Adam God Theory

[Calm]

. The evangelical concept of sola scriptura is an objective theological standard.

How so?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Any biblical statement of monotheism.

There are no biblical statements of monotheism. It has to be read into the text.

[Jim Stiles]

...refers to God the Father.

 

There is no Biblical statement of monotheism that refers to all three members of the Godhead (except of course I John 5 which is interpreted poorly).

Wrong.

[Jim Stiles]

There are no biblical statements of monotheism. It has to be read into the text.

Deuteronomy 6:4 KJV

Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:

[Jim Stiles]

How so?

The bible is written down in one place. No one can add to or subtract from it.

[JLHPROF]

Deuteronomy 6:4 KJV

Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:

 

Refers only to one member of the Godhead - Jehovah (as evidenced by the word Lord).  Has no reference to the Holy Ghost at all so that drops 1/3.

As to the Father or the Son, most LDS would say the Son, others might say the Father, but it doesn't mention both.

[Bobbieaware]

Deuteronomy 6:4 KJVHear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:

Do you think at the time Moses was thinking, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one person." ?

Edited January 31, 2015 by Bobbieaware

[Calm]

The bible is written down in one place. No one can add to or subtract from it.

The Bible was written in different sections overtime by different authors. It was only gathered together later on and different collections were chosen to go together by different people.

Do you reject the New Testament then since it was not part of the original collection of writings?

This in no way explains why it is an objective standard though.

Edited January 31, 2015 by calmoriah

[Jim Stiles]

The Bible was written in different sections overtime by different authors. It was only gathered together later on and different collections were chosen to go together by different people.

Do you reject the New Testament then since it was not part of the original collection of writings?

This in no way explains why it is an objective standard though.

LDS prophets have contradicted themselves countless times. The Bible does not contradict itself on any significant issue of faith or life. At one time, LDS prophets said that the Lord told them to have more than one wife as an eternal principle. Nowadays, LDS members who have more than one wife are excommunicated. LDS prophets today do not condone same sex marriage. In the future, who knows? The New Testament has always, on the other hand, disapproved of both plural marriage and homosexuality.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Jim Stiles

[Calm]

You have now not answered two questions from me but gone on to another topic.

 

Is that because you cannot answer the questions or you just don't want to?

Edited January 31, 2015 by calmoriah

[Teancum]

I love the Adam-God doctrine (obviously) but considering all the weird and wild speculation out there beyond the teachings contained in the theory, there are days I don't blame the leaders for choosing a simpler (if less correct) version of the Godhead. Keeps the speculation and contention on doctrine down, well, except on this board.

And once again the problem I have with this is if the Men who claim to be prophets and apostles of God and Jesus Christ and they can't get it right about who God is.....remember Joseph Smtih said it was the first principle of revealed religion to know who Gos is and what God's characteristics are....so if they can't get it right or conflict about it what good are they to me in my quest for truth and why should I trust them?

Edited January 31, 2015 by Teancum

[Teancum]

The bible is written down in one place. No one can add to or subtract from it.

Ah so sad for you that the manuscript evidence so clearly refutes this false statement.

[Teancum]

LDS prophets have contradicted themselves countless times. The Bible does not contradict itself on any significant issue of faith or life.........

THIS...is another blatent falsehood, one among many that Jim Stiles perpetuates here.

[JLHPROF]

LDS prophets have contradicted themselves countless times. The Bible does not contradict itself on any significant issue of faith or life. At one time, LDS prophets said that the Lord told them to have more than one wife as an eternal principle. Nowadays, LDS members who have more than one wife are excommunicated. LDS prophets today do not condone same sex marriage. In the future, who knows? The New Testament has always, on the other hand, disapproved of both plural marriage and homosexuality.

 

Utter nonsense, and anyone that believes that should do their homework better.

[JLHPROF]

And once again the problem I have with this is if the Men who claim to be prophets and apostles of God and Jesus Christ and they can't get it right about who God is.....remember Joseph Smtih said it was the first principle of revealed religion to know who Gos is and what God's characteristics are....so if they can't get it right or conflict about it what good are they to me in my quest for truth and why should I trust them?

