Jump to content
RockHopper

Acts 17:28 Question

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Josh Khinder said:

You made it sound like that was an exclusive LDS teaching, when Traditional Christians have always taught Jesus is a man with a body at the present time

 

1 Timothy 2

 

1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 

So now you are objecting that we are LIKE traditional Christians?

OH

MY

GOSH!!!

And if he has a body that means he is in one place at a time.  So "omnipresence" must mean that he is not some cloud filling the universe- there has to be another explanation- like the one we have, that the Light of Christ fills the universe while his body is in one place, as a physical object.

There is no other reasonable way to reconcile those two opposed beliefs.   Jesus cannot have a body and also be everywhere unless there is another mechanism performing that function.

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

God is a priesthood office.  And being a God requires obedience to law.
They may not need to "earn" salvation, but there are conditions they would need to follow.

So that means Jesus earned his salvation , didn't he ?

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

So now you are objecting that we are LIKE traditional Christians?

OH

MY

GOSH!!!

Never said that , just we both teach Jesus is a man with a flesh and bone body now . Traditional Christianity has little in common like Gordon Hinckley taught 

https://youtu.be/bkks2O6erGU

The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak as been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times. He together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the matters of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages." (Church News, June 20, 1998, p70) Gordon B Hinckley

We Look to Christ 2002 General Conference April

 

 

Edited by Josh Khinder

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, Josh Khinder said:

I'm an expert on Traditional Christianity and The Mormon Faith and see no error in any of my posts 

What evidence would you accept demonstrating you were wrong?  Would information from lds.org, the official LDS website, suffice or would you assume they were lying or hiding the truth if they disagreed with your stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Calm said:

What evidence would you accept demonstrating you were wrong?  Would information from lds.org, the official LDS website, suffice or would you assume they were lying or hiding the truth if they disagreed with your stuff?

Most official LDS sites are full of misinformation

'And of tenets thou shall not talk, but thou shalt declare repentance and faith on the Savior, and remission of sins by baptism, and by fire, yea , even the Holy Ghost' ( Doctrine and Covenants 19:31 )

They follow the command laid out in this section 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Josh Khinder said:

Most official LDS sites are full of misinformation

'And of tenets thou shall not talk, but thou shalt declare repentance and faith on the Savior, and remission of sins by baptism, and by fire, yea , even the Holy Ghost' ( Doctrine and Covenants 19:31 )

They follow the command laid out in this section 

 

 

So what would you accept as evidence of a valid LDS belief that demonstrated you were wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, Josh Khinder said:

There are major differences between Mormonism and traditional Christianity

There are major differences between traditional Christianity and traditional Christianity.  Big whoop! 

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I, for one, do not place protestants (especially evangelicals!) in the category of traditional Christianity. I mean, Christianity was a certain way for 1500 years and then they went and rebelled against it. How traditional can that be? ;)

 

"To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant"

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Josh Khinder said:

Yes in the Mormon faith Jesus is eternal like all humans, animals and plants .

Pretty cool, huh?

Why isn't that on your misleading chart?

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, pogi said:

Pretty cool, huh?

Why isn't that on your misleading chart?

His chart also has under Christianity: no purgatory.

I guess I'm not a Christian since I believe in purgatory...

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Gray said:

Hmm, sounds pretty unglamorous when you put it that way.

Didn't realize being glamorous was the goal.

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Calm said:

So what would you accept as evidence of a valid LDS belief that demonstrated you were wrong?

This is the only valid source of LDS belief....duh!!!

cDbgiNN.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if he classifies Catholics as Christian.  Many who use the same tactics as he does do not in my experience.

Share this post


Link to post

Pogi, let us hope he reveals to us other sources that will allow for a discussion.

If he refuses to accept any sources but his own as well as insisting on his own interpretation, there can be no communication imo.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Josh Khinder said:

So that means Jesus earned his salvation , didn't he ?

That's up to you.
Did Christ have the ability to choose and act?
Did Christ make specific choices that led to his death, resurrection, and ascension to heaven?
Did Christ make a choice to obey the Father?
Did Christ take actions to obey, perform his mission, and fulfill all righteousness?

 

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Didn't realize being glamorous was the goal.

