Popular Post MiserereNobis Posted July 6, 2023 Popular Post Posted July 6, 2023 7 hours ago, InCognitus said: That shows the varying opinions that people have about how to interpret the Bible. Wouldn't it be good to have living apostles and modern revelation to address those questions? Yep! Thank God for the magisterium! (just to show everyone how similar the LDS and Catholic foundations are when it comes to authority) 5
theplains Posted July 6, 2023 Posted July 6, 2023 20 hours ago, mfbukowski said: Yet as a "Council of Gods" meaning perfect unity of thought? Or possibly a Council of Deities.
theplains Posted July 6, 2023 Posted July 6, 2023 On 7/5/2023 at 12:49 AM, InCognitus said: I believe the Latter-day Saint understanding of God is correct and completely in harmony with the Bible Where does the Bible or any of the LDS canon show the following: A] that Heavenly Father (who supposedly was a child of his own heavenly parents) was once a man who became a God? B] that Jesus is the first born child of heavenly parents who became a God in his pre-mortal life? C] that the Holy Spirit is also a spirit child of heavenly parents who became a God in his pre-mortal life? D] that Joseph Smith was able to refute the idea that God was not God from everlasting to everlasting? Quote What is it that puts a person over the edge of believing in a false god, to where they are not saved? It depends on whether you believe the Egyptians were saved for worshipping Ra (the sun god) or any of the other gods of their land. They had about 11 major ones. See https://www.britannica.com/list/11-egyptian-gods-and-goddesses Quote Many modern Christians today believe things about God that aren't taught in the Bible (like Jesus having two natures, or Jesus and the Father are one being). Jesus is both God and man. Jesus and the Father are not one being. The Trinity as I understand it is 3 distinct personages but one God. I don’t believe the Trinity is 3 Gods or a monster like Joseph Smith taught. “Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God! I say that is a strange God anyhow—three in one, and one in three! It is a curious organization. “Father, I pray not for the world, but I pray for them which thou hast given me.” “Holy Father, keep through Thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we are.” All are to be crammed into one God, according to sectarianism. It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God—he would be a giant or a monster” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church). https://byustudies.byu.edu/online-chapters/volume-6-chapter-23/ I don’t know how prevalent the heresy of modalism is today. Quote What are you suggesting, that God is the King of actual kings, but he is the God of false gods or devils? God is above all man-made gods or false gods. He is God over Moses (called a god), Satan (called a god of this world) and the gods (judges) of Psalms 82. I believe there is only one God. Anywhere. Quote Who said females can't have the gift of prophecy? (Not me or the church). Having the gift of prophecy isn't the same as having the office of prophet in the church however ("God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets" - 1 Corinthians 12:28), even though someone who has the gift of prophecy may be referred to as a prophet or prophetess. But a prophet need not prophesy to be called a prophet (like Abraham). And none of that has anything to do with whether they held the priesthood. Did ancient Israel have a priesthood of all believers, or not? I believe the women in the Old Testament were part of the priesthood of believers, offering up spiritual sacrifices. Would you list, from the extra Mormon canon, LDS female prophets or LDS females who prophesied? Quote Do you think you can figure out who is teaching a false gospel or false Christ all on your own today? Or does it come down to a disagreement between the two of us over interpretations of scripture? Based on Watchtower teachings and comparing it to the Bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses have a false Christ and a false gospel. Do you believe that? If no, why not? Quote When Christ organized his church in the New World, he called and appointed twelve disciples, which was the extension of Christ's church in the Americas. This was also during the period when the church in the Old World had twelve living apostles to lead the church. It was Christ's church and the way he organized it in both places. From what I have read in the Book of Mormon, the church existed prior to Jesus supposedly coming to the New World. According to Mosiah 18, Helaman was the first to be baptized by Alma. Not sure who baptized Alma first. Alma then baptizes others (about 204 persons). Verse 17 says, “And they were called the church of God, or the church of Christ, from that time forward. And it came to pass that whosoever was baptized by the power and authority of God was added to his church”. Then when Jesus is said to appear in the New World, Nephi goes into the water by himself and is baptized. This was even though he is previously said to have ordained and baptized others (3 Nephi 7). No men in the churches mentioned in the Book of Mormon are called apostles. Quote Jesus was there personally during his mortal ministry when he picked the original twelve. In the LDS Church, Jesus was not there personally when he picked the three. He is said to have told these three to search out the twelve. "And now, behold, I give unto you, Oliver Cowdery, and also unto David Whitmer, that you shall search out the Twelve, who shall have the desires of which I have spoken; And when you have found them you shall show these things unto them" (Doctrine and Covenants 18). Quote But here’s the part that you missed