So there we go! I guess we no longer need to debate it on here anymore. We're all in agreement.Yes that is the Trinity
Answers to Gospel Questions Vol. 3 pp 98-99 under Counsel given by President Charles W. Penrose
Now, some of our brethren have taken up quite a discussion as to the fulness of the everlasting gospel. We are told that the Book of Mormon contains the fulness of the gospel, that those who like to get up a dispute, say that the Book of Mormon does not contain any reference to the work of salvation for the dead, and that there are many other things pertaining to the gospel that are not developed in that book, and yet we are told that the book contains "the fulness of the everlasting gospel." well what is the fulnesspel? You read carefully the revelation in regard to the three glories, section 76, in the Doctrine and Covanants, and you find there defined what the gospel is, There God the Eternal Father, and Jesus Christ, his son, and the Holy Ghost, are held up as the three persons in the Trinity-the one God the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, all three being one God. When people believe in that doctrine and obey the ordinances which are spoken of in the same list of principals, you get the fulness of the gospel for this reason:
General Conference Report, April 1922, pp 27-28.
Ummm...ok. But even still, by partaking of the fruit, man became like God by a degree. The remaining problem was immortality while in a sinful state.From the Living Bible
Then the Lord said, “Now that the man has become as we are, knowing good from bad, what if he eats the fruit of the Tree of Life and lives forever?”
So the Lord God banished him forever from the Garden of Eden, and sent him out to farm the ground from which he had been taken.
Thus God expelled him, and placed mighty angels at the east of the Garden of Eden, with a flaming sword to guard the entrance to the Tree of Life.
No where does it teach man will be God
LoL! Uh...ok. Pretty self explanatory.Au contraire...
YOU haven't demonstrated that the verse means that they "are" gods.
So the burden of proof remains on YOU.
LoL! Uh...ok. Pretty self explanatory.
22 ¶ And the Lord God said, (God is speaking)
Behold, the man (Adam)
is become as one of us, (us - the Father and Son)
to know good and evil: (God knows good and evil, now Adam does too).
What am I missing here?
That's an interesting interpretation. And yet a moot point. If anything, it's the Prophet you should be addressing for making the argument in the first place.Did you miss the word, "as"?
Do you not understand what a "simile" is?
If you tell your girlfriend that she's "pretty AS a rose",
that doesn't mean that she's an actual rose.
They simply have ONE thing in common.
If I didn't have an argument, what are you responding to?So you have no argument,
Derogatory comments aren't necessaryjust worthless rhetoric
Where did you prove my assumption was unsubstantiated or invalid?covering up unsubstantiated ASSUMPTION.
If "becoming as gods" is a simile,
If I didn't have an argument, what are you responding to?
Derogatory comments aren't necessary
Where did you prove my assumption was unsubstantiated or invalid?
All you did was offer an alternative assumption and claimed victory.
Which proves me wrong how?What do you mean, "if"?
Is the word "as" not there?
Its pretty strange to argue against something you don't think exists.Im pointing out the fact that you don't have an argument.
It's not a necessary fact.I'm simply stating a fact.
The fact, according to you, is that I give worthless rhetoric. This adds nothing to support your main point. So, this would also be "worthless rhetoric." So, the main takeaway is that you're a hypocrite. Got it. Your further hypocrisy will be illustrated by getting offended by this statement.I'm sorry if you're offended by facts.
Define substance. You're argument isn't any different mine. You defined terms.By the fact that you gave no substance to it.
I'm not here to prove you wrong. I don't even know what you think my argument is, or what you think you're arguing against. I think you just enjoy being disagreeable.Well, since you offered no substantiated interpretation, you are hardly in a place to proclaim "victory".
Which proves me wrong how?
The fact, according to you, is that I give worthless rhetoric. This adds nothing to support your main point. So, this would also be "worthless rhetoric." So, the main takeaway is that you're a hypocrite. Got it. Your further hypocrisy will be illustrated by getting offended by this statement.
The interesting part is that you do this in the name of Christianity, completely overlooking the 2nd great commandment.
In all honesty, I have come to expect no less, therefore I'm not offended. I don't believe you say it to offend, but rather derail this away from the main argument, which you can't defend.
Define substance. You're argument isn't any different mine. You defined terms.
The underlying argument is that Satan lied about Adam being as God by partaking of the fruit, you've done nothing to disprove that, not have you challenged what's being said.
The Prophets argument was the statement:
"Mormonism encourages a person to be good because to do so is not only pleasing to God, but a definite progressive step toward becoming like God." sounded like "Satan telling Eve she could become like God"
So whether of not God was speaking as simile or not is completely irrelevant.
Ultimately you're still supporting the statement that the Prophet is positioned against.
I'm not here to prove you wrong. I don't even know what you think my argument is, or what you think you're arguing against. I think you just enjoy being disagreeable.
No. I make a statement, it's "not false" until it's proven to be so. You haven't don't that.You just don't get it, do you?
I don't have to "prove you wrong".
YOU have to "prove" YOURSELF right.
No, that's actually what you're doing. You're simply declaring I'm wrong without proving it.But all you do is fallaciously try to shift the burden of proof.
Jesus didn't find it unloving to point out hypocrisy. Neither do I.It's amusing how you turn the discussion into a personal attack and rant against me.
And you claim I'M the one ignoring the 2nd great commandment?
I never proclaimed victory. I just demonstrated Satan didn't lie. God did exactly Satan said he would.All you did was:
1) quote a verse;
2) ignore the word, "as".
3) proclaim victory.
That is NOT a valid argument.
No one is making the argument of Adam "being" God. That's why this whole line of discourse is irrelevant. The original quote that started this says "like God".It says Adam being AS God.
Not Adam "being" God.
Thank you for demonstating you don't understand what I'm talking about.So Scripture uses a simile, and YOU claim that simile is "completely irrelevant"?
Thank you for admitting that you completely reject Scripture.
No, I'm not, on both accounts.Stop bringing up "the Prophet".
We all know you're simply trying to pit Christians against each other, when the REAL issue is that YOUR position is unBiblical.
I'm just stating facts. Is that a problem for you?More personal attacks.
Thank you for demonstrating the rotten fruits of Mormonism.
3 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?Do you deny that Satan said, "Hath God said" in Gen. 3:1, questioning the word of God?
I think it's pretty pathetic for you to uncharitably try to associate the poster with Satan, all the while rejecting God's word.
3 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
And why did Satan not fully quote God... well because he is a imposter and mixes some truth with lots of lies...