StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 The LDS believe that everyone has always existed. The LDS don't believe in Creation ex Nihilo. The LDS don't believe in that philosophical statement."String Theory still requires the energy that creates the filaments and membranes. Something had to create that energy. This takes us back to my original statement"We don't know the absolute beginning of everything yet.I used to be LDS. I realize the belief that we all existed and simply have no memory of it. If we were all self existing spirits then we would all be equal to God, but clearly we are not, as it is clearly stated in the Bible. There is even a hierarchy in Heaven.We do know the absolute beginning of everything: God. The LDS Bible still contains the Book of Genesis, yes?
carbon dioxide Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 I used to be LDS. I realize the belief that we all existed and simply have no memory of it. If we were all self existing spirits then we would all be equal to God, but clearly we are not, as it is clearly stated in the Bible. There is even a hierarchy in Heaven.We do know the absolute beginning of everything: God. The LDS Bible still contains the Book of Genesis, yes?We all existed as intelligences and had a spirit body added at some point. However just because we have always existed does not mean that we would be equal to God. One does not become like God simply by being around long enough. 1
Calm Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 Because it's also a logical argument, only it's placed phisophically to explain it. But it is based on assumptions that can never be proved to be correct or not. Just because something is logical doesn't mean it is truth.
Calm Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) If we were all self existing spirits then we would all be equal to God, but clearly we are not, as it is clearly stated in the Bible.But that is not what LDS doctrine teaches, but simply what you are assuming….an assumption that you cannot prove to be true. This is LDS doctrine…again based on a different assumption that can't be proved, but just as logical as your philosophical position that self existent beings must be equal. 18 Howbeit that he made the greater star; as, also, if there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal.19 ]And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all. If God can exist without a cause, why can't something else exist without a cause. Insisting that all things need a cause as an assumption and then presenting a solution for that something that is not caused is paradoxical and not logical imo. Edited January 18, 2015 by calmoriah 1
carbon dioxide Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) Who has said the universe is infinite? Science even points to "the big bang" which is a unique starting place. God was before that, the unmoved mover who moved the universe into existanceWe all lived before the Big bang. Many of us probably got a front row seat and watched it happen. Science is also working to show the existence of the multiverse. There may be billions or trillions of universes that exist that are similar to our own. The big bang event was not the first of its kind. Edited January 18, 2015 by carbon dioxide
Flyonthewall Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 I used to be LDS. I realize the belief that we all existed and simply have no memory of it. If we were all self existing spirits then we would all be equal to God, but clearly we are not, as it is clearly stated in the Bible. There is even a hierarchy in Heaven.We do not teach what you have put forth here. Abraham 3 18 Howbeit that he made the greater star; as, also, if there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal. 19 And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all. We do know the absolute beginning of everything: God. The LDS Bible still contains the Book of Genesis, yes?What makes you thing LDS do not believe God is the beginning of everything? The concept of the "beginning of everything" is so beyond mortal comprehension, that people often refer to it in a very simplistic term - God. A 3 letter word. What does it mean? What does it entail? No one will have a good answer, in fact the best they can say is "it's a mystery". LDS have gone a little bit further in unraveling this term "GOD", but yet we still don't know everything. The funny thing, at least to me, is that even though it is a mystery, it cannot what LDS believe. Kind of a "I don't know what it means but it can't mean that". 1
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 But that is not what LDS doctrine teaches, but simply what you are assuming….an assumption that you cannot prove to be true.This is LDS doctrine…again based on a different assumption that can't be proved, but just as logical as your philosophical position that self existent beings must be equal.If God can exist without a cause, why can't something else exist without a cause.Insisting that all things need a cause as an assumption and then presenting a solution for that something that is not caused is paradoxical and not logical imo.John 1:3 says all things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made. Exodus 20:11 God created the Heavens and the earth and all that was in them. Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Nehemiah 9:6; Colossians 1:16; Psalm 148:2,5 angels are created beings and they are immortal (Luke 20:36) but are not eternal because only God is eternal and worthy of worship (Revelation 22:9).
