Keeping the commandments and LDS theology

Bonnie

Super Member
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?
Care to deal with my points, that you seem to think that Ps. 82 cancels out ALL of the Bible verses that clearly state that there is ONLY ONE GOD? And care to remember that we have dealt with Ps. 82 many times on here over the years, and also your other Bible verses?
 

Bonnie

Super Member
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.
No, I did not forget. He DID say that "there is NO GOD BUT ONE." Of course pagans have MANY GODS and MANY LORDS, but for us, we have only One God and Lord. HE also explained that these other "gods" are idols and "by nature are NO gods."

So of course, to Christians, there is ONLY ONE GOD. To polygamous pagans, there are MANY gods--in Paul's day, like Zeus, Apollo, Diana, Hera....but ONLY one for true Christians, because we know that THERE IS NO GOD BUT ONE.
 

dberrie2020

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.

Again--if God the Son could, and did die--then why are you questioning whether the gods of Psalm 82 can die?
 

Bonnie

Super Member
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 does not say that God was a man. Or ever was one. What Jesus means is that He exactly represents the Father in every way, and we can "see" that Deity manifested in Jesus Christ in bodily form . Remember, Jesus said in John 4 that "God is spirit" and in context, He meant His Father. The Father was NEVER incarnated as a man.
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.

No we cannot take it two ways. Jesus wasn't talking about a literal "seeing" but that Jesus is the "image of the INVISIBLE GOD." We can see manifested in the physical son the divine attributes of God. As Paul also wrote "for in Him {Jesus} ALL the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form." And also where Jesus Himself says, in John 4 "God is spirit" and in context, He meant His Father.
"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.

This does not say that God the Father was first a man on an a planet who had to work his way up to godhood. Jesus is doing what He sees the Father doing--present tense. Was God the Father at this time Jesus said this a mortal man on "an earth" in the process of working his way up to godhood? Jesus is saying that He is doing His Father's will. This commentary explains it simply and well:

Jesus introduces this section by repeating the word amēn. This word is often translated as "truly." Using such a word at the end of a statement was, in that day, a way of declaring the truth of the statement. This word has survived use in various other languages, and many people still end prayers with the word amen. Using such a phrase at the beginning of a statement, however, implied that what was being said was first-hand information. This was used for original teachings, or eyewitness accounts. When Jesus says, "Amēn, amēn, legō hymin…"—"truly, truly I say to you"—He is claiming to know these things personally, directly, and first-hand.

Jesus' first claim to equality with God is in works. Jesus is acting under submission to God the Father, meaning any works He does cannot be considered violations of God's will. At the same time, Jesus claims that what He does, His works, are equivalent to the works of God the Father. Both of these ideas factor into later statements, such as John 10:30, where Jesus will proclaim "I and the Father are one."

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.

Jesus has life in Himself so that He can grant us eternal life in His name. As John 1 says "In Him was life, and that life was the light of men." And Jesus also said this, in John 10, NASB: "17 For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. 18 No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.”

And just because Jesus is the Son of God does NOT automatically follow that God the Father suffered, died, and was raised from the dead on another planet. That is absurd.
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.

Ever hear of a figure of speech? Like a metaphor? The Bible also says that heaven is God's throne, and earth, His footstool. So, are the heavens shaped like a throne, with God literally sitting on it? Is the earth shaped like a footstool, with God's feet on it???

"18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." NASB, John 1:18). EXPLAINED Him. MADE HIM KNOWN. REVEALED Him. DECLARED HIM. Jesus is God in the flesh. NO ONE has seen God the Father at any time, in all of His undiluted glory; if he had in his sinful nature, he would have been consumed.
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.

There is nothing in the OT or the NT that declares that God the Father is a human being. In fact, just the opposite--the OT says in that "God is NOT A MAN, that He should lie..." (Numbers 23:19) Jesus says "God is spirit" and in context, He is talking about His Father. And Paul writes in Colossians 1 that Jesus is "the image of the INVISIBLE GOD." Jesus is the physical representation of the invisible God. And he also wrote "Now to the King eternal, immortal, INVISIBLE, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.(1 Tim. 1)"

Jesus shares our DNA through His mortal mother Mary, not through His immortal uncreated God the Father.

