How Can We Know When We Hear

[Zakuska]

Seems to me... this "Voice" Paul Ray is speaking too is very Biblically based indeed.

1 Kgs. 19: 12

12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.

1 Ne. 17: 45

45 Ye are swift to do iniquity but slow to remember the Lord your God. Ye have seen an angel, and he spake unto you; yea, ye have heard his voice from time to time; and he hath spoken unto you in a still small voice, but ye were cpast feeling, that ye could not feel his words; wherefore, he has spoken unto you like unto the voice of thunder, which did cause the earth to shake as if it were to divide asunder.

D&C 85: 6

6 Yea, thus saith the still small voice, which whispereth through and pierceth all things, and often times it maketh my bones to quake while it maketh manifest, saying

John heard lots of voices in his heavenly vision, and so did many of the other prophets. Are you a Prophet Paul Ray?

[Paul Ray]

Are you a Prophet Paul Ray?

What are you thinking and suggesting with the use of the capital "P" in prophet, I wonder.

I know what I am thinking. What are are thinking?

I believe a prophet is anyone who has been taught something by God, personally.

... and yes, I have been.

But don't believe me just because I say so.

I suggest that you ask God, personally.

... and keep asking until God actually tells you.

I already know that you are a prophet.

God has already told me about you.

[Zakuska]

Doh. stupid shift key.

[Freedom in Truth]

QUOTE(Freedom in Truth @ Mar 7 2007, 12:44 PM)

There is a difference between someone who is a prophet and someone who prophesizes.

I think the difference is in your own mind and the minds of others like you who don't know that God is now with us.

God is definitely now with us - that we agree on for sure!

[Freedom in Truth]

QUOTE(Freedom in Truth @ Mar 7 2007, 01:44 PM)

What is a â??forthtellerâ?? Is this a word Mormons have invented? I couldnâ??t find it in a dictionary.

The above definition seems to include two definitions for â??prophetâ? - the Hebrew prophet and a â??prophetâ? in a general sense. Numbers 11 records a wish of Mosesâ??. Rev. 19:10 does not say that someone with a testimony of Jesus IS a prophet. Other verses say that believers will prophesy - I have no problem with this, but that doesnâ??t make them â??prophetsâ?.

There is a difference between someone who is a prophet and someone who prophesizes.

Not according to Paul...

1 Cor. 14:1-11, 29, 32, 37 (edited by FIT to save space)

Anyone who has the Gift of the Spirit is a Prophet. Moses' wish came true! DId you notice the "forthtelling" in verse 3? ("speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort")

In 1 Corinthians 14 Paul is explaining why he would rather that believers prophesy than speak in tongues. He is also speaking about keeping everything orderly when believers come together. Yes, verse 3 says that everyone who prophesizes speaks to men to encourage, strengthen, and comfort. (My Bible doesnâ??t have â??forthtellingâ? and neither did dictionaries - I didnâ??t think of the KJV . . . sorry.) I do not see that Paul is saying that everyone is a prophet. I also donâ??t see that Paul is saying that receiving one prophecy makes one a prophet.

1 Corinthians 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

Paul, in 1 Corinthians 12, compares the congregation of believers to a physical body - each member has something the whole body needs. He says that not all will prophesy.

1 Corinthians 12:7-11 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.

1 Corinthians 12:27-30 Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?

Again, in Ephesians 4:11, Pauls says that some will be prophets -

Ephesians 4:11 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers,

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

It seems that you have taken the specific definition of prophet and watered it down so all can be called prophets. Then, you interpret Biblical prophets as having given false prophecies so you can show that they were no different from Mormon prophets. This doesnâ??t work for me.

Your problem isn't with Mormons but the Bible in general. Look at Jonah. A true prophet, and he disobeyed and blood lusted. Moses killed a man, Peter lied, and look at Paul.

There is no question that prophets were not sinless men. That is not what we are discussing. We are discussing whether or not a true prophet of God will lie when giving a prophecy.

Did you say Isaiah was lying in Isaiah 6:9-10? Paul didnâ??t think so - he attributes the passage to the Holy Spirit. Jesus considers it a true prophecy as well.

Acts 28:24-27 Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe. They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: "The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your forefathers when he said through Isaiah the prophet:

" 'Go to this people and say,

"You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving."

For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'

Matthew 13:14-15 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

" 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'â??

Jesus also mentions that Nineveh â??repented at the preaching of Jonahâ?. He makes no mention of Jonah being a liar even though He doesnâ??t sound accepting of false testimony. (Hammer - do you notice both murder and false testimony in the same list again?)

Matthew 12:41 The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now one greater than Jonah is here. (Luke 11:32)

Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

In Post #311 I discussed this further. Of course I donâ??t believe God changes his mind, but He does â??changeâ? His actions - at least this is what it can look like from our point of view. Our repentance, prayer, and perseverance can bring a â??changeâ? in Godâ??s actions. However, God has foreknowledge and is omniscient so He knows in advance what we will do and what He will do.

I fully believe God can and often does change his mind and his decrees. The God who could not change his decrees was the Babylonian God. Remeber what landed Daniel in the lions den? Our God is a living breathing being who can speek for himself... not one who's decrees are set in stone.

I addressed this in Post #344. Why would God change His mind? Did God change His mind in 1978, deciding that it would now be O-K for blacks to possess the priesthood? Could God change His mind again and decide that whites canâ??t possess the priesthood? Is God fickle? It would be hard to trust a god like that.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

Passages like this are hard to understand without a knowledge of Hebrew thought, language, literary devices (anthropopathism), etc. But if you read with a knowledge of Hebrew thought, etc., you donâ??t come up with faulty prophecies.

Very true... the Hebrews are who beleived in a Corporeal God. The greeks disembodied him.

