Keeping the commandments and LDS theology

brotherofJared

Well-known member
2. So, IF these "gods" would die like men and fall like any prince, then that can ONLY mean they are human! You claim that God can die, since Jesus died. But Jesus was FIRST God, who then took on the additional nature of man, so HE COULD DIE.
Was Jesus human when he told them that they would die like men? Is it not possible that they were also not human when they were told that they would die like men? Jesus became human and then died like a man. It seems, therefore, likely that they became human and died like men. That condemnation to die like men seems to be a relatively insignificant condemnation to tell men. They all already know they will die, they are men. This is one of Heiser's main points that these are not men and his reasoning is basically what I just said. Why tell men they are going to die like men? It's as dumb as telling someone that is alive and well that you predict that they continue to breath for the next 5 minutes.

You assume they are human because of the word elohim is used elsewhere to mean human judges, but the text doesn't support that for many reasons. 1. They don't appear to be human (what humans do you know that can stand in the presence of God). 2. The only references to the the divine council are where God is talking to everyone, as opposed to a specific prophet being present in the room, are all pre-creation texts. This would be one of those and 3. There is no instance in all of the scriptures where God ever stood in a council of human judges on earth, ever. These are but a few.

Because God is eternal and uncreated. Man is NOT. This is something Mormons continually choose to forget--Jesus HAD to become a man, HAD TO take on the additional nature of man, so He could die! But His God nature did NOT die on Calvary's cross!
We didn't forget anything. It is our theology that man is co-eternal with God. We are neither created nor made. But that is another debate, but don't confuse "forgetfulness" with established doctrine. That is your theology, not ours. It's not something we forgot.

Having said that, we all took on the additional nature of man. It is part of our progress to become like God, the Father who is also a resurrected man just like Jesus is.
Therefore, His Deity did NOT die when He died on the cross--else, how could He raise up His own dead body from the grave?
We're not anymore dead after this mortal body is laid in the grave than we were before we were born. It seems that modern Christians are aware that the spirit does not need the body to live. But for some reason, they don't think either existed before the body was formed in the womb. If it can live after the body is dead, why can't it live before the body is born? Well, there's no answer to that one is there?
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
Agreed. They think Ps. 82 cancels out all the OTHER verses that say ONLY ONE GOD EXISTS.

There is a curious caveat to that claim--which the critics here have yet to explain:

That is--the God of the OT--which made the statements you claim--is the very One whom the Biblical writers separated out from the "one God" of the Biblical NT--and the very God who claimed He had a God and Father also:

1 Corinthians 8:6---King James Version (KJV)
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

1 Timothy 2:5--King James Version (KJV)
5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Ephesians 4:4-6--King James Version (KJV)

4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

John 17:3---King James Version (KJV)
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Matthew 22:44 ---King James Version (KJV)
44 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

1 Peter 1:3--King James Version (KJV)
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

John 20:17---King James Version (KJV)
17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Ephesians 1:17---King James Version (KJV)

