Why I Know

[zerinus]

In essence you believe I am not saved. Right?

Wrong. You still have the chance to repent and be saved. If you don't repent, that is true, you cannot be saved.

And yet I worship Jesus with joy in my spirit everyday and walk in his presence. And so to your false accusation, I just shrug my shoulders and say I love you despite your error. Because I know different. I experience the difference everyday.

You are deceiving yourself or has been deceived. There is no salvation outside of God one and only true and restored Church. You will be among those to whom the Lord will say, "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" (Matthew 7:23).

[Calm]

Absolute power tends to corrupt, just as it does to any organization.

IF it was God's Church, he certainly could have set it up so that there was no "absolute power" involved and made certain that those that were called to lead as were the Apostles would be able to resist the temptation that such power gave them.

Why did God not stop the corruption, because he allows us freewill.

So why does not the same apply to the scriptures? It would seem you are saying that God cared enough about His Word that he overruled freewill in that case, but did not care enough about His Church to do the same. Edited June 22, 2011 by calmoriah

[Franktalk]

In times of idolatry God always worked with a few and kept them separate so they would be a seed for the future. This is in scripture over and over. It is not unexpected that God would keep a seed of His Word for the future and at some point allow the Word to grow. This is a pattern repeated and repeated. I believe there was an effort to change the Torah around 300 AD. But these men did not know about scrolls that had gone to Russia or the ones buried in caves by the Dead Sea. This is why I refer to the Septuagint all of the time. But the point is that some way will be used to preserve what God wants to be preserved. There are enough good people wishing to do good for Him to use and not override free will. How many of us if asked by God to perform a task would refuse? In this Church, not many.

Even though I feel that the Word has been affected by men in the past I think the core message that leads to God never left. I can't speak of times before Job but I think the fathers in oral tradition knew a lot more than we give then credit. I think that the knowledge of the coming Christ was more like what is written in the BoM. I think men stripped it out. But they did so when it did not matter. The Spirit of God has always been with us. I have an interpretation of Job which shows many of the verses as speaking as a channel for other spirits. But even in the surface understanding the spirits are very active in the book of Job. It is my belief that good and evil spirits manifest all of the time before Abraham. I think the Holy Ghost suppressed the manifestations before Abraham and Christ to prepare the ground for faith. But I also believe those days will return. I am not sure how many people are ready for that.

[Franktalk]

....In essence you believe I am not saved. ......

I believe in almost universal salvation. But of course there are levels of reward. So don't get to concerned about the opinions of some. Just place your trust in God and move forward.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The claim was that Christians built the temple or were commanded to build temples... which is false.

You got this all backwards. In the OT Jehovah commanded the Jews to build Temples. In the NT there were temples still being used. Were in the NT does Jesus tell us not to build temples or use them, when for 1000's of years he commanded temples to be built.

Were is your temple Hughes? Were is your justification for not having a temple? It certainly is not in the bible that we are not to build temples.

[Hughes]

2 Samuel 7:5D&C 1:30

Sorry 2 Samuel isn't Jesus speaking to the Christians in the new covenant.

And D&C is supposedly new revelation, but as I said, anyone can claim to speak for God. Just saying it doesn't make it so.

If God protected the scriptures (I assume is your position) then why are there portions that were lost to us? Could not God protect His word?

And to answer, He does. That is why He brought forth the BOM.

Since the doctrines found in the LDS faith contradict much of the foundational doctrines of the historical Christian faith which is based on the Biblical text, your logic is faulty.

As to why God didn't give us all the letters and things that were written. I can only surmise that we have what we needed.

Wrong. You still have the chance to repent and be saved. If you don't repent, that is true, you cannot be saved.

You are deceiving yourself or has been deceived. There is no salvation outside of God one and only true and restored Church. You will be among those to whom the Lord will say, "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" (Matthew 7:23).

Thank you. Now I know I'm blessed. Since salvation isn't under any other name, nor church nor organization, but Jesus. I trust in him alone.

IF it was God's Church, he certainly could have set it up so that there was no "absolute power" involved and made certain that those that were called to lead as were the Apostles would be able to resist the temptation that such power gave them.

So why does not the same apply to the scriptures? It would seem you are saying that God cared enough about His Word that he overruled freewill in that case, but did not care enough about His Church to do the same.

What I am saying is that a document doesn't have freewill and isn't corrupted by absolute power, and it remains intact by God's grace and power.

It's naive to think that God could have set it up so that power wouldn't corrupt people, because God gave free will to us for a purpose.

I believe in almost universal salvation. But of course there are levels of reward. So don't get to concerned about the opinions of some. Just place your trust in God and move forward.

Done did that long time ago. Trust in God.

You got this all backwards. In the OT Jehovah commanded the Jews to build Temples. In the NT there were temples still being used. Were in the NT does Jesus tell us not to build temples or use them, when for 1000's of years he commanded temples to be built.