That God is incorporeal is an incredibly important Jewish belief. They believe that representing God in physical form is idolatry.

Is God a very large giant? Have you found His footstool so you can worship there? If God is this big and the earth is His footstool wouldnâ??t we see Him? Does God have wings? Does smoke come from His nose and fire from His mouth?

Isaiah 66:1 This is what the LORD says: "Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool.

Psalm 99:5 Exalt the LORD our God and worship at his footstool; he is holy.

Psalm 36:7 How priceless is your unfailing love! Both high and low among men find refuge in the shadow of your wings.

2 Samuel 22:7a,9 In my distress I called to the LORD; I called out to my God. (9) Smoke rose from his nostrils; consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it.

Numbers 23:19a God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind.

John 4:24 â??God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

You also don't come up with a God of flesh and bones that used to be a man. So - how does this fit with the Mormon concept that the early church corrupted the Biblical text? Did those Greeks mess with Hebrew thought, literary devices, idioms, etc.? They not only deleted â??plain and precious truthsâ? but somehow changed Hebrew thought?

What... like Micheal Angelo?

So Moses had horns on his head?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_(Michelangelo)

[Freedom in Truth]

QUOTE(Freedom in Truth @ Mar 7 2007, 01:44 PM)

What is a â??forthtellerâ?? Is this a word Mormons have invented? I couldnâ??t find it in a dictionary.

Unfortunately it seems to mean that they process the information available to every one else and try to make a good guess at what is going to happen. Cf. Ezekiel 24-29.

See Post #355 for â??forthtellerâ?. I donâ??t think it mean what youâ??re thinking.

[Paul Ray]

God is definitely now with us - that we agree on for sure!

Why don't you try explaining the idea you have in your mind that leads you to believe there is a difference between a prophet and someone who prophesizes.

I know there is a difference between a prophet and a prophecy.

A prophet is a person who prophesizes and a prophecy is what a prophet teaches.

If a person is repeatedly teaching what God has taught him, or her, then that person is prophesying. (sp?)

What do you see as the difference between a prophet and a person who prophesizes?

If we are wrong, or you believe we are wrong, why don't you just tell us what you think is the truth?

[Freedom in Truth]

For example, all the true prophets in the Old Testament... or those who wrote what is in it... taught that Jesus Christ would be coming to redeem us. For them it was a future event, but their intent wasn't to predict the future. Their intent was to teach that Jesus Christ would be coming to redeem us... to teach people about Jesus Christ. That is what prophets do. They try to teach other people about Jesus, with the spirit of Jesus to guide them and help them know who He is.

Would you say that someone who hears God and is right once is a true prophet? Or would you say that all who teach about God and are right once are true prophets? I am not sure all the OT prophets taught of coming redemption - I would have to look that up - but why do you say all the prophets taught that Christ would be coming to redeem (not God)?

Though a prophet can teach I would not equate a prophet with a teacher, especially in the NT. (more below)

Here's another example. A prophet today would teach that Jesus has come, with the understanding of who He was and is. A false prophet is someone who teaches something that isn't true about Him.

Would you agree with Zakuska that Jonah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah spoke falsely about God? Would that make them false prophets under your definition?

A prophet is basically a teacher who teaches about Jesus Christ, while knowing Who He is, correctly, while being inspired to teach through the power of the Holy Ghost.

Your definition of â??prophetâ? seems to be very linked with â??teacherâ??. I see a difference between someone who sometimes receives prophecies and someone who often receives prophecies, and between someone who teaches his teen son now and then and someone who teaches at a college. In the same way, though I sometimes plant flowers I am not a gardener.

Here are some verses I posted in #355 - The first two verses say people will have different spiritual gifts -

1 Corinthians 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

1 Corinthians 12:7-11 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.

Paul, below, says not all will prophesy.

1 Corinthians 12:27-30 Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?

Again, in Ephesians 4:11, Pauls says that some will be prophets -

Ephesians 4:11 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers,

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

...two definitions for â??prophetâ? - the Hebrew prophet and a â??prophetâ? in a general sense. Numbers 11 records a wish of Mosesâ??. Rev. 19:10 does not say that someone with a testimony of Jesus IS a prophet. Other verses say that believers will prophesy - I have no problem with this, but that doesnâ??t make them â??prophetsâ?.

In your opinion, which I believe is false. I think you are teaching us something false about prophets.

See above verses. I would not say I am teaching you. I see us as sharing what we believe and why. If you learn from me I would say God taught you because I have no reason to receive your respect on such issues.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

It seems that you have taken the specific definition of prophet and watered it down so all can be called prophets. Then, you interpret Biblical prophets as having given false prophecies so you can show that they were no different from Mormon prophets. This doesnâ??t work for me.

Then what does work for you? How do you know when you are hearing from prophets? What is a prophet, to you? Do you believe God inspires you to teach us? Why should we listen to you?

Here is something I wrote on another thread (edited a bit) -

I believe a prophet is way more than someone who makes predictions or gets information from God. A prophet is someone who is very close to God, someone who KNOWS God intimately (allowing that a human can never completely know God). A prophet knows Godâ??s heart - in a sense he is a close friend to God. A prophet can tell you that God loves something you are doing, not because God spoke directly and said â??Tell Paul I love what he is doingâ? but because the prophet knows God well enough to know what He loves.

And, because a prophet knows God so well, he can know what sounds like God and what doesnâ??t. (John 10:4b - â??His sheep follow Him because they know His voiceâ?.) For example, a husband knows the voice of his wife. Another example - letâ??s suppose youâ??re married and your wife hates chocolate (always has) and it makes her sick. If someone told you they saw her at Baskin Robbins having a hot fudge sundae you wouldnâ??t believe them. You KNOW your wife and know she wouldnâ??t be having a hot fudge sundae. If someone else told you they have been a close friend of your wifeâ??s for years, but they are bringing her a box of chocolates, you would really question their relationship with your wife. Do you see what I mean?