 

I don't think you have to place all of your doctrinal confirmation in the teachings of the prophets.  They're greatest value is in the laws and ordinances they supervise as legal administrators.  We do depend on their revelations and teachings to guide us, but we have the ability to get our own revelation.  We don't have the authority to perform all the ordinances ourselves.

I don't put all my doctrinal beliefs in line with any prophet (except maybe Joseph Smith).  They were wrong at times and still are.  But they still administer the ordinances of salvation and exaltation.  That's the important part.

[Teancum]

I don't think you have to place all of your doctrinal confirmation in the teachings of the prophets.  They're greatest value is in the laws and ordinances they supervise as legal administrators.  We do depend on their revelations and teachings to guide us, but we have the ability to get our own revelation.  We don't have the authority to perform all the ordinances ourselves.

I don't put all my doctrinal beliefs in line with any prophet (except maybe Joseph Smith).  They were wrong at times and still are.  But they still administer the ordinances of salvation and exaltation.  That's the important part.

Ok but this just does not work for me. I expect prophets to know and teach doctrinal truth.

[JLHPROF]

Ok but this just does not work for me. I expect prophets to know and teach doctrinal truth.

 

I understand and agree.  But in truth, I believe that only Joseph had the direct line to heaven, wherein God revealed new truths to him on a daily basis and as questions were asked.  I think the others have received some revelations, but mostly they do the best they can to interpret the original revelations by the spirit.

I don't expect (or believe) that the prophet has the direct hotline to God's desk and just does the best he can.

[Jim Stiles]

You have now not answered two questions from me but gone on to another topic.

 

Is that because you cannot answer the questions or you just don't want to?

The Bible was written in different sections overtime by different authors. It was only gathered together later on and different collections were chosen to go together by different people.

The Bible had one ultimate author. The same God who directed Genesis to be written and collected also directed Malachi to be written and collected.

Do you reject the New Testament then since it was not part of the original collection of writings?

No, the New Testament had the same ultimate author as the Old Testament.

This in no way explains why it is an objective standard though.

Men's opinions change with the season. God's opinions do not.

[ERayR]

Ok but this just does not work for me. I expect prophets to know and teach doctrinal truth.

 

Infallibility from a mortal being, no matter the calling, is not going to happen.

[Teancum]

Infallibility from a mortal being, no matter the calling, is not going to happen.

I am not asking for infallible leaders. But to again, at least for me, there seems to be some basics they ought to know. Who and What God is is at the top of the list.

[ERayR]

I am not asking for infallible leaders. But to again, at least for me, there seems to be some basics they ought to know. Who and What God is is at the top of the list.

 

That is a question that has been discussed and debated for a long. long time.  It has resulted in several different positions on the subject.  One of them being Joseph Smiths description which the LDS prophets accept and teach.  If you are expecting something with universal acceptance - well it just ain't gonna happen.

[Calm]

The Bible had one ultimate author. The same God who directed Genesis to be written and collected also directed Malachi to be written and collected.

No, the New Testament had the same ultimate author as the Old Testament.

 

And the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and revelations in the Pearl of Great Price have the same ultimate author.

[Teancum]

That is a question that has been discussed and debated for a long. long time.  It has resulted in several different positions on the subject.  One of them being Joseph Smiths description which the LDS prophets accept and teach.  If you are expecting something with universal acceptance - well it just ain't gonna happen.

And honestly this it the apologist response and it back peddles so far and so much away from waht the LDS church has and still does teach about itself. This is why I cannot stomach aplogetics.

[Teancum]

And the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and revelations in the Pearl of Great Price have the same ultimate author.

Except according to the apologists we really cannot expect clear and direct information. It is all cloudy and fallible .

[ERayR]

And honestly this it the apologist response and it back peddles so far and so much away from waht the LDS church has and still does teach about itself. This is why I cannot stomach aplogetics.

 

And my problem is with  those who think prophets are supposed to answer all their questions for them.