Were is your temple Hughes? Were is your justification for not having a temple? It certainly is not in the bible that we are not to build temples.

Right, the Jews aren't the christians are they?

Since our bodies are now the temple of the spirit. Buildings built by men are no longer where God resides.

Edited June 22, 2011 by Hughes

[shalamabobbi]

Since the doctrines found in the LDS faith contradict much of the foundational doctrines of the historical Christian faith which is based on the Biblical text, your logic is faulty.

As to why God didn't give us all the letters and things that were written. I can only surmise that we have what we needed.

Or there was an apostasy..

But sticking with the point for now, if God by His power can protect the scriptures when some scribe by error or design would make a change to them, how do you square that with the free agency of that scribe? How did God prevent the mistranslation?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Right, the Jews aren't the christians are they?

Better not tell Peter or Christ that. Is this a real argument? Seriously Hughes? You do realize that a vast majority of early Christians were Jews. And they had temples. There is no getting around that.

Since our bodies are now the temple of the spirit. Buildings built by men are no longer where God resides.

Earth to Hughes, our bodies have always been temples. You have totally avoided my question to you. Were in the NT or the bible does Christ claim that temples are not needed.

Were does the bible claim that " Buildings built by men are no longer where God resides." That scripture is missing from my bible. Can you point me to a bible verse. This is an official CFR.

Edited June 22, 2011 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Deborah]

Right, the Jews aren't the christians are they?

Since our bodies are now the temple of the spirit. Buildings built by men are no longer where God resides.

Christ was a Jew who sat in the temple. It was the Jews who became the first Christians. Jesus came to "fulfill" the Law, not do away with it.

So our bodies weren't the temples of our spirits before Christ came? That makes no sense. I don't know how one rationalizes that just because Christ made the point that our bodies are the temples of our spirits that we no longer need temples, which were an important part of worship among God's chosen people, Jews and Christians, both before and after Christ's appearance in mortality.

Hughes, reading your interpretations makes me realize even more how true the restored church is. We don't have to twist scripture to make it mean what we want.

[Deborah]

ha, Mola and I were on the same page.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

ha, Mola and I were on the same page.

Indeed, I can just let Deborah speak for me. You always seems to say what I am thinking.

Edited June 22, 2011 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Calm]

What I am saying is that a document doesn't have freewill and isn't corrupted by absolute power, and it remains intact by God's grace and power.

It's naive to think that God could have set it up so that power wouldn't corrupt people, because God gave free will to us for a purpose.

A document does not write itself. If the authors and copyists had freewill as did the leaders of the Church, what was stopping them from corrupting the document as the Church was corrupted?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

A document does not write itself. If the authors and copyists had freewill as did the leaders of the Church, what was stopping them from corrupting the document as the Church was corrupted?

Double standard? Yes. Does Hughes care? Nope. We have been over his double standards before. The ends justify the means.

The church became corrupted per Hughes own words.

The scriptures did not become corrupt because God could protect them.

For some reason God could not protect his church from corruption but he could the scriptures.

Hughes reason for this is "document doesn't have freewill and isn't corrupted by absolute power, and it remains intact by God's grace and power."

OK..... As Calmoriah has said is that teh document did not write it's self. It is reasonable to conclude that if the church was corrupt then the scripture that the church uses would become corrupt. Also, if I think the idea of God not being powerful enough to protect the scriptures is a red herring.

More to the point why could God not protect the church but could the scriptures.

[altersteve]

Hughes,

Where in the Bible does it say that we no longer need temples? Why did Christ not specifically say, "Don't use the temple anymore," and if he did, then why did the authors of the Bible not include that obviously important detail? Would that mean that the Bible is not complete? And if Christ did indeed say this, then why did Paul and other apostles continue using the temple for sacred purposes?

[Garden Girl]

Since our bodies are now the temple of the spirit. Buildings built by men are no longer where God resides.

Hello Hughes...

To use your words.... Just because you say it doesn't make it so...

GG

[ELF1024]

As usual, Hughes is verbose on emotion, and devoid of logical backup.

It's all about what he feels, and has little if anything to do with what he an actually back up with the Bible.

Drop the personal attacks or you will be banned from the thread.

It wasn't intended as a personal attack, it was intended as an observation. I am sorry you feel it was personal.

If I had wanted to attack him personally, I would have something about his lineage, his parents marriage status, or his manner of dress; none of which I did.

I'll do you a favor and ban myself from the thread.

Edited June 22, 2011 by ELF1024

[Hughes]

Or there was an apostasy..

But sticking with the point for now, if God by His power can protect the scriptures when some scribe by error or design would make a change to them, how do you square that with the free agency of that scribe? How did God prevent the mistranslation?

The compelling point is the vast amount of copies we have to compare the "mistranslations" or mistakes if you will.

Better not tell Peter or Christ that. Is this a real argument? Seriously Hughes? You do realize that a vast majority of early Christians were Jews. And they had temples. There is no getting around that.