17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

Hebrews 1:9---King James Version (KJV)
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Care to explain that to us?
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
3. Your "answer" here is just a waffle.
Your question is just a waffle. That's why I said it is irrelevant. The text doesn't say who they are judging. You are making an assumption based on your traditions. You think that just because they are judging that they are judges and rulers? Who do you think this command was given too? "Judge not least ye be judges...". Was that only given to judges and rulers?
Again, IF these "gods" in Ps. 82 are real, true gods, and they judge people on earth
You just don't get it. There is nothing in the text that says they judged anyone anywhere. That is you supposition. I'm not going to argue context that doesn't exist in the text. You assume they are human judges. They are not. Then you offer this waffle that they are gods and doing what human judges do. Clearly you are making things up as you go. Either they are gods and we don't know who they are judging because the text doesn't say who they are judging, or they are human judges who somehow got into the divine council that doesn't exist on earth, as far as I know, and were told that they would die like men. I bet that latter part came as no surprise. :rolleyes:
I never said the text says they do judge in civil and religious cases.
Then stop arguing that they do. You keep insisting they are human judges. Where do human judges officiate? Over civil and religious cases. :rolleyes:
But the text does say that they favor the wicked and do not uphold the widow and orphan.
No. It doesn't say that at all. The only thing they are accused of is judging unjustly and favoring the wicked. The rest of the text is not a record of what they didn't do. It's a record of what they must do not to die like men and fall like one of the princes.
Remember, God did appoint judges in the OT LoM
Thank you for offering your lame claim. Be cause God appoints judges in the OT Law of Moses, that means that elohim, where it is mentioned is talking about judges. That is a very weak claim. Everywhere the word elohim is used to refer to judges, the context plainly shows they are human judges. Ps 82 doesn't have any such context. That is why most of the versions on biblehub don't call them judges. The call them mighty, gods, heavenly beings, divine council, divine assembly, rulers, other gods, angels and one states that God judged in the midst of God. I could find only one that said God judged in the midst of the judges. There's obviously a translation issue. But nothing in the text itself suggest that these elohim are human judges.
Now, compare [Isa 3] and esp. the bolded parts to Ps. 82:
One is before the fact and the other is after the fact. The problem exists in all people, not just rulers and judges. You will note that In Isaiah, "he stands to judge the peoples WITH the elders and the princes" ESV. The problem is across the board. You will note also, in the story about the Lazarus and the rich man that though the rich man didn't make it to heaven, he wasn't a ruler or a judge. He just had the means to assist when the petition was put up to him and he didn't. Lazarus didn't become poor because the rich man didn't assist him. He was already poor. The rich man is unnamed and virtually unidentified because judgment belongs to the people, not just the rulers and judges. Which is what I said all my posts concerning Ps 82.

You will also note that Isa 3 doesn't imply that any of these are elohim nor are there any judges mentioned.
Notice the similarity in tone and wording and CONTENT. Now, defending the UNjust and showing partiality to the wicked are rendering false judgments.
If you mean, the peoples, not just the judges or the rulers, I see a similarity, yes. Of course, it isn't the righteous, but they also will be judged as mentioned in this passage. All the peoples will be judged and the Lord will not let those who were partial to the wicked escape that judgement. That would include rulers and princes as well. I agree that the rulers have a particular responsibility, but it is naive to assume that the rulers do their oppression by themselves.
So, no, God is NOT talking about EVERYONE judging justly
So, yes, God IS talking about EVERONE judging justly. :rolleyes:
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
4. My last question is not incoherent. You managed to answer it, sort of. So, these "gods" are NOT exalted humans, eh? Because they SIN? So, what exactly ARE they, then? Humans with great power or actual deity?
I answered after I tried to make sense of the question. Still, your questions don't make sense. Sin has nothing to do with any of it. They are gods because God called them gods. As to what they actually are, as I stated before, they are the entire corpus of people who will live on this earth or who have lived on this earth.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
The "sons of God" could very well have been angels, which pre-existed humans.
They are angels which are also humans in the pre-existence. ;)
But I do note your "appears" and "apparent". To you. But what we DO have is a rich depository of ancient Hebrew and Greek NT copies--thousands of them, whole or in part that scholars can compare and contrast.
They can compare and contrast all they want, but without the originals they are never going to know which ones are in error. The can assume that one is more correct than the other by finding an earlier manuscript when text wasn't present, but even that text, they can be sure that it is correct without the original text. That's not what it "appears" to be, nor is it "apparent". It is a fact. You can't generate something you don't have no matter how much of it you don't have.
What do we have with the BoM? A book that was riddled with errors in its first edition, many of them grammatical, from the get-go
We have a lot more of the original text than you all have of the Bible's original text.
Remember this:


This was by a Mormon historian, B. H. Roberts. Remember the printer had to go by the written manuscript of the BoM.
No. I don't remember any of that at all. Should I?

I don't know anything, nor do I care, what Joseph Fielding Smith was talking about or when he said it. The idea that your junk site thinks they have a study that proves anyone was lying fails on its face if they cannot prove that the individual knew the truth when he said it. In order to lie, one must do it knowingly. Otherwise, he is just ignorant of the truth.