So, no God the Father is NOT A HUMAN BEING AT ALL.
[/QUOTE]
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
This does not say that God was a man. Or ever was one.

Bonnie--I suppose all should pray God not only was a man--but still is:

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

So--is your claim that Jesus Christ isn't God--or that you don't believe God was ever a man? Either way--that isn't Christian thought.
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
No we cannot take it two ways. Jesus wasn't talking about a literal "seeing" but that Jesus is the "image of the INVISIBLE GOD." We can see manifested in the physical son the divine attributes of God.
I don't believe anyone would deny that, but I was wondering--would you make that same claim here, concerning man?

Genesis 1:26--King James Version
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

As Paul also wrote "for in Him {Jesus} ALL the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form."
The LDS would agree. There are some other interesting observations in the scriptures:

Ephesians 3:19---King James Version
19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
"18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." NASB, John 1:18). EXPLAINED Him. MADE HIM KNOWN. REVEALED Him. DECLARED HIM. Jesus is God in the flesh. NO ONE has seen God the Father at any time, in all of His undiluted glory; if he had in his sinful nature, he would have been consumed.
The LDS would agree.

How does that negate the fact God can be viewed in vision?

There is nothing in the OT or the NT that declares that God the Father is a human being. In fact, just the opposite--the OT says in that "God is NOT A MAN, that He should lie..." (Numbers 23:19)
The God of the OT was Jesus Christ. Jesus was a man--and still is.

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

Jesus shares our DNA through His mortal mother Mary, not through His immortal uncreated God the Father.

So, no God the Father is NOT A HUMAN BEING AT ALL.
When you place "God" in front of that claim--it gives me the initiative to ask you--was God once a man?
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
This does not say that God was a man.
Sorry. That is what it says.
What Jesus means is that He exactly represents the Father in every way
LOL. Sure it does. It means whatever you say it means. In the context of the passage though, the disciples asked to that he "show" them the Father. They wanted to see Him with their own eyes. And, based on your observation, Jesus did represent the Father in every way, including what he looked like in his body and form. Or did you mean something other than "in every way"? Bonnie, if Jesus represented the Father in "every way" no man could see him and live. Right? And you can't see attributes. You can the results of them, but could the His disciples "see" Jesus creating all things? Did they see him create anything? Quite frankly, what you think Jesus meant would have been a huge let down because Jesus didn't actually show them anything but himself.

I can't see how can seriously believe what you just said, based on the text. This is is just a regurgitation of your traditions. It doesn't matter what the text says, you'll believe what you want regardless and make up any kind of story to support what you believe.
Remember, Jesus said in John 4 that "God is spirit"
Well, If "Jesus represented the Father in every way", then he lied to his disciples because IF God really is a spirit, meaning his father, you totally miss the actual context, then Jesus didn't represent the Father in every way.
The Father was NEVER incarnated as a man.
Well, that's your tradition, but the evidence doesn't support it. You will do everything you can to protect what you believe and I don't really blame you. I do the same thing. But you asked for the evidence from the scriptures that supports it and this is one of them. You might not like it, but it's there. Your interpretation of the passage, though the way you said it "in every way" would mean that the Father also has a body, but you really meant, just believe what i mean, not what I said. You expect me to believe what you just now said only because you say so. There is no evidence in the scripture that says that the Father was NEVER incarnated as a man.

God is spirit, and so is Jesus. Jesus is God also. Jesus has a body and a spirit. There's no reason why the Father cannot have be spirit and yet also have a body. I mean, after all, didn't Jesus "represent the Father in EVERY WAY"?
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
This does not say that God the Father was first a man on an a planet who had to work his way up to godhood.
I didn't say it did. But it does say that Jesus is only doing what he saw His Father do. That would indicate that he saw his Father do something. Now Jesus might have special vision where he can see invisible beings, but we do not. However, we could see Jesus and what he was doing. So, if Jesus did them, then we must assume based on what Jesus, God, said is true. That what we can see in Jesus and what he did and will do, is what God, his Father did.

