Guest johnny_cat Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Believe what you will, but I belive "this" refers to the thing in front of you when you're reading the verse. So, if I'm reading this in an anthology of scriptures, including the Koran, the Book of Mormon, and the Bible, that means "this" would refer to the anthology? Such a hyperliteralist reading is not particularly helpful or illuminating.
FormerLDS Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 QUOTE Believe what you will, but I belive "this" refers to the thing in front of you when you're reading the verse. So, if I'm reading this in an anthology of scriptures, including the Koran, the Book of Mormon, and the Bible, that means "this" would refer to the anthology? Such a hyperliteralist reading is not particularly helpful or illuminating.Fine.Don't believe it then, Johnny.
T-Shirt Posted October 27, 2004 Author Posted October 27, 2004 Believe what you will, but I belive "this" refers to the thing in front of you when you're reading the verse. Uh...what is in front of you didn't exist at the time that what is in front of you was written. T-Shirt
Guest johnny_cat Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Fine.Don't believe it then, Johnny.OK. It's nice to know I have your permission. As I said, I believe pseudo's interpretation makes sense. Yours, taken to its logical conclusion, makes less sense. But I'm not insisting you believe me. But it did seem to me that you were quite adamant that your reading was the correct one. That's one of the things I love about the Bible. Each time you read it, you get something more out of it.
Jon Haugo Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Sorry if this post is not relavant to the subject. I just browsed through and thought I would re-post something that I had posted before.I thess 5:27 I charge you before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers.Col 4:16 After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea.
FormerLDS Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 QUOTE (FormerLDS @ Oct 27 2004, 12:24 PM) Believe what you will, but I belive "this" refers to the thing in front of you when you're reading the verse. Uh...what is in front of you didn't exist at the time that what is in front of you was written. T-Shirt The word of God existed before it was even written.1 Peter 1:25 answers the "Is this book the word of God?" question.
Guest johnny_cat Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 The word of God existed before it was even written.1 Peter 1:25 answers the "Is this book the word of God?" question. Um, lots of books answer that question.
John Russell Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Former said:The spear of Longinus has a definate connection throughout history beginning with rulers such as Constantine and Alexander the Great and used as recently as 1932 by the likes of Adolf Hitler.I was aware of the legend of the spear, although to my knowledge, its authenticity has never been validated (rather like the Shroud of Turin). Regardless, is there any authentic extrabiblical evidence (not the traditions or passing remarks made centuries later, but material from that time period) for Longinus being the soldier who stood by the Cross, and that he was indeed a subsequent witness of Jesus?
T-Shirt Posted October 27, 2004 Author Posted October 27, 2004 Alright, I am going to try to get this thread back on track. My whole purpose in this thread was to point out the double standard of many BAC/EVS. Many of them use against us, the same types of arguments that are used against them, yet we are called liars, dupes, fools and satanic and then they accuse us of cognitive dissonance. I find it somewhat odd though, that only three non-LDS Christians actualy came in here and tried to defend their position. Two of them are of the respectable type that don't generally use the tactics I refer to above. The other, while he does at times use those tactics, at least has the courage to say, I believe it, no matter what. I respect that, but when LDS use that argument, we are laughed at and accused of having blind faith etc. Confidential Informant has a thread where, I believe he is trying to make the same point as I am, yet, he too is having no success at finding christians to come and defend themselves. Why is this? Is it a safe conclusion to assume that many of the critics on this board are hypocrites and only like to sling mud but have no interest in facing their own similar criticisms? Or is there another explanation?T-Shirt
heavymental Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Believe what you will, but I belive "this" refers to the thing in front of you when you're reading the verseBecause you believe it doesn't make it so, simply your belief and interpretation.
hooberus Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Now my question. How do you non-LDS christians deal with the amount of evidence that is out their that claims Jesus to be a myth and that the Bible is nothing more than a plagiarism form earlier pagan religions?On another board the agnostic/atheistic posters there made similar claims (ie: Jesus never existed; pagan origins, etc.). After taking the time to look at these claims, I found substantial evidence for the historicity of Jesus Christ and his crucifixion under Pontius Piliate, and also found that the claimed evidence for so-called pre-Christian "crucified" and "resurrected" pagan "godmen" was generally based either on gross mischaracterization or post-Christian sources.