Secondly, BH Roberts was talking about the tone and nature of the Book of Mormon, that in it's earliest form, not in the first edition, we know for a fact that changes were made from the manuscripts to the printer's copy (they didn't want to give him the originals which makes sense) to the first edition, which you keep harping about, that changes were made. Most of the punctuation was inserted by the printer and common typographical errors were made in that printing. Joseph made changes to the printer's copy and well as Oliver Cowdry. These are well known facts. The crux of BH Roberts statement that you quoted revolves around what is meant by "the errors in question", which from the text, appears to be the writing style, not the punctuation because punctuation is normally not transmitted in translation process (in other words, God did not specify where to put the comma or the period or to make a new paragraph). But we don't have enough in your source to determine that for sure, I believe the errors BH Roberts is talking about and the errors Josph Fielding Smith is talking about are two completely different issues. I believe, as BH Roberts does, that the style of writing, the words and grammar used was intentional and not errors. At the beginning of your quote, BH Roberts unequivocally stated that there are typos and errors "especially in the first edition" of the Book of Mormon and that such errors are to be expected. Obviously, text that was free from errors was the original manuscript, minus, of course, the punctuation and some spelling errors. But the tone and grammar used was intentional and virtually free of errors.

As I explained repeatedly and am now explaining again. The second man touched it, changes started entering the text. That includes the errors in punctuation and spelling. But Joseph Smith made no errors in translation (this, of course, we cannot prove because we don't have the original plates). I believe God gave Joseph Smith the exact meaning he intended to he conveyed in the text exactly the way it was written. I have stated that I believe the original text that we have is far superior to the corrected text we have today. That is including the odd phrases and bad grammar. It carries with it an unparalleled ability to communicate meaning even though the structure is odd. I find the work by Royal Skousen to be a phenomenal accomplishment and like him, I am disappointed we don't have more of the original text. There were no structural or grammatical errors in that text.
The fact remains--the Bible, both OT and NT--has been remarkably well-preserved,
The fact is, you have no way of knowing that without the original manuscripts. You can theorize and hypothize until you are blue in the fact, but it is not a fact and you can never know that what you said is true without the original manuscripts. I've demonstrated this on this site already. OG just said he didn't care about what was missing. I laughed because, that's the same attitude you all take to the scriptures. You don't care what's missing, so what you have is accurate. :rolleyes: But to be clear, it is only accurate because you say it is, not because it actually is. We've already seen changes as errors have been assessed to the point that scholars and theologians come to ao consensus. But not everyone agrees and some versions still have the errors.

I know they are pretty well preserved because we have the Book of Mormon which clears up misconceptions but supports the general salvational text of the Bible. What was not well preserved was the doctrines that the Bible teaches. How and why that got messed up is anyone's guess, but most modern Christian churches do not teach the Bible. They have abandoned it in favor of their own traditions.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
You wrote this, boJ:
To be clear, I did not write the sub quote in your quote. You wrote that.

This is what I wrote:
Again, this is just showing that what you think we believe, is not what we believe and shouldn't even be part of your argument because you don't know what you're talking about.

Yes. God the father was "once a man on an earth" just like Jesus Christ was "once a man on an earth".
I responded only to the text that didn't include your incorrect assumptions about what we believe.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
But DO Show us from the Bible where God the FATHER was ever incarnated as a human being. SHOW US, boJ
I have to do this repeatedly and you all always repeatedly pretend this didn't happen. :rolleyes:

Two places.
"He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father" John 14:9
This can be taken in two ways, but because the question asked was that they could see God, the Father, then it's obvious that he meant God, the Father. As Jesus said, after he was resurrected and the disciples were unsure if they were seeing a spirit, he invited them to touch him and asked, does a spirit have flesh and bone and ye see me have? From this we can see that God the Father is a person of flesh and bone and is not a spirit, but a human being like Jesus Christ.

"Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does." John 5:19
This clearly states that what the son, Jesus, is doing, the Father also did.

Joseph Smith added another,
"For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself." John 5:26
Power to do what? To resurrect himself. Like Father, like Son.

Add to that, Stephen and Joseph Smith's almost identical witness:
"Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God" Act 7:56.
God has a hand.