Again, you asked for evidence. Your interpretation of the text is simply different than mine. This is the evidence from the scriptures. It's not even weak evidence. Jesus is flat out telling us that he's doing what he saw his father do. Period.
Jesus is doing what He sees the Father doing--present tense.
Lovely sediment, but still Jesus saw him do it. He saw him heal the sick. He saw him preach the gospel. He saw him spit upon and crucified. Whether it was in present tense or not is irrelevant. Jesus saw him do it and Jesus did it also. So, what we see Jesus do, He saw His Father do. It doesn't matter what tense of the verb was being used.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
Jesus has life in Himself so that He can grant us eternal life in His name.
Perfect, and the Father did the same thing for his people.
And just because Jesus is the Son of God does NOT automatically follow that God the Father suffered, died, and was raised from the dead on another planet. That is absurd.
It's absurd in your tradition, but the Bible supports it.
 

The Prophet

Active member
kQ48KVJ.jpg
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."
That statement fails on its face. God reveals God who can't be seen? Please. Doesn't this conflict with Moses speaking with God face to face as one man speaks to another? Well, one of them is a figure of speech, huh? Didn't Jesus tell his disciples that if you have seen me you have seen the Father? It sounds like Jesus revealed the Father and guess what? The Father looks just like the Son. Both have bodies. I mean, if one does and God looks just like him, then the other would also, right?
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
There is nothing in the OT or the NT that declares that God the Father is a human being.
I've just demonstrated that they do.
In fact, just the opposite--the OT says in that "God is NOT A MAN, that He should lie..." (Numbers 23:19)
That means he doesn't lie like men do. :rolleyes:
Jesus says "God is spirit" and in context, He is talking about His Father.
This has already been addressed. There has never been a question about how it is referring to. We know it is about the Father. Here, you are talking about the Father as if he is a different being. And while I agree with you, God the Father is a different being than is Jesus Christ, we cannot ignore that Jesus Christ represents the Father in "every way" and so, if the Father is spirit, so is the Son.
And Paul writes in Colossians 1 that Jesus is "the image of the INVISIBLE GOD."
And this is just as laughable as the first time you mentioned it. How can an invisible God have an image? If He did, then he wouldn't be invisible, would he?
Jesus is the physical representation of the invisible God.
Right. "in every way" which means what he looks like. The term invisible, simply means, not here. It coincides with the phrase, "no man has seen God at any time" and why is that? Because he's invisible? Because he's spirit? No, because he's not here. Like you said, Jesus is his representative and Jesus said, If you have seen me, you have seen the Father. I look just like him.
Jesus shares our DNA through His mortal mother Mary, not through His immortal uncreated God the Father.
LOL. There is no species but humans that can impregnate a human. That is the scientific proof that God, the Father is human. But it doesn't matter to most Christians, they would be willing to believe anything but what is actually present in the scriptures.
Tradition trumps all.
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Again--if God the Son could, and did die--then why are you questioning whether the gods of Psalm 82 can die?

The only reason the Son could die is because He TOOK ON a body of flesh.
He was the God-man.

Only one God exists, but if there were other gods (which Scripture repeatedly denies), then none of them took on a body of flesh, so they couldn't die. A divine nature doesn't have the capacity of dying.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
The text does NOT say "EXACTLY THAT", that "Father, Son, and HS" are "three separate BEINGS."
The text presents them as three separate beings. I explained exactly how it does so and therefore, the text does say exactly that.
Please DO Show me where the Bible says "God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are three separate BEINGS."
I didn't present to you any such phrasing in quotes. I stated that the text presents them as three separate beings and I explained how it did so. Quite misrepresenting my argument.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
OTOH, the bible repeatedly says that there is ONLY ONE GOD and "God is ONE."
OTOH, the Bible repeatedly says that they are there separate beings. And still, God is one. More explicitly stated in the Book of Mormon, the three beings are one God. When you name the three beings and then state that the three are one God, I don't know how anyone can get that confused. I quote, "The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, which is one God". That's three beings together, are one God.
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
The text presents them as three separate beings. I explained exactly how it does so and therefore, the text does say exactly that.

The text presents them as being distinct from one another, as in "the Father is not the Son".

To specifically use the term "being" (which has a specific meaning) when the context does not warrant it, is disingenuous.
 

brotherofJared

Well-known member
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.
No. We understand it very well. You all don't because of your false traditions. They are three beings, each God, who together are one God. That's not hard to understand at all.
 
Top