Zakuska
-
Posts
7,537 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Zakuska
-
-
Lets face it... who wouldn't curse a fig.
1 -
Here again Paul links the "gift" / "reward" of eternal life to "good works.
Romans 2
2 Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. 2 But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who practice such things. 3 And do you think this, O man, you who judge those practicing such things, and doing the same, that you will escape the judgment of God?4 Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? 5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, 9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God.
0 -
5 hours ago, FormerLDS said:
Anyone can be saved. I was a Mormon when I discovered the truth and was saved.
Think about a "gift" and think about a "reward". They are complete opposites.
A gift is given freely and without payment of any kind. A reward is given only in recognition of personal worthiness, merit and achievement.
The Bible says "the gift of God is eternal life" in Romans 6, so clearly eternal life is given freely and without any payment in return.
Why does LDS theology teach that you cannot have eternal life during mortality?
Because the "eternal life" the LDS "savior" offers is not a free gift, but the reward of worthy behavior.
Paul can't seem to keep his theology straight... he told the Collosians they were being "rewarded" with eternal life because of their good works.
Colossians 3:23-24, “Whatever your task, work heartily, as serving the Lord and not men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward.
Seems to me Paul used "gift" and "reward" pretty interchangably.
1 -
Good post strappinglad.
On subjects involving science too often one side of the debate relies on "peer-reviewed" data as the be all end all of "empirical facts". But with science being "self editing" it kind of makes the point moot. By definition, in such a system, there can be no "empirical facts" because there is a built in clause to every "fact" that says this "fact" is subject to change in the future without notice.
Another flaw in the sciences today is "science by consensus". But that's another whole can of worms.
0 -
You know what... now that I read section 84 heading again verse 4 could be read as refering to the Kirtland temple as well.
0 -
On 1/29/2016 at 10:52 AM, JLHPROF said:
D&C 84:4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation.
5 For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord, and a cloud shall rest upon it, which cloud shall be even the glory of the Lord, which shall fill the house.No idea how the early saints viewed it. They probably viewed it literally until they started dying off. You would have to research early commentary on D&C 84 to find out.
I would imagine they viewed it the same way as the early Christians viewed Matthew 24/Luke 21.
Not sure why it matters since generation can mean many things.I think the key to understanding this is verse 5. That generation did not pass before 7 temples (houses of God) were built to the Lord.
Kirtland
Nauvoo
Salt lake
Ogden
Provo
Manti
St George
Yes that does not include the Missouri temple. So the status is...
Verse 4 failed while verse 5 was fulfilled 6 x's over.
2 -
On 2/4/2016 at 0:51 PM, Kevin Christensen said:
Years ago my wife and I turned to the dictionary and found enlightenment:
Sustain96
1. To keep up; keep going; maintain. Aid, assist, comfort.
2. to supply as with food or provisions:
3. to hold up; support
4. to bear; endure
5. to suffer; experience: to sustain a broken leg.
6. to allow; admit; favor
7. to agree with; confirm.FWIW
Kevin Christensen
Canonsburg, PA
I like that one... lets use it in a sentence:
"We sustain leaders when they make pour policy and we grin bear and endure the consiquences."
0 -
Yes.
Gen 19:24
וַֽיהוָ֗ה הִמְטִ֧יר עַל־סְדֹ֛ם וְעַל־עֲמֹרָ֖ה גָּפְרִ֣ית וָאֵ֑שׁ מֵאֵ֥ת יְהוָ֖ה מִן־הַשָּׁמָֽיִם
http://biblehub.com/text/genesis/19-24.htm
The key to seeing the 2 entities, one physically located on the earth while the other made it rain from heaven is the: מֵאֵ֥ת before the second יְהוָ֖ה.
0 -
Dont take my word for it... Gen 19:24 being interpreted as 2 Entities called YHWH. Is alive and well to this very Day among trinitarians.
QuoteThe “Heavenly” and “Earthly” Yahweh:
A Trinitarian Interpretation of Genesis 19:24Against all of these notions the following provides a case for the historic Trinitarian understanding of Genesis 19:24, first from the Old Testament, and then from the New Testament. The view defended in the present paper is the same as Leupold’s who saw this downgrade trend over fifty years ago.
“We believe the view the church held on this problem from days of old is still the simplest and the best: Pluit Deus filius a Deo patre = “God the Son brought down the rain from God the Father,” as the Council of Sirmium worded the statement. To devaluate the statement of the text to mean less necessitates a similar process of devaluation of a number of other texts like [Genesis] 1:26, and only by such a process can the claim be supported that there are no indications of the doctrine of the Trinity in Genesis. We believe the combined weight of these passages, including Gen 1:1, 2, makes the conclusion inevitable that the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is in a measure revealed in the Old Testament, and especially in Genesis. Why would not so fundamental a doctrine be made manifest from the beginning? We may see more of this truth than did the Old Testament saints, but the Church has through the ages always held one and the same truth.”2
http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/rogers/genesis_19_24_trinitarian1.html
0 -
Intresting.