Prophets can speak directly for God - be a mouthpiece for God. These types of statements really should be accurate, for the prophet should know Godâ??s voice. However, they might not completely understand Godâ??s message. I might say, â??Paul, God told me to tell you that He is pleased with your gentle spirit and He wants you to know that you will not lose the battle you are fighting concerning your son, so do not be afraid or discouraged.â? If I really was told to say that to you I wouldnâ??t have any idea what is happening in your private life right now. This type of message would be under â??strengthening, encouraging, and edifyingâ? that Paul spoke of.

Prophets are not infallible. They are human like us and they could be selfish, they could have anger that is not righteous, etc. But, if they are mature in their relationship with God, and if God is trusting them with special messages, the messages (when interpreted correctly) eventually should come to pass.

So, a prophet is more than someone who speaks for God. A prophet KNOWS Godâ??s heart and is close to God in relationship.

However, I believe people can hear from non-godly spirits.

Deut. 13:1 - If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, "Let us follow other gods" (gods you have not known) "and let us worship them," 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul.

This is an example of someone who is not hearing from God. We can discern this because God would not tell us to follow other gods. This is the problem I have with JS - he told people to follow a different god (by telling them that the God of traditional Christianity of his day presented God wrongly). The only other prophet I know of who corrected interpretation of scripture was Jesus. I donâ??t think JS would claim to be equal to Jesus as a prophet, would he?

Anything a prophet says should be tested with revelation in the Bible and Godâ??s character. JSâ??s revelations failed this test - he claimed the Bible had been changed in order to pass.

I havenâ??t been to a denomination that has â??prophetsâ? - people who hold the office of a prophet like Mormonism has. I am not saying that there arenâ??t prophets or that there canâ??t be prophets. I do know several who are â??propheticâ?. Again, I am not here to teach you. And you shouldnâ??t listen to me automatically - you should test what I say with the revelation of the Bible. But, unfortunately, Mormons have changed Biblical revelation and the character of God - so there is no standard with which to judge.

[consiglieri]

I honestly cannot believe that you guys are still at this thread.

Kudos to you all for perserverence.

I will weigh in on the side of the angels, however.

The fact is that it is apostate Christianity that did away with prophets in God's church, and in the process created an organization unlike anything represented in the Bible.

If the Bible teaches anything, it teaches that whenever God had a people on the earth he recognized as his, he had a prophet at the head; defined as a person through whom he revealed his will to his people.

This pattern is consistent from the beginning of Genesis through the end of Revelation.

A church that does not follow this pattern is unlike any church we read about in the Bible.

Why do you believe in a Church that is so foreign to the Bible, FIT?

And more to the point of the question in the title of this lengthy thread; is it not certain that a church that is not organized after the clear biblical pattern is likely to be teaching a "doctrine of demons"?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Paul Ray]

Would you say that someone who hears God and is right once is a true prophet?

I think you're missing part of the equation. Let me answer that question something like this.

I would say that someone who hears God and is right once about what God has said, correctly understanding God's message, and then shares that message with another person is a true prophet, even if God never tells that person anything else.

And btw, when I was thinking about this last night, I had another thought come to me which might help you understand this.

When you ask yourself what a prophet is, and you're forming questions in your mind to understand this, try substituting the word teacher for the word prophet in your mind, while understanding that a prophet is a teacher who God has inspired... rather than simply teaching what God has taught someone else.

If you're only repeating what prophets taught, without any revelation from God to yourself, personally, then I would call you a teacher instead of a prophet... in each of those specific instances.

Or would you say that all who teach about God and are right once are true prophets?

To be a prophet, yourself, you would need to receive revelation from God, and teach other people what God has taught you. A prophet is a teacher who God has inspired, as opposed to a teacher who teaches only what other people say... people other than God, I mean.

I am not sure all the OT prophets taught of coming redemption - I would have to look that up - but why do you say all the prophets taught that Christ would be coming to redeem (not God)?

Christ is God, if you understand what I mean when I say that. The person Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob knew as their God, is the person who we know as Jesus Christ. It is true that when Christ was here, He taught us about His Father, and His Father is a different person, but whether the OT prophets referred to the person who would come as Jesus Christ, or God, it was the very same person.

And at least one of the reasons they all taught that He would be coming was because they wanted us to know God, personally.

Though a prophet can teach I would not equate a prophet with a teacher, especially in the NT. (more below)

Me either, except as a point of reference to help you understand how a prophet is greater than a teacher, because a prophet is inspired by God, instead of just a teacher who repeats what others say. A prophet learns from God, personally.

Would you agree with Zakuska that Jonah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah spoke falsely about God? Would that make them false prophets under your definition?

I think you misunderstood Zakuska. I don't think he meant that God's prophets spoke falsely, at least not when they were speaking for God. But prophets are also human, and they can still make mistakes. Not everything they say is inspired by God, personally.

Your definition of â??prophetâ? seems to be very linked with â??teacherâ??.

I'm trying to help you see the similarities. I know there are some differences.

I see a difference between someone who sometimes receives prophecies and someone who often receives prophecies, and between someone who teaches his teen son now and then and someone who teaches at a college. In the same way, though I sometimes plant flowers I am not a gardener.

If I knew you planted flowers, I would call you a gardener, even if you weren't the best gardener in all of the world.

I believe everyone is a prophet, to the extent they are prophets. I believe God has taught everyone at least one thing during life. Everything good comes from God.

Here are some verses I posted in #355 - The first two verses say people will have different spiritual gifts -

I know people are more especially gifted in certain areas, or have certain things they are especially good at doing. But you can have more than one gift, and you can improve the gifts you have. If you're not good at something, you can practive and become even better.