I guess not. But if it's a priesthood office, should anyone aspire to it? It thought God was more of a species, and we were embryonic gods.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎1‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 10:19 AM, Josh Khinder said:

This picture distinguishes the Mormon Jesus versus Mormon Christ

 

cDbgiNN.jpg

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

The Mormon Jesus is not as depicted in your chart.

1.  Created Being

2.  Gave us Salvation

3.  Unique and supreme importance

4.  LDS doctrine is that Christ was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost

5.  LDS doctrine is that we don't know if He was married, much less a polygamist.

By created I mean that Christ is a child of God, like the rest of mankind.  Of course, we all have the eternity of Intelligence within us.

Edited by mrmarklin
Clarity

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/9/2018 at 9:56 PM, RockHopper said:

Hi, I'm new to the forum.  I'm an evangelical, but very LDS friendly :).  And unlike many evangelicals, I'm hopeful, that despite our differences, we are worshiping the same God and doing our best to follow the same Lord and Savior.  So with that all on the table, I'm very curious about how most Mormons view God, in the sense of His presence.  In Acts 17:28 it says: 

For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

What does this mean to most Mormons?  Do they believe that the Father is all around us, that our very existence is tightly coupled with His presence?  My view is that the Father is omnipresent and can see/hear everything.   He knows our thoughts, He hears our prayers, He knows our motives and our deeds.  And through the Father, His Son is also present in the same way.

Thanks for any thoughts anyone would like to share.

Hello and welcome to the forum RockHopper!

Do LDS believe in the same Jesus? I proffer that LDS believe in the Jesus/Yeshua of the Bible. We believe to some extent other Christians have fallen away from that belief, and it has become something different from what the Bible teaches. So to that extent some of us have said we believe in a different Jesus than other Christians. My Jesus was actually begotten of the Father when the Father told him "Thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee" as recorded in Hebrews. The trinitarian Jesus, renders this into an eternally begotten Jesus, whatever that means, so that Jesus was always the Son. Early Church history reveals this was an unsettled matter in early Christianity with even Tertullian saying there was a time when the Son was not. Eventually, the Nicene Creed and the State Church of Rome won out & forcibly pushed out any dissent calling it heresy. So the trinitarian Jesus was always the Son, and will always be the Son. I view Jesus as becoming the Eternal Father per Isaiah 9:6. 

Do I believe the Father is all around us? I believe the Father is not all matter or energy, but that He can manipulate it for His ends. LDS are generally not pantheists. He can read our minds if He so chooses, but if we are determined to do evil, He does not strive with us, and may not know exactly what we are thinking at any given moment. He will usually know by our speech as will satan. I would now state my belief that the Father probably does most of His communication by what we would call telepathy. It is probably through his ability to manipulate energy at the most basic levels.

On 1/10/2018 at 12:55 PM, RockHopper said:

Hey Josh, Sorry I was a little confused about your earlier posts, now I understand where you're coming from :) I guess I can respond with a little different perspective.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

John 1:18  No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Colossians 1: 15-17   Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

The word "Trinity" does not appear in the Bible.  This makes me question when believers make their version of the Trinity a salvation issue.  Personally, I don't agree with much of the LDS doctrine on the origins of the Father and the Son.  But, I don't  agree 100% with the Protestant/Catholic view of the Trinity either. 

Fore example, I believe that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God.  So was He always with the Father, or was He begotten by the Father?  If he was begotten then He had beginning, a beginning that was before all of creation for sure, a beginning outside of time, but nonetheless a beginning.  Jesus is different in that He wasn't created, He was begotten.  In fact, He was the only being ever begotten by God and He is of the same essence/nature as His Father.  Every other being was created, and not of the same essence/nature of God the Father.

Since my view does not align 100% with the "canonized" doctrine of the Trinity, am I now following a different Jesus?   Am I now praying to different Father, through the Spirit of Christ that cries out Abba, Father, within my very being?  Would you be so quick to judge me?  I'm certainly not offended, but I would offer you a reminder from Romans.

Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

As for the other points (2,3,4,5), I don't think that's an accurate description of what Mormons (in general) believe.  But, I'm more than happy to discuss it.