from what I said above: After the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, he directed his church through the divinely appointed leaders. And when new apostles needed to be chosen, or other teachers, it was done by revelation, just like it shows in Acts 6:1-6, Acts 13:1-3, Acts 14:23. So when Jesus restored his church, he personally picked his prophet and two others, and they called others by revelation in exactly the same way the church was governed in the New Testament after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus. It is done in exactly the same way. Jesus originally chose 12. One died and then Matthias was chosen to apostleship by lot as opposed to a direct calling from Jesus. This may account for him never being mentioned again in Scripture by name as an Apostle. Out of all the people who had seen the resurrected Christ, they only decided between two of them. What Paul was to the Gentiles, Peter was to the Jews. If anything, we have two presidents. There was no First Presidency in the New Testament who picked the twelve. As I mentioned before, the church in the New Testament had only one High Priest (Jesus Christ). On the other hand, the church in the New World, while not having apostles, they had high priests (Mosiah 11:11 as one example). Then we have the invention of new offices – the Seventy, Quorums of the Seventies, and Area Seventies. Some manuscripts I think mention it was 72. We find no mention of the 70 or 72 in either the Bible or Book of Mormon. There was no principle of releasing people from being a Seventy when they reach 70 years of age and replacing them with someone younger. In Acts 6, the twelve apostles appointed seven (not 70) to look after certain matters as the church grew in number. This 2021 General conference update says https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/october-2021-general-conference-leadership-update During the Saturday afternoon session of general conference, President Henry B. Eyring of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints announced the release of six General Authority Seventies. Each has turned 70 years old, the traditional age of release, and has been granted emeritus status. The origin of this came with Joseph Smith. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2005/08/the-quorums-of-the-seventy?lang=eng Latter-day revelations provide that the Seventy are “to preach the gospel, and to be especial witnesses [of Jesus Christ] … in all the world” (D&C 107:25). Furthermore, they “are to act in the name of the Lord, under the direction of the Twelve … in building up the church and regulating all the affairs of the same in all nations” (D&C 107:34). Area Seventies live at home and serve on a Church-service basis, much like a bishop or a stake president, for a designated number of years. Following the pattern established in the time of the Prophet Joseph Smith, the modern-day Quorums of the Seventy are “instituted for traveling elders to bear record of my name in all the world, wherever … mine apostles, shall send them to prepare a way before my face” (D&C 124:139). This pattern is not found in the New Testament church. It was established by Joseph Smith. Quote How many apostles were there in the New Testament after Paul replaced James, and then when Barnabas, Andronicus, and Junia were added as apostles? With the various definitions of what an apostle is according to that PAOC article, your guess is as good as mine. If you want to speak about apostles who could perform the miraculous signs and wonders, I don’t know. I don’t even know if your mentioned Andronicus and Junia had these sign gifts. We have no indication from scripture that Paul specifically replaced James or who supposedly replaced Peter or Paul when they were killed.
mfbukowski Posted July 6, 2023 Posted July 6, 2023 3 hours ago, theplains said: Or possibly a Council of Deities. Sure, if you like that better
mfbukowski Posted July 6, 2023 Posted July 6, 2023 (edited) 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: Yep! Thank God for the magisterium! (just to show everyone how similar the LDS and Catholic foundations are when it comes to authority) But hey man, if like authority ain't your thing, it's like, lemme think what God tells me? Yah dig it? But you still need some honcho to give you, like a direction, see, if you dig it, like, go with that. But you still gotta go to The Boss and make sure HE digs it as what you're supposed to do, 'cause if it's not cool with the Boss, LOOK OUT! I mean like, what happens if like after you croak, The BOSS says: "THOSE AUTHORITIES WERE WRONG" 🙃 Edited July 6, 2023 by mfbukowski
InCognitus Posted July 7, 2023 Posted July 7, 2023 7 minutes ago, theplains said: On 7/4/2023 at 10:49 PM, InCognitus said: I believe the Latter-day Saint understanding of God is correct and completely in harmony with the Bible Where does the Bible or any of the LDS canon show the following: A] that Heavenly Father (who supposedly was a child of his own heavenly parents) was once a man who became a God? B] that Jesus is the first born child of heavenly parents who became a God in his pre-mortal life? C] that the Holy Spirit is also a spirit child of heavenly parents who became a God in his pre-mortal life? D] that Joseph Smith was able to refute the idea that God was not God from everlasting to everlasting? Where those things are found in LDS scripture (or whether or not you are representing the beliefs correctly - some of what you say above is a total misrepresentation of our beliefs) are completely irrelevant to what I said, that the Latter-day Saint understanding of God is in complete harmony with the Bible. The Bible doesn't tell us all there is to know about God, and in fact the Bible even says that the Spirit reveals to us the "deep things of God" (1 Corinthians 2:9-16). God reveals truths to his prophets, and those truths are in harmony with what we have in the Bible. But many of these same things are based in Bible teachings, like Jesus being the "firstbegotten" of the Father and that God the Father "made" Jesus "both Lord and Christ". And if a person has more revealed to them about God than is found in the Bible, then it doesn't mean they believe in a different god, it just means they know more things or different things than someone else about the God of the Bible. 