thesometimesaint Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 John 1:3 says all things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made. Exodus 20:11 God created the Heavens and the earth and all that was in them. Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Nehemiah 9:6; Colossians 1:16; Psalm 148:2,5 angels are created beings and they are immortal (Luke 20:36) but are not eternal because only God is eternal and worthy of worship (Revelation 22:9). Prooftexting doesn't help. Did Jesus create God? Christ was clearly with God from the beginning. Yet Jesus was clearly born of woman.
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 And Genesis 1:16 on the fourth day God created the sun, moon and stars.
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 Prooftexting doesn't help. Did Jesus create God? Christ was clearly with God from the beginning. Yet Jesus was clearly born of woman.Proof texting does help. Thus it's called proof texting. What you all are saying is contrary to the Bible. God and Jesus are one in the same. Jesus was God made flesh, consubstantial with God. Jesus was born of Mary, but He was equally God and Man. God incarnate was essential for our salvation as He had to take on our sins and die assuming the punishment for our sins. Obviously God is eternal and could not die without assuming flesh, yet with His eternality (I think I made that word up) He overcame death.
JLHPROF Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 Proof texting does help. Thus it's called proof texting. What you all are saying is contrary to the Bible. Well, if the Bible is wrong, why wouldn't we say things contrary to it. I don't recall any reason why any scripture should be considered infallible.
thesometimesaint Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 And Genesis 1:16 on the fourth day God created the sun, moon and stars. So? Genesis 1:11Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. Genesis 1:16God made two great lights--the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. The question is is the Bible chronology literal or figurative?Did God create plants before there was the sun to give them light to sustain that life?
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 So?Genesis 1:11Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so.Genesis 1:16God made two great lights--the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.The question is is the Bible chronology literal or figurative?Did God create plants before there was the sun to give them light to sustain that life? Is that relevant to the discussion? The objection was to God not being created and Himself creating everything, including the universe and heavenly beings. The order of which it was done nor the time frame in which it was accomplished changes the fact that it was done by God.
thesometimesaint Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 Proof texting does help. Thus it's called proof texting. What you all are saying is contrary to the Bible.God and Jesus are one in the same. Jesus was God made flesh, consubstantial with God. Jesus was born of Mary, but He was equally God and Man. God incarnate was essential for our salvation as He had to take on our sins and die assuming the punishment for our sins. Obviously God is eternal and could not die without assuming flesh, yet with His eternality (I think I made that word up) He overcame death. ProoftextingSEE http://www.theopedia.com/Proof_texting The question still remains if Jesus created everything did Jesus create God?
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 Well, if the Bible is wrong, why wouldn't we say things contrary to it. I don't recall any reason why any scripture should be considered infallible.Because it is the Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit which He sent to guide His church. We you to consider a part of the Bible as fallible, you would bring in to question everything in the Bible because then who is to say what of it is true and correct, if any of it.
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 ProoftextingSEE http://www.theopedia.com/Proof_textingThe question still remains if Jesus created everything did Jesus create God?No one said Jesus created everything. Gid created everything, in His triune being, God Son and Holy Spirit. The Most Holy Trinity. God is equally Jesus is equally the Holy Spirit etc etc.
Calm Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 John 1:3 says all things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made. Exodus 20:11 God created the Heavens and the earth and all that was in them. Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Nehemiah 9:6; Colossians 1:16; Psalm 148:2,5 angels are created beings and they are immortal (Luke 20:36) but are not eternal because only God is eternal and worthy of worship (Revelation 22:9).Still isn't logical to claim the necessity of a cause for all things and then have a first cause that has no cause. 2
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 ProoftextingSEE http://www.theopedia.com/Proof_textingThe question still remains if Jesus created everything did Jesus create God?And in regards yo proof texting, they are not taken out if context. The entire context of the Bible supports it. Anything used to show otherwise would be taken out of context.