Paul, below, says not all will prophesy.

At this moment, not all are, are they. But we can develop our gifts that God has given us. Not all at once, suddenly, but over time, gradually.

Again, in Ephesians 4:11, Pauls says that some will be prophets -

I believe it would be more correct to say that He was saying that some already are prophets, and apostles, etc. And over time, there will be others with specific gifts. And also over time the people who at one time were not very gifted will become even better with their gifts.

Practice, practice, practice. There's no good reason why we should ever stop trying.

... but please don't fake it. Some of us know how to tell who has the real thing.

I would not say I am teaching you. I see us as sharing what we believe and why. If you learn from me I would say God taught you because I have no reason to receive your respect on such issues.

Ditto from me, exactly. And I actually believe it is impossible for me to teach you.

I can only plant a seed, and it is God who will water it... if it's a good seed, and He approves of the tree.

... a prophet is more than someone who speaks for God. A prophet KNOWS Godâ??s heart and is close to God in relationship.

I believe that too.

However, I believe people can hear from non-godly spirits.

Of course. I call those people either false teachers, or false prophets.

A false teacher teaches something false, but doesn't say it is God who taught him/her.

A false prophet teaches something false while saying it is God that taught him/her.

... the problem I have with JS - he told people to follow a different god (by telling them that the God of traditional Christianity of his day presented God wrongly).

This is an example of what I would call a false teaching... what you, yourself, are saying right here.

Joseph didn't tell people to follow a different god, or God. Our (LDS) God is the same God other Christians worship. We (LDS) simply know more about God than you and other Christians do now, or actually, more than you will accept.

And it is you, and others like you, who say we (LDS) have a different God... and I personally know that what you are saying is false. I was once in another church, before I became a member of this church, and I never did switch the God I worship. I simply know more now than I once did about God.

I donâ??t think JS would claim to be equal to Jesus as a prophet, would he?

No, he wouldn't. It was Jesus who taught Joseph, but not all that Jesus knew. I think it will take forever to learn as much as Jesus knows now.

Anything a prophet says should be tested with revelation in the Bible and Godâ??s character.

I would prefer to phrase it like this:

Anything anyone says should be tested with any and everything God has already said, and what God says now trumps what God said in the past.

Example: At one time God told us to offer animal sacrifices. At this time that is no longer necessary.

JSâ??s revelations failed this test - he claimed the Bible had been changed in order to pass.

I believe that is another false teaching... from you.

It was God who told Joseph what Joseph taught us about the gospel. If you don't believe that, you can ask God for yourself.

I havenâ??t been to a denomination that has â??prophetsâ? - people who hold the office of a prophet like Mormonism has.

Actually, there is no office of "prophet". Every member of the Church is, or at least should be, a prophet.

The President of the Church is the prophet for the whole church. He is the one the Lord talks to about the Church... to guide him about how to direct and govern in it.

And each member of the Church can receive revelation for his/her own stewardships. None of us is or should be blindly following anybody.

I am not saying that there arenâ??t prophets or that there canâ??t be prophets. I do know several who are â??propheticâ?.

Heh, you seem to want to avoid calling anyone a "prophet", and instead want to refer to them as being "prophetic" or "people who prophesize".

It is really not a big deal to be called a prophet. Everyone has to be to learn from God, personally.

And you don't have to be a member, before you can become a prophet. You are a prophet when God teaches you, personally, and you then share what God taught you with other people.

Again, I am not here to teach you. And you shouldnâ??t listen to me automatically - you should test what I say with the revelation of the Bible.

Why limit ourselves to the Bible, only? God is there, and we can ask God anything, personally.

How do you even know the Holy Bible is actually the word of God?

Did you just believe what someone told you? Was that person God?

I never just believe anyone when they tell me something without checking with God first, to know it's true.

It hope it helps you to know that is my policy.

But, unfortunately, Mormons have changed Biblical revelation and the character of God - so there is no standard with which to judge.

The standard should be what God tells you, personally, not what other people tell you.

Why should you believe what other say about anything?

Heh, you may think I am gullible to believe what I believe about God, but I learned what I know from God, personally.

You seem to believe the Bible just because other people told you it's "God's word". I may be wrong, but that is the way you come across.

I hope you will someday realize God can teach you, personally.

You don't have to just believe what others tell you... including what I am telling you here and now. And I also don't have to just believe you when you tell me something. I can check with God, personally, always.

[Freedom in Truth]

Actually... since the Salt Lake Based Church doesn't own the Copy right it cant very well Print anything.

So since the LDS church doesnâ??t own the copyright they are forced to disobey God? If they donâ??t own the copyright then how do they used the JST (selected sections) for footnotes in their KJV Bible?

Acts 4:19 But Peter and John replied, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God.

And what about Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (Daniel 3)? And what about Daniel (Daniel 6)? Didnâ??t they obey God rather than man? If God commanded you all to publish the JST wouldnâ??t that be of utmost importance? Wouldnâ??t you even try?

Yes bits and peaces are incorporated into the foot notes and appendecies of the Quad. Which Gives us the original KJV as well as what Joseph ammeneded so we can see the changes for our selfs.

Why would you want the original KJV if it has been so corrupted? And wouldnâ??t having the KJV be confusing? Wouldnâ??t it be better to have the â??correctionsâ? in the text and possibly the KJV footnoted? But why would you want to keep a verse in the Bible if it is wrong? (You donâ??t keep misspelled words, right?)

This is false... Parts of it are in the quad, and are considered Cannonical.

But the JST as a whole is not included. Who edited through JSâ??s corrections?

[Freedom in Truth]

You seem to be aware of some reasons. You quoted some later on. Another is becuase the Lord wanted it to be done.

I was asking specifically what you thought.

I think we do highly esteem the JST. But no, I would not expect us not to.