1 -
2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:
1)So, you (and Justin) are claiming that the YHWH in Gen 18:1 is not the same YHWH in Gen 19:24? Both are spelled the same in the Hebrew text. So, are you claiming that YHWH is an office or title held by two separate entities? Or an infinity of entities? Etc. It is not clear what you are trying to say.
1) No. the YHWH of 18:1 who spoke to Abraham and was "on the Earth" is the same YHWH in 19:24 who was "on the earth.
But 19:24 speaks of a second entity given the name/title YHWH who was in the heavens who poured out the fire and brimstone when the YHWH on the earth gave the all clear that Lot and company wereo= out of harms way.
Justin is not the only one who interprets Gen 19:24 as speaking of two entities (one in heaven and one on earth) called YHWH.
The link I provided:
150ad Justin
180ad Iraneus
200ad Tertullian
250ad Ignatius
253ad Cyprian
Novatian
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles
All these interpret 19:24 just as I have.
So to answer question number 2 and 3.
YHWH does seem to be a title for God rather than a proper name.
More about that here:
Contrary to what some Christians believe (and at least one cult), Jehovah is not the Divine Name revealed to Israel. The name Jehovah is a product of mixing different words and different alphabets of different languages.
[/quote]
0 -
1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:
The KJV piously and conveniently translates the Hebrew Tetragrammaton YHWH (Yahweh) as "LORD," even though it is an epithet or title meaning "He who creates that which comes into existence," and can refer to either Father or Son. Titles may be borne by anyone who is assigned to hold that office.
The use of "LORD" twice in Gen 19:24 is in synonymous or complementary parallel, and refers to the same entity in each case -- the same LORD who immediately before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah had appeared to Abraham (along with two of his angels) at Mamre and ate a sumptuous meal (Gen 18:1ff.).
I respectfully disgree. Notice how the church father's interpreted the verse as 2 separate entities working in tandom to bring about the destruction of Sodom and Gamorah.
http://rabtessera.blogspot.com/2013/10/early-church-fathers-regarding-two.html?m=1
- 150 AD Justin Martyr: In this text, Justin the Christian is trying to convince Trypho the Jew that Jesus is God, by showing one of the three men who appeared to Abraham, was Yahweh himself: " I [Justin] inquired. And Trypho said, "Certainly; but you have not proved from this that there is another God besides Him who appeared to Abraham, and who also appeared to the other patriarchs and prophets. You have proved, however, that we [the Jews] were wrong in believing that the three who were in the tent with Abraham were all angels." I [Justin] replied again, "If I could not have proved to you from the Scriptures that one of those three is God, because, as I already said, He brings messages to those to whom God the Maker of all things wishes [messages to be brought], then in regard to Him who appeared to Abraham on earth in human form in like manner as the two angels who came with Him, and who was God even before the creation of the world, it were reasonable for you to entertain the same belief as is entertained by the whole of your nation." "Assuredly," he said, "for up to this moment this has been our [the Jews] belief." ... "And now have you not perceived, my friends, that one of the three, who is both God and Lord, and ministers to Him who is in the heavens, is Lord of the two angels? For when [the angels] proceeded to Sodom, He remained behind, and communed with Abraham in the words recorded by Moses; and when He departed after the conversation, Abraham went back to his place. And when he came [to Sodom], the two angels no longer conversed with Lot, but Himself, as the Scripture makes evident; and He is the Lord who received commission from the Lord who [remains] in the heavens, i.e., the Maker of all things, to inflict upon Sodom and Gomorrah the [judgments] which the Scripture describes in these terms: 'The Lord rained down upon Sodom and Gomorrah sulphur and fire from the Lord out of heaven.' "(Dialogue of Justin Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew, Chapter LVI.—God Who Appeared to Moses is Distinguished from God the Father.)
0 -
There are indeed 2 YHWHs spoken of in scripture.
Gen 19
24Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven, 25and He overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground.
LORD as it appears both times in this verse is YHWH.
Of course one is the Father (in the heavens) and the other is the Son (on the earth). But how exactly did he appear visibly in human form prior to having been born of the virgin Mary? (Hint: bro of Jared knows)
0 -
2 hours ago, FormerLDS said:
Your premise is an incorrect assumption.
Are there not false prophets, false Christs and false doctrines?
Why would be so difficult to see there are also false scriptures?
The Bible does claim to be pure and perfectly preserved in Psalm 12:6-7
"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."
Yes spoken words. Says nothing about the written word. However Jeremiah addresses the coruption of the written word.
Jer 8:8
“‘How can you say, “We are wise,
for we have the law of the Lord,”
when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?0 -
2 hours ago, danielwoods said:
The Bible also says that Satan comes as an angel of light.
As for your question, Rev. 14 describes an event that occurs after the church is taken from the Earth, hence no one present to preach the gospel.
Hmmm... sounds exactly like what happened when the last Apostle was martyred and the authority to preach the gospel was lost.
0 -
2 hours ago, FormerLDS said:
The point is, every angel of light requires one to first question Biblical inerancy.
What is it about the as-is Bible these angelic beings of light simply cannot stand?
I think the facts speak for themselves.