Earth to Hughes, our bodies have always been temples. You have totally avoided my question to you. Were in the NT or the bible does Christ claim that temples are not needed.

Were does the bible claim that " Buildings built by men are no longer where God resides." That scripture is missing from my bible. Can you point me to a bible verse. This is an official CFR.

Sure thing.

This was the old covenant. God dwelt in the Temple.

2 Chronicles 7:1–3 - When Solomon finished praying, fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices, and the glory of the Lord filled the temple. 2 The priests could not enter the temple of the Lord because the glory of the Lord filled it. 3 When all the Israelites saw the fire coming down and the glory of the Lord above the temple, they knelt on the pavement with their faces to the ground, and they worshiped and gave thanks to the Lord, saying,

“He is good;

his love endures forever.”

this is the new covenant:

John 17:22 "I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23I in them and you in me."

1 Corinthians 6:19, "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?"

No where did the followers of Christ (ie christians) build temples.

Christ was a Jew who sat in the temple. It was the Jews who became the first Christians. Jesus came to "fulfill" the Law, not do away with it.

So our bodies weren't the temples of our spirits before Christ came? That makes no sense. I don't know how one rationalizes that just because Christ made the point that our bodies are the temples of our spirits that we no longer need temples, which were an important part of worship among God's chosen people, Jews and Christians, both before and after Christ's appearance in mortality.

Hughes, reading your interpretations makes me realize even more how true the restored church is. We don't have to twist scripture to make it mean what we want.

After Christ is called the new covenant. 2 cor. 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

"you can't pour new wine into old wineskins."

The temple sacrifices aren't needed anymore, hence no temple is needed.

A document does not write itself. If the authors and copyists had freewill as did the leaders of the Church, what was stopping them from corrupting the document as the Church was corrupted?

Evidence shows that we have an accurate document. Even when the Catholic church was teaching corrupt things, the document wasn't corrupted.

Hughes,

Where in the Bible does it say that we no longer need temples? Why did Christ not specifically say, "Don't use the temple anymore," and if he did, then why did the authors of the Bible not include that obviously important detail? Would that mean that the Bible is not complete? And if Christ did indeed say this, then why did Paul and other apostles continue using the temple for sacred purposes?

Paul and the Apostles didn't use the temple the same way the Jews did, they understood their sins were already forgiven.

As usual, Hughes is verbose on emotion, and devoid of logical backup.

It's all about what he feels, and has little if anything to do with what he an actually back up with the Bible.

Drop the personal attacks or you will be banned from the thread.

Please note that I've not attacked anyone personally. I have disagreed, and am not an LDS believer, so it's logical that I have a different POV. I have done my best to be nice and cordial.

[zerinus]

Thank you. Now I know I'm blessed. Since salvation isn't under any other name, nor church nor organization, but Jesus. I trust in him alone.

The Lord established His Church so that "such as should be saved" should be gathered into it:

Acts 2

:

47 And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

There is no salvation in an apostate religion. If you are not gathered in with God's one and only true Church, which is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you cannot be saved.

[shalamabobbi]

The compelling point is the vast amount of copies we have to compare the "mistranslations" or mistakes if you will.

So the way to discern the truth from error is by the number of copies in existence. Got it.

How many copies of the BOM are in circulation? Anybody know?

[Vance]

So the way to discern the truth from error is by the number of copies in existence. Got it.

How many copies of the BOM are in circulation? Anybody know?

And don't forget the number of copies of the Quran.

[Hughes]

The Lord established His Church so that "such as should be saved" should be gathered into it:

Acts 2

:

47 And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

There is no salvation in an apostate religion. If you are not gathered in with God's one and only true Church, which is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you cannot be saved.

And what was it that the early church was called? Do you recall?

So the way to discern the truth from error is by the number of copies in existence. Got it.

How many copies of the BOM are in circulation? Anybody know?

Since there are no copies of the BoM in the original languages, the number is zero.

[Deborah]

Since there are no copies of the BoM in the original languages, the number is zero.

Since the Bible is nothing more than a compilation of many writings at different times, how many copies of the Bible are there in the "original language"?

[altersteve]

Paul and the Apostles didn't use the temple the same way the Jews did, they understood their sins were already forgiven.

This does not answer my question. I asked if the temple is no longer needed, then why did Paul and other apostles continue to use it? And what was it that told Christians not to use it any longer? Why do you not use a temple?

[zerinus]

And what was it that the early church was called? Do you recall?

It was called the Church of Jesus Christ, since Jesus Himself referred to it as "my church" (Matthew 16:18). But since that Church apostatized, and God has restored it anew in the latter days, His Church today is called, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints".

[altersteve]

Also, Hughes, I understand that you love the Lord, and you obviously have faith in him. And I'm assuming that you repent of your sins everyday. That's good. But baptism by water and by fire (the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost), by someone having the proper authority to do so, are also needed, as Christ so clearly taught. Have you been baptized by and received the gift of the Holy Ghost from someone of the proper authority?