You highly esteem only some sections, it seems.

I don't think we have done it yet, aside from a few selections that are in our canon. We don't have the copyright, so it wouldn't be legal.

How did you get the copyright for some sections? Why did you seek the copyright for just some sections?

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

Did the church disobey God for over 100 years?

No. I don't think so. He told us to obey all our laws.

When we can't, because of laws, I don't think God considers that to be our fault.

We can only do what we can, anytime.

I donâ??t think Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (Daniel 3) and Daniel (Daniel 6) and Peter and John (Acts 4) would agree with you.

The RLDS community has always had it. If I wanted to, and knew about it from them, I could've read it.

Doesnâ??t the RLDS publish the BoM too? So the LDS doesnâ??t have to publish the BoM either. The LDS doesnâ??t have to make the BoM part of the Quad - if you want to read it you can find it on your own. The fact that the LDS does publish the BoM and that they include it in the Quad says they view it differently from the JST.

Yes. I don't simply believe people who say they are speaking for God until and/or unless God tells me that He inspired them.

So personal revelations to people in the Bible are not necessarily anything God wants you to know (ever)?

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

On the other hand, the Mormon Quad includes the KJV Bible, the BoM, the D&C, and the PoGP. The JST is not included, so it must not be considered authoritative or inspired or sacred like the other works.

I think that's an assumption, and I do not agree. I consider every word of God to be sacred to me... just as soon as I know it's God's word.

The LDS has put its stamp of approved authority and inspiration on the Quad. If they have not, them why do they have a Quad? Why not dispense with it and just let everyone read what works for them?

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

It is a lesser work?

Paul Ray - No, I don't think so.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

How could it be?

Paul Ray - I don't see how that could be possible.

Sorry - this is making no sense to me. If the JST is not possibly a lesser work then it would be in the Quad.

The canon of scriptures are a measuring rod we can use to determine what scripture is. The canon is like a big set of examples.

So anything you hear from God should match the character or commands or revelation of what has already been said, correct?

The entire JST is not a rod for testing straightness? You would rather have the corrupted KJV?

I don't speak for the Church. We have a President, and Apostles. That's their job.

I understand that, but do your personal views match the views of the President and Apostles?

QUOTE

I try not to assume, but sometimes we think we understand but we donâ??t!

Paul Ray - That happens to me more than I care to admit.

I think it's important to know who to ask, and who to trust for answers.

Amen!

Don't believe just what I say, anytime.

I donâ??t - I measure it to the Bible. It often doesnâ??t match.

[HurlyBurly]

So since the LDS church doesnâ??t own the copyright they are forced to disobey God? If they donâ??t own the copyright then how do they used the JST (selected sections) for footnotes in their KJV Bible?

I don't think you need copyrights to include references to or brief excerpts from another work. ("Brief", of course, being interpreted relative to the size of the excerpt relative to the total work.) I'm sure that the excerpts of the JST that are footnoted and in the appendixes of the LDS Quad are fully legal.

And what about Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (Daniel 3)? And what about Daniel (Daniel 6)? Didnâ??t they obey God rather than man? If God commanded you all to publish the JST wouldnâ??t that be of utmost importance? Wouldnâ??t you even try?

I imagine that if God were to command us to use the JST exclusively instead of the KJV in our teachings that he would command us to do it in a legal way. I just searched on Amazon, and it seems you can buy the JST there, so I don't see any need for us to publish it if somebody else already is.

[Zakuska]

You can hardly fault Micheal Angelo for a mistranslation in the un-alterable Infallable Bible texts.

The statue depicts Moses with horns on his head. This is believed to be because of the mistranslation of Exodus 34:29-35 by St Jerome. Moses is actually described as having "karan ohr"--"rays of light"--coming from his head, which Jerome in the Vulgate had translated as "horns" (See Halo). The mistake in translation is possible because the word "keren" in the Hebrew language can mean either "ray" or "horn".

John says Israel had horns too...

[Paul Ray]

Freedom,

Rather than just quote what you said and what I said previously I'll try to summarize what I have been trying to tell you, or at least the points I don't think you understand. You can keep asking me questions, though, if you want to know what I think. I will answer you in the best way I can think of.

I consider the JST to be scripture, and it is now freely available to everyone who wants to read it and find out for themselves whether or not it is true... and the way to do that is to ask God if it's true, line by line and precept by precept.

I believe the reason the JST is not included in our (LDS) canon is because we didn't have the copyright to it, and we still don't have the copyright. I believe Joseph Smith had the copyright and then after he died... HE WAS MURDERED IN COLD BLOOD... it was then passed to his family, his wife and his children. I may be wrong, but I don't think the Church has ever had the copyright for the whole book. We do print a few selections, but we don't have the copyright for the book. We simply give a few quotes to what is written in the JST.

The Church does have the copyright to the Book of Mormon, however, and anyone who wants to publish it must have the consent of the Church.. if they want to publish it legally. To my knowledge, the RLDS do not publish it, themselves, and they get it from us, or the Church.

I also want to clarify that I am only a member of the Church. I do not speak for the Church, officially. The Church is an organization, and it has been legally organized, with officers who are General Authorities of the Church.

I try to be in line with everything they try to teach me when I want to know what it is the Church teaches, and I always seek God's inspiration as I learn, but you are now hearing from me as only a member of the Church. I'm a volunteer, not one of the leaders. I do have a calling, and in that I am a leader, but I answer to the official leaders of the Church.

I hope you now understand what I believe.

If you ever want to know the truth, you can simply ask God. Right now you're only learning from me.

... from what I know and believe God has taught me, personally, with maybe a few things that are simply my own opinion.

[Neighbor]

I'll have to get back and read what I've missed when home again...

