johnny Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 LDS4EVER writes,I have never ever said that Jesus is the Father. I said that Jesus (supported biblically) that Jesus is God. What do you mean that "Jesus is God" because clearly the Bible says that "Jesus is the Son of God"?What is the difference?
johnny Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 LDS4EVER writes,Hmmm, here's a clue for you. He died! Here's a clue for you it was a vision ...Do you believe that the objects seen in a vision are the actual objects?
noahnoah Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 Hmmm, here's a clue for you. He died! Try this clue: How did we come to know about what he visioned when he was being stoned? Was he there with a tablet as he was being stoned?? To make a long story short, however he communicated this, he could have very easily communicated something as important as 2 GODS?
johnny Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 LDS4EVER writes,Prove otherwise. Stephen's experience ...Acts 756 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.John's experience ...Revelation 41 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.Revelation 221 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Tanyan Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 They are all ILLUSIONS !, NON REALITY !, UNTRUTH !, ITs ALL A SHAM, A LIE.
johnny Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 Tanyan writes,UNTRUTH !, ITs ALL A SHAM, A LIE. You have just described the teachings of Mormonism!
LDS4EVER Posted December 3, 2004 Author Posted December 3, 2004 Hmmm, here's a clue for you. He died! Try this clue: How did we come to know about what he visioned when he was being stoned? Was he there with a tablet as he was being stoned?? To make a long story short, however he communicated this, he could have very easily communicated something as important as 2 GODS? Are you saying that Stephen really didn't see anything? That the writter of Acts and the bible lied?I believe the account of Stephen and he saw what he saw. I believe the bible. May I suggest you do the same.
LDS4EVER Posted December 3, 2004 Author Posted December 3, 2004 Do you think that in the CK, God was really, actually, truly sitting on a throne, Yes, I do.Jesus was occupying a lamb's body, No, John saw Jesus, the lamb of God who was slain for the sin of the world.and there was a river of water of life literally flowing out of the throne and out of the lamb?Jesus is also know as the fountain of living water and that his love will flow as a river of living water.I return to my original question or challange. Prove Stephens vision to be illusion.
Fiat Lux Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 Do you think that in the CK, God was really, actually, truly sitting on a throne, Yes, I do.Jesus was occupying a lamb's body, No, John saw Jesus, the lamb of God who was slain for the sin of the world.and there was a river of water of life literally flowing out of the throne and out of the lamb?Jesus is also know as the fountain of living water and that his love will flow as a river of living water.I return to my original question or challange. Prove Stephens vision to be illusion.I actually shouldn't have asked if you believe God was sitting on a throne, because it doesn't say He was... it says "the throne of God", not that anyone occupied it. [edited: Scratch that... it was occupied by someone clearly described in imagery]But in any event, if he didn't see actual things, then he must have had a vision. A God-inspired, full-of-truth, meaningfully symbolic vision... but a vision nonetheless. Do you disagree?
LDS4EVER Posted December 3, 2004 Author Posted December 3, 2004 It's not in dispute that he had a vision. What is in dispute is whether what he say real or illusion and no basis in fact. If it's the latter, why relate the vision at all?
johnny Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 LDS4EVER writes,Are you saying that Stephen really didn't see anything? That the writter of Acts and the bible lied?I believe the account of Stephen and he saw what he saw. I believe the bible. May I suggest you do the same. I am saying that Stephen saw a vision. Do you believe that Jesus is a Lamb because that is what John saw in his vision and that is what the Bible really says John saw?I ask that you prove Stephens account to be anything other than actual and you give me this. I'm almost afraid to ask how this proves Stephen's account fictional or illusionary. Stephen's account is not fictional or illusionary ... it is a vision.Do you know what a vision is?
johnny Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 LDS4EVER writes,I have never ever said that the Son is one in being with the Father. That sounds like United Penticostal modelism and isn't LDS doctrine so not sure where you got that idea. It is what the Nicene Creed and the Holy Sciptures reveal.You said that Jesus is God and the Son of God ... how can this be?
johnny Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 LDS4EVER writes,It's not in dispute that he had a vision. What is in dispute is whether what he say real or illusion and no basis in fact. If it's the latter, why relate the vision at all? What is in dispute is if the images in a vision are the actual shape or a represention.What do you think?
LDS4EVER Posted December 3, 2004 Author Posted December 3, 2004 Stephen's account is not fictional or illusionary ... it is a vision.Do you know what a vision is?Yes, people, I know what a vision is. I'm not stupid. What I am asking is to prove that Stephen did not really see what is reported in Acts, or rather, prove that what Stephen saw isn't how the throne of God actually looks.
johnny Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 LDS4EVER writes,Yes, people, I know what a vision is. I'm not stupid. What I am asking is to prove that Stephen did not really see what is reported in Acts, or rather, prove that what Stephen saw isn't how the throne of God actually looks. I can prove that a vision is a representation.Why is it that Stephen's vision is different than Daniel's, Ezekiel's, or John's vision of the same scene?The bible reveals that the Father and the Son (both Gods) are separate and distinct and are members - along with a separate and distinct Holy Ghost - of a one true Godhead.The Bible reveals that the Father and the Son are separate and distinct persons.When you say "both Gods" are you saying that their are two Gods.The Bible clearly reveals that their is one God.Clearly "two Gods" conflicts with "one God"!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.