There are others. I could go to the Old Testament, but there is plenty of evidence and witnesses that God, the Father, is a human being, not the least of which is the birth of Jesus Christ. Humans have no subspecies that will produce offspring in them. Jesus Christ obviously shares the same DNA that we have. His Mother is human. He is human. Physiologically, the father must also be human.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
You are wasting a lot of band width and not saying a whole lot. Here are the Is. 45 verses in context:
Most of what I write is not for you. I know that everything I write is meaningless to you and i know this because I have to keep repeating it. You'll believe what you want regardless of anything I say. So, snip away.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
We were not discussing Cyrus
LOL. If you say so. :rolleyes:
God knows the future and was predicting it.
If He knows the future, he is not predicting it. But since we're not discussing Cyrus, I guess your statement has no relevance tot he discussions. Seems to me that you're just wasting bandwidth.
BUT HE STILL SAID THAT APART FROM HIM THERE IS NO GOD. Not even Cyrus' "gods." He did NOT acknowledge Cyrus' gods at all.
He did because he was talking to a pagan who wasn't even born yet. You can ignore it all you want, but it's still there. View it from Cyrus' point of view. He grew up having gods that he was taught to believe in and along comes ... well, I already explained it and you chose to disgard it, so there's no use in repeating it again. All you care to read into the text is your traditions without any regard to the actual text and the implications. All you see is what you want to.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
how convenient that you ALSO forget that Paul ALSO wrote that "there is NO GOD BUT ONE."
How convenient that you forget that Paul also explained what he meant when he said there is no God but one, What did he say? To us, there is but one God, the Father, who isn't Jesus Christ.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
You said quite a lot to keep from giving me a direct answer to Ps. 82 and WHO you think the "gods"
I don't know how you missed it, but I've said it repeatedly throughout this thread.
"as far as Gods go, THERE IS ONLY ONE." Then you say "we know that there are many gods
Gods, meaning Elohim. There are many who are one. They are not all a single being. They are many beings who are God. That is what being one means. As for the many in the council with God are not yet one with God. We can easily see that there is descension in the troop based on the text we find in Ps 82. We lost a third in the war in heaven. We are losing more in that same war in mortality. As I stated before, God's definition of what a God is appears to be different from yours. But regardless, there appears to be a lot of them.
How then, can there be MANY GODS and at the same time "ONLY ONE"? Why do you contradict yourself?
I'm not contradicting myself. You aren't grasping the argument. I might compare this to trying to explain calculus to a child, though I can't understand why that is. In our theology, there are many exalted gods and more exalted beings are being added every second. This has been going on for a very very long time. The number of gods, based on Ps 82, appears to be unlimited, nevertheless, those that are exalted are only a subset of the total.

There is no contradiction. The many are one God. Those in the council in Ps 82 are many who are not one.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
God did NOT say that they were IN DANGER of dying like men...He said they WILL DIE LIKE MEN and FALL like any prince.
Who will die like men? Who was God talking to? The entire council? Hopefully, you recognize that they couldn't all possibly be condemned to fall like one of the princes. Hopefully, you can see that this was addressed to a specific subgroup of the council.

The message of Ps 82 is a warning to those who judge unjustly and give partiality to the wicked. Then he tells everyone, because this is something that everyone needs to hear, the proper things to do. These are virtually the things they need to do, as I explained elsewhere, love overcomes unjust judgment. Since you like to snip and save bandwidth, I can't tell if I addressed this in the post you are replying to.

The God calls them gods and sons of the most High [God], all of them.
Then the Psalmist calls for God to rise in the council of the earth and judge all the nations, apparently, just as he judged in the divine council.

It is a warning whether you like it or not and it's not a warning to only rulers and judges. It is a warning to all people everywhere.
Also, God says they "know nothing" and "do not understand" and "walk about in darkness"?
That is simply an observation. It would be true of anyone who doesn't understand the message. That would be most of the modern Christian world.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
The Bible DOES no such thing.
I just showed you it does. :rolleyes:
For a person who claims they are accepting the Bible as a whole, it seems very suspect that that same person is ignoring the text I offer from the Bible that does say exactly that, that they are three different beings. A single being with three personalities is playing games to present himself and three different beings.
They understood He was claiming Deity.
I didn't say he wasn't claiming deity. In fact, I said that he did claim deity. I'm not sure what your beef is. When you figure it out, let me know.
Your BoM says n several places that Father, Son, and HG are one, or One God.
Correct. They are three beings who are one God. I've never said they weren't. You make the assumption that they are. The Book of Mormon doesn't. They treat them as three beings. God the Father is the Father of the Son who has a mortal mother. In a single being scenario, that would make Jesus his own father. To you, it's a mystery and it is because it's not true. To us, we know they are not one being and those in the Book of Mormon, they knew that the Messiah is not God, the Father.