In some reading I noticed Balaam. Here was a pagan 'seer'/prophet who came to understand very quickly that when God speaks He fulfills His word rather than changing it.

So if this pagan seer who came to hear from the real one and only God realized this, isn't it reasonable that the same thing is still true about God today as it was in 1400 BC? He spoke the universe into existence and the sun still sustains our life on earth, gravity still functions, etc... The commandments of God are sure.

After reading UNSTOPPABLE GLOBAL WARMING, EVERY 1500 YEARS, I'm not convinced that the 6000 year old earth is true, and want to study Genesis over to check out the figurative aspects of the creation account.

[Freedom in Truth]

Over One Hundred Texts From the Bible That Show the Doctrine of Original Sin is Unbiblical and False

This shows that:

1) Original sin is unbiblical,

or, failing that

2) The Bible contradicts itself

or, failing that

3) The Bible is ambiguous and confusing.

I think original sin is a state of being, not an action. We are born into a world dying from sin having entered it. We are affected by the sin of our relatives. Our nature misses the mark of perfection. Have you ever had an infant? They are self-centered by nature. You can argue that they are not accountable for this - thatâ??s fine. But then you have the difficulty of deciding when they are accountable.

â?? . . . little babies open their eyes in this world as sinners, under the wrath of God, and condemned to the everlasting punishment of hell. They teach that new born babies who die without baptism will go into the â??torments of hell forever.â??"

I have never heard this taught. I have never said this.

This article takes a whole different approach to this subject than I do. I find it legalistic and formulaic (and often in error, but that is a different point).

I believe the issue is the heart. In a sense, itâ??s not so much what you do but why you do it and what you are thinking. The Bible addresses the heart at length - Jesus addresses it as well. Look at Matthew 5 and following - the Sermon on the Mount - the first recorded teaching of Jesus in the NT. Some examples -

Matt. 5:21-22 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment.â?

Matt. 5:27-28 "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.â?

I believe when people die (infants included) they come face to face with God. At that moment they have a heart response to God. They either recognize Him for who He is and worship and love Him, or they recognize Him for who He is but will not worship and love Him.

Itâ??s hard for me to describe this heart response, but itâ??s like how different people react to . . . a street person. Do they have compassion? Pity? Love? Do they take some action? Are they annoyed? Do they think the person is a loser, probably an addict, hopeless? Do they think the person is not really homeless but just lazy? What comes out of their heart? What do they immediately feel when they see the street person? Then what do they do?

How about peopleâ??s reactions to someone who just won an award? Are they genuinely happy for the person? Are they jealous? Annoyed? How about peopleâ??s reactions to someone who attempts to be perfectly honest? Do they admire the person, or do they think the person is a fool? These are heart responses.

Sin cannot be in the presence of a most Holy, Almighty God. Jesus died to cover our sins so we could be in the presence of God and have relationship with Him. Jesusâ?? death covers original sin, sins we commit without knowledge, sins we commit with knowledge, etc. All sins. Then when we face God (or hear the Truth) we have choice.

Jesus Taught That Little Children Are Without Sin - do these verses mention sin? Maybe something else is being pointed out.

The Bible Says That Men Are Created Upright And Without Sin - what does â??made in the image of Godâ? mean?

It Is Impossible For God To Create A Sinful Being - the same verses are being used over and over. What about birth defects? Genetic traits? Behavioral genetics? Pathological liars (for example)? Maybe God breathes Life into the fertilized egg but the egg is already affected by the imperfect world and the genes of his imperfect parents.

Men Sin Against The Good Nature With Which God Created Them - this point is related to and dependent on point #2 and #3

Children Have No Knowledge Of Good And Evil At Birth - no knowledge, correct. What is the age of accountability? But what about their hearts? Children are by nature selfish and self-centered.

No Man Can Be Guilty For A Sin He Did Not Commit - canâ??t you be guilty for something you did not do but should have (neglect)? We are not guilty of Adamâ??s sins - but Adamâ??s sins have consequences for us. The consequence is that we are flawed and can no longer stand in Godâ??s presence. Then, of course, we add our own personal sins. And, we would have disobeyed just like Adam if we were in the garden.

The article is getting repetitive and basing points on other points, so I will just select what to respond to.

All Sin Is Voluntary. There Is No Involuntary Sin - I donâ??t know about you, but I can think something I did not choose to think (not consciously anyway). Are you always aware of being thoughtless or selfish? (â??thoughtlessâ? kind of suggests lacking thought)

First Proof-text - Psalm 51:5 and Job 1:21. â??Nakedâ? can mean â??carrying nothingâ?, which fits the context of this chapter of Job (he just lost everything) and also goes with the following verse -

Ecclesiastes 5:15 Naked a man comes from his mother's womb, and as he comes, so he departs. He takes nothing from his labor that he can carry in his hand.

I donâ??t see the reasoning why these verses (Psalm 51:5 and Job 1:21) have to both be literal or both be figurative. Neither verse says we go back into the womb. David â??was confessing the great magnitude and guilt of the sin he had committedâ? by saying that he is so sinful that he even was born sinful. The author needs this verse to be symbolic because of his third point above.

The rest of the article seems to be mostly based on the same point - point #3 above.

Since every person who is of or past the age of accountability chooses to sin, â??original sinâ? is not really all that relevant in their case. And if God looks at the heart and everyone has the opportunity to choose God or to choose separation from God, being born in a state of original sin does not give an infant no choice other than Hell.

[Zakuska]

I'll have to get back and read what I've missed when home again...

In some reading I noticed Balaam. Here was a pagan 'seer'/prophet who came to understand very quickly that when God speaks He fulfills His word rather than changing it.

So if this pagan seer who came to hear from the real one and only God realized this, isn't it reasonable that the same thing is still true about God today as it was in 1400 BC? He spoke the universe into existence and the sun still sustains our life on earth, gravity still functions, etc... The commandments of God are sure.

