Paul Osborne Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 How can that be if God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity? Oh, he changes. It depends on what concept of change you are talking about. God doesn
johnny Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Paul Osborne writes, This has not always been the case! He changed. Before mortality he didn
Paul Osborne Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 According to Mormon thinking ... wouldn't the Father also be a member of a Godhead before he was a sinner therefore wouldn't that make him also divine before and after incarnation? The Father wasn
johnny Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Paul Osborne writes, Oh, he changes. It depends on what concept of change you are talking about. God doesn
johnny Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Paul Osborne writes, Pure speculation! The odds that the Father was a divine member of a Godhead before his mortal sojourn is astronomically against all odds. But, is is a possibility. Earlier you said that "The Mormon God was already loved by an endless number of Gods" ... wouldn't this imply their was something like a Godhead?
Tanyan Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 SOOOOOOO, if "spirit is matter" it has a bodily component, so GOD has a BODY !. Seems to me that a "GOD that transends Form ivalidate's or takes away the 2nd person of the Trinity Body which is metaphysicaly ontiologicaly fused together into the nature [being] of the ONE GOD. Sorry this sounds and reads as the god of the philosophers and scholars, not the GOD of Abraham Issac, and Jacob. LDS Apologist, Attorney Richard R. Hopkins Book: HOW GREEK PHILOSOPHY CORRUPTED THE CHRISTIAN CONCEPT OF GOD, using the Biblical sciences has answered and responded to all these same attacks, accusations, criticisms, of the LDS concept of DEITY as Johnny constantly brings up as does other LDS Apologetic works. I dont see johnny getting tis Book and actualy reading it and seeing the weakness of his position. Well I gotta go now, Take care everyone, PEACE !. IN HIS DEBT, TANYAN.
Paul Osborne Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Why do you associate perfect with a body?Do you know of a scripture that makes this association? Christ said he liveth and was dead. Had he not received his resurrected body he would still be dead. That doesn
johnny Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Paul Osborne writes, Christ said he liveth and was dead. Had he not received his resurrected body he would still be dead. That doesn
johnny Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Tanyan writes, SOOOOOOO, if "spirit is matter" it has a bodily component, so GOD has a BODY The Son of God has a glorfied body.
Big Dogger Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 God transcends all creatures. We must therefore continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, image-bound or imperfect, if we are not to confuse our image of God
johnny Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Paul Osborne writes, Getting a body made it possible for Jesus to save us! Getting a body allowed the Son of God to suffer and to be the medator between man and God.The Father was made divine before Jehovah was born in heaven. But was the Father divine before his incarnation?You have said the Father was not divine after his incarnation.That's right. He WASN'T a God.Why was Christ divine after his incarnation and the Father was not divine after his incarnation?Doesn't the Bible reveal that the Son only does what he has seen the Father do before him.
Big Dogger Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Admittedly, in speaking about God like this, our language is using human modes of expression (that doesn't mean that God is human); nevertheless it really does attain to God himself, though unable to express him in his infinite simplicity. Likewise, we must recall that "between Creator and creature no similitude can be expressed without implying an even greater dissimilitude"; and that "concerning God, we cannot grasp what he is, but only what he is not, and how other beings stand in relation to him."
johnny Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Paul Osborne writes, Because he was glorified with the Father and showed all things. His mission was to be the Savior and only a God can do that.Why wasn't the Father glorified and showed all things?
johnny Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Hi Big Dogger,Glad to have you join the exchange ...I would agree that God transcends all creatures and we are not to confuse our image of God with our human representations.johnny
Big Dogger Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Since our knowledge of God is limited, our LANGUAGE about him is equally so. We can name God only by taking creatures as our starting point, and in accordance with our limited human ways of knowing and thinking.All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. The manifold perfections of creatures
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.