Our ignorant critics like to take the text of the Book of Mormon and overlay it with the text of the Bible and claim it means what they believe it means, but it has never been so. We understand that they are three beings who are one God.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
I just showed you it does. :rolleyes:
For a person who claims they are accepting the Bible as a whole, it seems very suspect that that same person is ignoring the text I offer from the Bible that does say exactly that, that they are three different beings. A single being with three personalities is playing games to present himself and three different beings.

I didn't say he wasn't claiming deity. In fact, I said that he did claim deity. I'm not sure what your beef is. When you figure it out, let me know.

Correct. They are three beings who are one God. I've never said they weren't. You make the assumption that they are. The Book of Mormon doesn't. They treat them as three beings. God the Father is the Father of the Son who has a mortal mother. In a single being scenario, that would make Jesus his own father. To you, it's a mystery and it is because it's not true. To us, we know they are not one being and those in the Book of Mormon, they knew that the Messiah is not God, the Father.

Our ignorant critics like to take the text of the Book of Mormon and overlay it with the text of the Bible and claim it means what they believe it means, but it has never been so. We understand that they are three beings who are one God.
The text does NOT say "EXACTLY THAT", that "Father, Son, and HS" are "three separate BEINGS." Please DO Show me where the Bible says "God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are three separate BEINGS." Where does the BIBLE SAY EXACTLY THAT?

OTOH, the bible repeatedly says that there is ONLY ONE GOD and "God is ONE." Yet, Father, Son, and HS are all three called "God." Yet, "God is One; there is only one true God." So....in some way we cannot fully understand, this side of heaven, while there is ONLY ONE GOD, in another sense, He is Three--3 separate and distinct Personalities/Identities within that Unity of Being. God can do what WE canNOT and it is utterly foolish to expect God to be held captive by our limited ability to understand fully His Nature, this side of heaven. But that is what Mormonism has done to the Great and Almighty God of the universe--debased him into being nothing more than an exalted man, a little farther up the spiritual evolutionary ladder than we mortals are. And what it has done to Jesus Christ, the eternal Word of God is even worse--made Him the literal spirit brother of SATAN!!!

Saying God is three beings in one God is like saying...oh.. I, you, and my husband are three separate human beings in one human being.... but that is not what the Bible shows us. It shows us that while Father, Son, and HS are all called "God" in the Bible, the Bible repeatedly says that GOD IS ONE GOD. NOT THREE GODS.

And sorry but yes, your BoM does indeed teach a form of Trinitarianism, calling Father, Son, and HG in several places "One God." Nowhere does it say that they are three separate Gods in One God. Even the Testimony of the 3 Witnesses in the forepart of the book states that "Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost, which are ONE GOD."

NOT three Gods in one God. You can protest all you like, but that is what it shows us. Unfortunately, the BoM strays into Modalism, calling Jesus his very own father. A heresy condemned by the early, true church.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
LOL. If you say so. :rolleyes:

If He knows the future, he is not predicting it. But since we're not discussing Cyrus, I guess your statement has no relevance tot he discussions. Seems to me that you're just wasting bandwidth.

He did because he was talking to a pagan who wasn't even born yet. You can ignore it all you want, but it's still there. View it from Cyrus' point of view. He grew up having gods that he was taught to believe in and along comes ... well, I already explained it and you chose to disgard it, so there's no use in repeating it again. All you care to read into the text is your traditions without any regard to the actual text and the implications. All you see is what you want to.
LOL, yes I DO Say so--can you show me where anyone was discussing Cyrus before you brought him up? I am not denying what is in Is. 45, at all. Show me where I have denied that Is. 45 mentions Cyrus.