After reading UNSTOPPABLE GLOBAL WARMING, EVERY 1500 YEARS, I'm not convinced that the 6000 year old earth is true, and want to study Genesis over to check out the figurative aspects of the creation account.

Except if you remember the story of Daniel... it was an Unalterable decree that ended him up in the Lions den. So thus we see the difference between Israels God and the God of the Babylonians/Pagans. One was a living breathing being who had "dialog" with his people and the other was a God who was set in stone and an Idol.

[Freedom in Truth]

You can hardly fault Micheal Angelo for a mistranslation in the un-alterable Infallable Bible texts.

John says Israel had horns too...

Artists have depicted the holy family as having halos around their heads . . . did they?

Was Jesus fair-skinned? Did He have light brown to blonde hair?

Was the Last Supper at a tall dining table?

Do you depend on artists for your source of Truth?

[Zakuska]

Artists have depicted the holy family as having halos around their heads . . . did they?

Was Jesus fair-skinned? Did He have light brown to blonde hair?

Was the Last Supper at a tall dining table?

Do you depend on artists for your source of Truth?

No I depend on the texts that inspired the Artists AND more importantly what the Church of the Artists say about the text. Then I go to God and ask him, in Prayer.

According to the Vatican Adams Body looks like Gods Body. At least thats what the caption of the picture says on the Vaticans web site.

Theres only one verse in the KJV that could be reasonably constued as saying Angels have wings. Yet... Angels are predominatley depicted with wings. Doesn't mean they have them.

[moriancamur]

Returning from an erand elders asked JS why his prophecy was not fulfillled.

After prayer JS came and said " Some revelations are from God , some from men and some from the devil"

My take is JS was saying this one was one of the latter two. It wasn't a doctrinal issue, nevertheless if he gets confused sometimes I'm sure we will also. Thats why we have scripture as a standard.

[Freedom in Truth]

I just wanted to let you all know that I'll be on a trip for about 1 1/2 weeks. I will return, Lord willing. Until then, you are all in my prayers.

Freedom in Truth

[Freedom in Truth]

QUOTE(Freedom in Truth @ Mar 8 2007, 01:16 PM)

Please give verses to support that only original sin was â??wiped outâ?. Also, please define original sin. I hope you are not going to say that it was just death brought into the world.

There were two types of Death introduced at the fall.

1) Physical death - Remeber Adam mortally died at the age of 930 years old (Gen 5:5) Which was well within the Prophetic 1000 year "day".

2) He also spirtually died. Being cast out of Gods presence.

Did not God reconcil the world to himself through Christ?

Spiritual Death was done away with in Christ... thus the veil was ripped to signify anyone and everyone had Access to the father through the spirit. Original Sin was swallowed up in Christ and again man can commune with the father. One day Physcial death wuill be done away with. But that only will come at the second comming.

Adam â??spiritually diedâ? because he chose to rebel against God. The consequence of this was no longer being able to be in Godâ??s presence as before. â??Physical deathâ? was so we donâ??t have to live in a sinful state forever.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

â??Now its every man for himself.â? Wow - that doesnâ??t sound like anything a Christian would say - that sounds like the World. Very self-focused sounding to me. Jesus gave His life for others - isnâ??t that our model? Arenâ??t we to bear one anotherâ??s burdens, serve others, etc.? How can you obey all these selfless commandments in order to get for yourself? The heart of someone who obeys selfless commands doesnâ??t go with the heart of someone out for himself.

Zakuska - Now I don't know if You are intentionally trying to missrepresent my words. The context in which I said that was to do with Man and his personal sins. Before the sour Grapes the sins of the fathers was counted on the heads of their children but now... "its every man for himself" He is accountable to God for himself wether his works are good or evil.

Rom. 14: 12

12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

1 Pet. 4: 5

5 Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.

No, I did not intentionally try to misrepresent your words - that is really how I understood what you said. It has always been that we are all individually accountable to God - that did not ever change.

Sour grapes? I donâ??t know what you mean by this.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

The only way you one earn salvation or godhood or worthiness is to lower the qualifications. You canâ??t be sinless. You are also saying that Jesus went through the agony of death but that wasnâ??t enough to cover all your sins. The power of the cross has been diminished as well. Godâ??s power is diminished - your power is increased.

Zakuska - Which sins did Christ pay for?

Rom. 3: 25

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

Who's going to pay for the sins I commit as a Beleiver?

Whoâ??s going to pay for the sins you committed before becoming a believer?

Zakuska - Hint: Romans 14:12; 1 Peter 4:5

Does â??giving accountâ? (being responsible) mean that your sins arenâ??t covered by Christ?

Zakuska - Me, Unless I repent.

Heb 6

29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.

Leviticus 17:11b - it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life

Hebrews 9:22b - without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness

If Christâ??s death only provided forgiveness for original sin, then there has been no shedding of blood for your other sins - therefore they cannot be forgiven.

Romans 9:30-32a - What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works.

Galatians 2:16 - know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

You have faith that original sin is forgiven, but for the rest of your sins you are under law. You are no different from the Jews who believed that their works earned righteousness/atonement/salvation/justification.

From Isaiah 64:6 - all our righteous acts are like filthy rags

We are justified through faith - our works show where our heart is but our works do not save us.

Romans 5:1 - Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Colossians 2:13b-14 - He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.

Zakuska - Are their sins that not even Christ Blood can cover?

Hebrews 10:12 - But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.

Zakuska -

1 Jn. 5: 16-17

16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

Matt. 12:31

31

[consiglieri]

This is the thread that never ends.

Yes, it goes on and on my friends.

Some people started posting here

Not knowing what it was.

And they'll continue posting here

Forever just because

This is the thread that never ends,

Yes, it goes on and on my friends . . .