I will offer that I was raised Baptist, but when I read the Bible, Jesus seemed to say too many things which conflicted with the idea of trinitariansm - like only the Father and not He Himself knew when He was returning. Together with the truth that God doesn't automatically send those to hell who have never heard the gospel, and the restored truth of Jesus' words from John 5:25 that He was going to visit the dead, and those who believed Him could be resurrected with Him, I was quickly ready to soak up what the restored gospel had to say.

To answer your question about the begotten nature of our Savior. I don't believe the Church really has a generally accepted doctrine about it. Brigham Young said some things which can be interpreted very literally, but not necessarily having to do with the passage "this day I have begotten thee." I think many in the Church take this very temporally, as referring to some kind of physical birth. However, I interpret it spiritually. That the Son did exist before receiving this covenant, but as a son rather than the Only Begotten of the Father. I believe Job speaks to this - particularly the part about the morning stars singing together. Thus, I place it in a pre-earth setting, and believe the NT passages that the Son was sent as the only Begotten of the Father already. The OT seems to confirm this in that He sometimes is clearly speaking as YHWH saying that that YHWH and His Spirit have sent Him. Thus, He is part of the "us" speaking as YHWH Elohim in Gen 3 :22.

To the extent you are trying to follow a Jesus of scripture and not the trinitarian Jesus, they may say you believe in a different Jesus. Is that heresy? If it is, I say so be it. I will let them have their Jesus who doesn't become the Father in the regeneration, and will honor my Jesus of scripture!

As for the other points 1,2,3,4, & 5 brought up by Josh Kinder, my responses are as follows:

1. I do not follow a Jesus who began as a created being. I follow the LDS belief that our spirits were not created, but our bodies are, and God "blows" our spirits into us to give us life, even as He did Adam, the first man of the Word. Obviously, Jesus' earthly body was created like ours since it came out of Mary. But to the extent that Yeshua as a being was created? no. He was the pre-existent Word with the Father. See my prior points.

2. Jesus did not have to earn salvation on this world, but came as our Savior - something He offered to do for us so that we may learn to follow Him as the Way.

3. Yeshua is NOT of "minor importance." That is a ridiculous characterization. Most critics realize that LDS are Jesus crazy. Everything we do is for Him. 

4. Yes, as Brigham Young noted, Jesus was conceived by a physical act. However, I do not follow any belief that God married Mary or such nonsense. He was physically conceived by some process we don't understand through the Holy Spirit. No one has kicked me out yet for believing that.

5. Jesus was not a married polygamist on earth. I don't believe He married on this earth. I do believe there have been many prior worlds, and I believe Jesus has been previously married. This is a somewhat unsettled area of Church doctrine, but the time is coming that it will become settled. I do not believe Jesus will ever return to corruption - so He will never re-enter "the world" as such. He will live forevermore as the Father in Celestial glory. He will be seen in Jerusalem again, but it will be cleansed before that day, when they shall say, blessed is He that cometh in the name of YHWH.

Edited by RevTestament
correction of scripture citation

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, mrmarklin said:

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

The Mormon Jesus is not as depicted in your chart.

1.  Created Being

2.  Gave us Salvation

3.  Unique and supreme importance

4.  LDS doctrine is that Christ was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost

5.  LDS doctrine is that we don't know if He was married, much less a polygamist.

Don't you mean uncreated being?

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, Gray said:

I guess not. But if it's a priesthood office, should anyone aspire to it? It thought God was more of a species, and we were embryonic gods.

It can be both.
The line between priesthood and family blurs and combines the higher you go.

What is the most common sunday school definition of priesthood?  Authority to act in God's name.
Who is the best example of acting in the name of God and with his authority?  His only begotten Son.
According to scripture as we become more like God we become gods, sons/daughters, heirs, are crowned (kings/queens, a priesthood office).

If we only think of priesthood as the Church (Deacon, Teacher, Priest, Elder, High Priest etc) there is very little connection to Godhood.
But if we think of priesthood as Joseph described it the connection to family becomes clearer.

  • The 2nd Priesthood is Patriarchal authority. Go to and finish the temple, and God will fill it with power, and you will then receive more knowledge concerning this priesthood.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×