I am not reading my "traditions" into the text at all but simply reading what is ACTUALLY THERE. And nowhere does God through Isaiah mention Cyrus' gods. Here again is the pertinent part of chapter 45, NASB:

Isaiah 45 New American Standard Bible (NASB)​

God Uses Cyrus​

45 This is what the Lord says to Cyrus His anointed,
Whom I have taken by the right hand,
To subdue nations before him
And to undo the weapons belt on the waist of kings;
To open doors before him so that gates will not be shut:
2 “I will go before you and make the rough places smooth;
I will shatter the doors of bronze and cut through their iron bars.
3 I will give you the treasures of darkness
And hidden wealth of secret places,
So that you may know that it is I,
The Lord, the God of Israel, who calls you by your name.
4 For the sake of Jacob My servant,
And Israel My chosen one,
I have also called you by your name;
I have given you a title of honor
Though you have not known Me.
5 I am the LORD, and there is no one else;
There is no God except Me.
I will arm you, though you have not known Me,
6 So that people may know from the rising to the setting of the sun
That there is no one besides Me.

I am the LORD, and there is no one else,
7 The One forming light and creating darkness,
Causing well-being and creating disaster;
I am the LORD who does all these things.

Please show me where God is acknowledging Cyrus' gods. ALL He has done is acknowledge that Cyrus does not know Him. He is saying that, despite this, God is using Cyrus for His purposes, with the children of Israel.

But DO note the bolded verses. God clearly states here that HE ALONE IS GOD and there is NO OTHER GOD but Him. That is what "except" and "besides" mean.

I consulted no commentaries whatsoever about this. I simply read what was actually in this chapter. It isn't hard to understand and I do have a college degree in Journalism, so I do know the English language pretty well.

 

Bonnie

Super Member
Was Jesus human when he told them that they would die like men? Is it not possible that they were also not human when they were told that they would die like men? Jesus became human and then died like a man. It seems, therefore, likely that they became human and died like men. That condemnation to die like men seems to be a relatively insignificant condemnation to tell men. They all already know they will die, they are men. This is one of Heiser's main points that these are not men and his reasoning is basically what I just said. Why tell men they are going to die like men? It's as dumb as telling someone that is alive and well that you predict that they continue to breath for the next 5 minutes.

You assume they are human because of the word elohim is used elsewhere to mean human judges, but the text doesn't support that for many reasons. 1. They don't appear to be human (what humans do you know that can stand in the presence of God). 2. The only references to the the divine council are where God is talking to everyone, as opposed to a specific prophet being present in the room, are all pre-creation texts. This would be one of those and 3. There is no instance in all of the scriptures where God ever stood in a council of human judges on earth, ever. These are but a few.


We didn't forget anything. It is our theology that man is co-eternal with God. We are neither created nor made. But that is another debate, but don't confuse "forgetfulness" with established doctrine. That is your theology, not ours. It's not something we forgot.

Having said that, we all took on the additional nature of man. It is part of our progress to become like God, the Father who is also a resurrected man just like Jesus is.

We're not anymore dead after this mortal body is laid in the grave than we were before we were born. It seems that modern Christians are aware that the spirit does not need the body to live. But for some reason, they don't think either existed before the body was formed in the womb. If it can live after the body is dead, why can't it live before the body is born? Well, there's no answer to that one is there?
Well now, we are making progress...yes it is entirely possible that the "gods" in Ps. 82 were mortal human beings being lambasted for favoring the wicked and not upholding the helpless. And NOT deity at all!


I don't care what Heiser thinks. This isn't about Heiser. When Mormon positions on this are weak, they always resort to Heiser. Well, Heiser isn't the Bible. He has also stated that Mormons misuse what he thinks about this. I am only using the Bible and taking ALL of it into consideration, not isolating 2 verses from one Psalm, and one verse from the NT. I am looking at ALL of it. And as for thinking that telling people who were already mortal that they would "die like men" is silly -there is NOTHING wrong with that and is perfectly understandable. That was just a reminder from God that, despite their power, these "gods" are still mortal and will die and fall like any prince. He was reminding them OF THEIR MORTALITY.

So again, do you think the "gods" in Ps. 82 are actual true deity by nature?

And yes we WERE CREATED AND MADE. The Bible clearly tells us HOW in Genesis--which means we were NEVER co-eternal with God. Even your very own BoM says that God created Adam from the dust of the earth, and that God spoke things into existence (paraphrasing a little). But your lying false prophet founder completely butchered the verses in Genesis. For shame. Which shows that he had a very low regard for the holy word of God.
 
Top