[Freedom in Truth]

QUOTE(Freedom in Truth @ Mar 8 2007, 12:57 PM)

We all have intrinsic value/worth to God - we are His masterpieces. He infinitely loves each of us. He desires a relationship with each of us. We walk with God, love Him, follow Him, and glorify Him as we serve Him and join His work on earth. Our motivation is our love for Him (not earning godhood, worthiness, etc.). Whatever God asks of us is for our good. We find purpose and fulfillment when we walk with God and join His will, and that is a â??rewardâ? in itself! We move towards becoming our true selves in fellowship with Him and we taste life in abundance.

Our motivation is our love for our God. You insinuate that our motivation is earning godhood or worthiness. These may be blessings added to our heads if we love the Lord our God with all our heart, mind, strength etc. We find purpose and fulfillment when we walk with God and become His will becoming one with Him as He is one with the Father. This is indeed a reward. We move towards becoming our truest selves in Him, not just through fellowship with Him. We taste, feast and rejoice in the abundance of His love, life, power.

I am telling you what I hear, Hammer. I only hear you speak of Godâ??s love when I point out that you donâ??t speak of it. I hear a lot about spiritual experiences, special knowledge, rewards, repentance - all things that have to do with exaltation. This is what is first and foremost on your mind. Love for God and relationship arenâ??t brought up much - mostly only in defense. And, your approach is similar to many other Mormons I have communicated with.

â??We find purpose and fulfillment when we walk with God and become His will becoming one with Him as He is one with the Father.â? You are one with God as â??Heâ? is one with the Father? Who is the â??Heâ? in this sentence? It seems to be God - yet God is one with the Father? Then who is the Father?

I cannot see that it is abundant love for God to not cover your debt of sin that you cannot repay.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

Obedience/ good works do not earn salvation (relationship with God). But they do often show where our heart is.

Hammer - Where our heart is there is our treasure also. Salvation can't be earned. Salvation is free. However, we must prove ourselves obedient. There is no entering into the Kingdom of God without having charity and charity is the end of obedience to the commandments. Charity is the relationship with Christ.

Salvation is right standing with God - justification - righteousness. Your â??salvationâ? does not give you right standing - it only allows you to earn right standing. Right standing cannot be earned - sin cannot be in Godâ??s presence and sin can only be forgiven with the shedding of blood. Only your original sins are covered by blood.

Leviticus 17:11b - it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life

Hebrews 9:22b - without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness

If you love God you will obey His commandments (you will at least attempt to). God gave His commandments for a reason and it is not up to you to decide what to obey and what not to. Isnâ??t that what Adam and Eve did?

Wouldnâ??t you say that God knows more about love and what is loving than you do? The relationship with Christ is love and obedience as a result of our love.

John 14:15 - "If you love me, you will obey what I command.â?

John 14:21a - â??Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me.â?

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

Ephesians 2:4-10 â??But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressionsâ??it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithâ??and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of Godâ?? not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.â?

Hammer - Even so. But as James states:

James 2: 20, 26

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

â?¢ â?¢ â?¢

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Either these passages (Ephesians, James) contradict each other (saved by faith OR saved by works), or we are saved by grace through faith - then we show our faith and keep our faith alive by works. If you have no works do you really have faith? If you love classical music but never listen to it do you really love it? Will you continue to love classical music if you never listen to it or might you grow distant from it? What you do shows where you are on the inside. Works can help your faith stay strong, but they do not save you.

QUOTE - Freedom in Truth

Our actions show our heart. Our actions do not save us. The only way we could be worthy on our own is to be sinless, and that we will not be.

Hammer - You must know that your idea of salvation and ours differ so to keep saying the same phrase over and over again doesn't cut. it.

We each say what we believe. We each know what the other believes. I have asked you to support your beliefs.

Hammer - We believe that everyone is saved from the physical death. Everyone will be raised to be judged. But we know that by our works we will be judged. That is what determines whether or not we will be gaining spiritual salvation. Those who deny Christ will not receive Salvation. Those who refuse the gift will not receive salvation's gift of the spirit. Works like Baptism, Loving one another, being born again-- are absolute works of necessity.

This is not Biblical. And it doesnâ??t help me when you all give me one or two verses in support of your belief while you ignore 20 (hypothetical number) verses that do not support your belief. There are many verses that support salvation by faith, not works. Your beliefs have to be supported by the whole Bible, not just one isolated verse.

Baptism - what is it exactly? And which one is necessary - water baptism? Baptism of the Holy Spirit? What did baptism (a Greek word) mean to 1st century Jews and to Jesus? Have you studied the concept? Where does it say that one cannot be saved if not baptized? And, if love is the most important thing and way more important than obedience, then wouldnâ??t God understand that someone couldnâ??t be baptized? No - it seems that this one work is so very important that you even have to baptize dead people (which you really cannot do anyway since they are no longer on earth). On the one hand, you have a God who is more concerned with love than obedience, but on the other hand you have a God who insists on obedience to the baptismal act. That does not make sense.

Hammer - Then there is exaltation for the greater sacrifices and works through God. Have you read Section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants. It would help you to better understand our doctrine and then you wouldn't keep saying works do not give us salvation.

I am saying that works donâ??t give salvation. Therefore, I donâ??t believe works give you salvation either. You are telling me they do. That is not Biblical - it is JS. And JS canâ??t be proven to be a true prophet without discrediting Biblical prophets. As I have asked - support your works-based righteousness from the Bible, please - the whole Bible. Or, donâ??t claim the Bible as scripture.

Hammer -

Rev. 20: 12-13

12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead werejudged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and bhell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Revelation 20:12, 15 - And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.

If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

What is the book of life? If your name is in the book of life you are not thrown into the lake of fire. You have never cited this verse (15).