T-Shirt Posted October 27, 2004 Author Posted October 27, 2004 On another board the agnostic/atheistic posters there made similar claims (ie: Jesus never existed; pagan origins, etc.). After taking the time to look at these claims, I found substantial evidence for the historicity of Jesus Christ and his crucifixion under Pontius Piliate, and also found that the claimed evidence for so-called pre-Christian "crucified" and "resurrected" pagan "godmen" was generally based either on gross mischaracterization or post-Christian sources. hooberus,Thank you for your comments. Lets compare this to what a typical LDS would face using your response:After taking the time to look at these claims, I found substantial evidence for the historicity of the Book of Mormon, and also found that the claimed evidence that Joseph Smith was a false prophet was generally based either on gross mischaracterization or anti-mormon sources.Quite frnkly if I used this response in defense of my belief, I would get something like this in return:Are you serious? Well, then show me your evidence. What proof do you have that Joe Smith didn't have sex with 14 year olds and that tapirs.. I mean horses existed in meso america. So, hooberus, can you present your evidence? Saying you disagree is not evidence, I want to see proof.Now, I don't disagree with your response, but my question is, why do many Mormon critics use the same kinds of arguments against us that are used against them? Is that not somehow hypocritical?T-Shirt
hooberus Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 Now, I don't disagree with your response, but my question is, why do many Mormon critics use the same kinds of arguments against us that are used against them? Is that not somehow hypocritical?Could you give some examples?
Del March Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 With all due respect, it has been my experience that most Latter-day Saints, good as they may be, do not believe the word of God.Am I supposed to gather from this that you've actually met and talked in depth with most LDS ? I hope you realise this is impossible...Just because you've met *some* LDS who don't believe in the same things you do doesn't mean the LDS in general don't believe the word of God.Del
FormerLDS Posted October 27, 2004 Posted October 27, 2004 QUOTE (FormerLDS @ Oct 26 2004, 04:06 PM) With all due respect, it has been my experience that most Latter-day Saints, good as they may be, do not believe the word of God. Am I supposed to gather from this that you've actually met and talked in depth with most LDS ? I hope you realise this is impossible...Just because you've met *some* LDS who don't believe in the same things you do doesn't mean the LDS in general don't believe the word of God.Del The scriptures do not support the basic doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.Most LDS believe the same basic doctrines. That is why I said "most Latter-day Saints, good as they may be, do not believe the word of God."With respect to the original intent of this discussion, perhaps you should start a new discussion if you would like to talk about it further.
hooberus Posted October 28, 2004 Posted October 28, 2004 Earlier I said:On another board the agnostic/atheistic posters there made similar claims (ie: Jesus never existed; pagan origins, etc.). After taking the time to look at these claims, I found substantial evidence for the historicity of Jesus Christ and his crucifixion under Pontius Piliate, and also found that the claimed evidence for so-called pre-Christian "crucified" and "resurrected" pagan "godmen" was generally based either on gross mischaracterization or post-Christian sources.Evidence was presented on the other board, in response to the specific claims of the posters there (ie: Christ myth; pagan origins, etc.).
Del March Posted October 28, 2004 Posted October 28, 2004 The scriptures do not support the basic doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.Most LDS believe the same basic doctrines. That is why I said "most Latter-day Saints, good as they may be, do not believe the word of God."With respect to the original intent of this discussion, perhaps you should start a new discussion if you would like to talk about it further.I don't think there's any need to start another thread, because this is quite within the subject of this thread.You say the LDS doctrine isn't supported by the Bible, and as such is not the word of God.Questions :1. How do you know there is a God ?2. How do you know that the Bible is the word of God ?3. How do you know that *only* the Bible is the word of God ?And by the way, talking about other threads : I notice you didn't comment on my thread about the need for prophets. Any reason for that ?Del
ScriptureLover Posted October 30, 2004 Posted October 30, 2004 FormerLDS - The scriptures do not support the basic doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.We believe in the principles and ordinances of the Gospel, First Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (Yeah, I know that's not in either the scriptures or LDS doctrine )Second repentance - I can't remember if that has ever ben taught in LDS-ism, or the scriptures for that matter......... Third Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins - now I know that has nothing to do with either LDS or the scriptures. Fourth - the receipt of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands - again, a foreign precept in both instances, LDS Church and the scriptures You said "basic doctrines....."Go ahead make my day, just try to refute me here. I dare you.........
FormerLDS Posted November 2, 2004 Posted November 2, 2004 FormerLDS - QUOTE The scriptures do not support the basic doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We believe in the principles and ordinances of the Gospel, First Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (Yeah, I know that's not in either the scriptures or LDS doctrine )Second repentance - I can't remember if that has ever ben taught in LDS-ism, or the scriptures for that matter......... Third Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins - now I know that has nothing to do with either LDS or the scriptures. Fourth - the receipt of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands - again, a foreign precept in both instances, LDS Church and the scriptures You said "basic doctrines....."Go ahead make my day, just try to refute me here. I dare you......... This post has been edited by ScriptureLover on Oct 30 2004, 01:03 AM How, according to LDS theology, does one receive the "gift of the Holy Ghost"?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.