JLHPROF Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 Because it is the Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit which He sent to guide His church.We you to consider a part of the Bible as fallible, you would bring in to question everything in the Bible because then who is to say what of it is true and correct, if any of it. The Bible is true because it says it's true....try arguing with that logic.Where is the evidence that:1. It's the unaltered word of God2. It's infallible3. God sent it complete as it is today to guide anyone Show me any inarguable evidence of these claims that doesn't come from within the Bible itself. And yes, that's a CFR.
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 The Bible is true because it says it's true....try arguing with that logic.Where is the evidence that:1. It's the unaltered word of God2. It's infallible3. God sent it complete as it is today to guide anyoneShow me any inarguable evidence of these claims that doesn't come from within the Bible itself. And yes, that's a CFR.If you're a person of faith, evidence is not needed. That's what faith is. No one can prove to you that Joseph Smith had glasses that allowed him to read the golden plates but you believe it. Where is the evidence, outside of the Book of Mormon, that this occured?
JLHPROF Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 If you're a person of faith, evidence is not needed. That's what faith is. No one can prove to you that Joseph Smith had glasses that allowed him to read the golden plates but you believe it. Where is the evidence, outside of the Book of Mormon, that this occured? Exactly my point. And yet you expect us to believe you when you say the Bible is infallible but yet you don't believe us when we say the Book of Mormon is true.I see no reason why any of our faithful members would debate a double standard. The Bible is as prone to error as any other book of scripture.
thesometimesaint Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 If you're a person of faith, evidence is not needed. That's what faith is. No one can prove to you that Joseph Smith had glasses that allowed him to read the golden plates but you believe it. Where is the evidence, outside of the Book of Mormon, that this occured? The Bible won't help you there.SEE Urim and Thummimhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urim_and_Thummim
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 The Bible won't help you there.SEE Urim and Thummimhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urim_and_ThummimIt's an ancient language that was known at the time of Joseph Smith. The isn't evidence.
StJude Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 Exactly my point. And yet you expect us to believe you when you say the Bible is infallible but yet you don't believe us when we say the Book of Mormon is true.I see no reason why any of our faithful members would debate a double standard. The Bible is as prone to error as any other book of scripture.The problem is, in order for you to defend the LDS view, you have to rely on the Bible containing error. If you believed the Bibe to be inerrant you couldn't support the claims of Mormonism. The Book of Mormon isn't even claimed to be error free. So if that's the case, which it is, what part of your practiced faith is correct and what part could possibly be based off an error? Even if I thought the Bible contained error, it wouldn't undermine my faith. The Catholic Church doesn't rely on the Bible containing error or being inerrant to support our beliefs. Though I believe it to be inerrant as has been the view even before the Bible waa canonized.
Freedom Posted January 18, 2015 Posted January 18, 2015 The problem is, in order for you to defend the LDS view, you have to rely on the Bible containing error. If you believed the Bibe to be inerrant you couldn't support the claims of Mormonism. The Book of Mormon isn't even claimed to be error free. So if that's the case, which it is, what part of your practiced faith is correct and what part could possibly be based off an error?Even if I thought the Bible contained error, it wouldn't undermine my faith. The Catholic Church doesn't rely on the Bible containing error or being inerrant to support our beliefs. Though I believe it to be inerrant as has been the view even before the Bible waa canonized.No, this is not the case. The LDS view is correct because of the doctrine of continuing revelation. Of course, nowhere in the bible does it claim that the bible is without error or complete. If the savior came to establish his new gospel, why did Paul have to add to it? Was Jesus not able in three years to establish his teachings? Paul is added to it because despite the fact that Jesus finished his ministry and ascended to heaven, revelation continued. I am a bit confused by your statement 'as has been the view even before the bible was canonized'. Could you explain this?
Recommended Posts