I think the facts do speak for them selves too. Especially when the Bible says an angel of light will come preaching the Gospel.
Revelation 14:6King James Version (KJV)
6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
If an Angel has to come back from heaven with it to preach, how can the earth have the gospel?
0 -
The church seems to be speaking out of both sides of its mouth again.
Gal 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
If we are all equal in Christ. Then why we continue with a class system that sets up one side of the equasion as super special and the other as subordinate chattel is beyond me. Male and female are either fully equal in the eyes of the Lord or they are not. It's high time Eves curse for eating the fruit first be removed. It's time we put our money where our key board is and quit with the lip service that women are equal in the church and actuallc treat them as such.
0 -
For a God who doesn't need or dwell in temples... he sure dwells in a lot of temples.
Isaiah 6:1
In the year that king Uzziah died, I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.
1 -
2 hours ago, FormerLDS said:
Yes, I do. I believe God has preserved His word perfectly thought the King James Bible [even though every angelic being who has appeared and miraculously "restored truth" would completely disagree with me].
How can we declare "Gods word (aka the bible) has been perfectly preserved" as FormerLDS baldly asserts when Gods word (ie the bible) declares of it's self that it hasn't been perfectly preserved?
Jer 8:8
“‘How can you say, “We are wise,
for we have the law of the Lord,”
when actually the lying pen of the scribes
has handled it falsely?CFR that God said he would preserve the bible perfectly.
0 -
3 things that stick out to me.
1) Jerome's mistranslation of rays of light for horns causing Michael Angelo to set a Biblical mistranslation in stone.
2) Joseph Smith bringing up the fact that the Book of James should actually be called "the book of Jacob". James the Saviors brother was named Jacob not James. I have an old Greek bible which confirms JS knew what he was talking about.
3) Codex Vaticanus - with its red ink margin scribals from the editor calling the scribe a knave for correcting spelling/grammar errors in the original he was copying from.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus
4thly,
All the accusations of the early church fathers accusing the Jews who they were debating of altering scripture. (Eg. See Justin's dialog with Trypho)
0 -
3 hours ago, danielwoods said:
In what way? Grace is received by believing that Christ's work was sufficient. That complete faith and trust in his work for our salvation is all that is needed.
Grace alone dictates you do nothing what so ever for your salvation. You do absolutely zero. No commandment keeping at all.
Yet the very thing that gets us saved is a commandment. So you can't get saved without keeping the commandment. Commandment keeping preceeds the gift of grace. This is contra what grace/false Gospel teachers preach.
1 -
Just now, danielwoods said:
Actually, that is the only commandment to attain eternal life.
And it blows the theory of grace alone out the window along with all its false treachers.
1 -
During the millenium christ will reign personally on the earth.
QuoteDuring the Millennium the Savior will reign personally on the earth.
-
1.
The millennial government is under the administration of the Savior and His righteous Saints (see Isaiah 2:1–4; Micah 4:2–3; Joel 3:16–17; D&C 43:29–30; 45:59; Revelation 5:10;20:4, 6; D&C 133:25).
-
2.
The Millennium will be righteous Israel’s day with the Savior, during which He will make all things known to them (see Zechariah 2:11; D&C 101:32–34; 121:26–32; 2 Nephi 30:16–18; Isaiah 11:9).
-
3.
Not everyone will have a knowledge of the living God and belong to His Church when the Millennium begins (seeMicah 4:5).
-
4.
During the Millennium, all those living on the earth will eventually know the Lord and will join His Church (seeJeremiah 31:31–34; D&C 84:98).
0 -
1.
-
And the first commandment we have to keep to obtain etetnal life is "believe in Christ".
1 John 3
23And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
0
Carbon Dated Materials from the Future?!
in General Discussions
Posted
So I was bored tonight so I watched some History Channel on demand. Ancient Aliens S12 Ep 6 The Science Wars
What does this have to do with Mormonism?
Mormon Apologists and theists in general are routinely lambasted online by supposed "Imperical Scientific Facts" proposed by Atheists and intelectuals of all walks. So perhaps we can talk about a few things from this episode that peaked my interest and reminded my of several discussions I had years ago on this board.
1) What do we do when Carbon Dating gives us "Future Dates"? This episode gives several examples of recent Carbon Dating from core samples that give us future dates using the current and most recent scientific methods for obtaining these Dates.
Here is a couple more examples of future Carbon Dates. (Please... I know this is a creationists site but the Scientific Peer reviewed emails these guys are getting back from the accredited labs... Science doesn't lie.
http://creation.com/carbon-dating-into-the-future
It is explained that volcanic eruptions as well as exposure to radiation can scew Catbon Dating results.
If that's the case... how can we trust/know for sure that ANY of the carbon dates that scientists have given us so are aren't subject to suspicion?
2) Georgio "ALIENS" guy... has one of the elongated skulls DNA tested. The providence of the skull is Paracus, South America, by the Museum who loaned the skull to be DNA tested. Now... I'm not claiming the Skull is "Alien" and neither is Georgio ("Alien" guy). It comes out that the DNA most closely matches Scottish ancestory. So... what is a 14000 year old Scottish man doing buired in South America?