7 hours ago, theplains said: Quote What is it that puts a person over the edge of believing in a false god, to where they are not saved? It depends on whether you believe the Egyptians were saved for worshipping Ra (the sun god) or any of the other gods of their land. They had about 11 major ones. See https://www.britannica.com/list/11-egyptian-gods-and-goddesses This doesn't answer the question. I was talking about someone who believes in the God of the Bible, not someone who believes in worshipping Ra. Both of us base our beliefs about God on the Bible. How much can we get wrong about God before we are not saved? Can Christians believe things not found in the Bible like Jesus having two natures and still be saved? 7 hours ago, theplains said: God is above all man-made gods or false gods. That's no big deal, all humans are already above all man-made gods or false gods, so that doesn't sound like a very powerful God to me. The God of the Bible is a powerful God because he is the God of gods, gods that exist in reality. 8 hours ago, theplains said: I believe there is only one God. Anywhere. So why does Jesus have a God? According to the Bible, Jesus, who is God, has a God. (See John 20:17, Rom 15:6, 1 Cor 11:3, 2 Cor 11:31, Eph 1:3, Eph 1:17; Heb 1:8-9, 1 Pet 1:3, and Rev 3:12). 8 hours ago, theplains said: I believe the women in the Old Testament were part of the priesthood of believers, offering up spiritual sacrifices. What verses say that women held the priesthood in the Old Testament? 8 hours ago, theplains said: Quote Do you think you can figure out who is teaching a false gospel or false Christ all on your own today? Or does it come down to a disagreement between the two of us over interpretations of scripture? Based on Watchtower teachings and comparing it to the Bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses have a false Christ and a false gospel. That wasn't an answer to my question. Do you think you can figure out who is teaching a false gospel or false Christ all on your own today? Or does it come down to a disagreement between the two of us over interpretations of scripture? 8 hours ago, theplains said: Then when Jesus is said to appear in the New World, Nephi goes into the water by himself and is baptized. This was even though he is previously said to have ordained and baptized others (3 Nephi 7). Yes, Christ was establishing the church and organizing it in 3 Nephi 19, and they had to be baptized into the church even though some (like Nephi) had previously been baptized. Likewise, when the restored church was organized on April 6, 1830, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were baptized into the church as well, even though they had been baptized previously. In the New Testament, those that had only John's baptism were rebaptized into Christ's church as well (Acts 18:3-6). So this is perfectly in harmony with how Jesus directs his church. 8 hours ago, theplains said: No men in the churches mentioned in the Book of Mormon are called apostles. That's correct, because the twelve apostles were in Jerusalem. The twelve disciples were set apart to govern the church in the Western Hemisphere. It was all one church, with twelve apostles (or fifteen counting Barnabas, Andronicus, and Junia). 10 hours ago, theplains said: In the LDS Church, Jesus was not there personally when he picked the three. You're going round and round in circles with reruns. It's like watching Gilligan's Island again (and again and again and again). This was already addressed here , here, and here. 11 hours ago, theplains said: Jesus originally chose 12. One died and then Matthias was chosen to apostleship by lot as opposed to a direct calling from Jesus. This may account for him never being mentioned again in Scripture by name as an Apostle. Matthias was never mentioned again at all (as an apostle or otherwise) after Acts chapter 1. Of course after Acts chapter 1, neither is Andrew mentioned again, or Bartholomew, or Thomas, or Matthew. I guess they may not have been real apostles as well (if we're going to base it on them never being heard of again). 11 hours ago, theplains said: There was no First Presidency in the New Testament who picked the twelve. This was already addressed here , here, and here. 11 hours ago, theplains said: As I mentioned before, the church in the New Testament had only one High Priest (Jesus Christ). The New Testament doesn't say there was "only one" high priest. Just because you can only name one high priest doesn't mean they had only one high priest. 11 hours ago, theplains said: On the other hand, the church in the New World, while not having apostles, they had high priests (Mosiah 11:11 as one example). The book of Mosiah takes place prior to the coming of Christ (so this doesn't help your case). 11 hours ago, theplains said: Then we have the invention of new offices – the Seventy, Quorums of the Seventies, and Area Seventies. Yes, it was good that Jesus "invented" these offices: "After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come." (Luke 10:1) 11 hours ago, theplains said: With the various definitions of what an apostle is according to that PAOC article Yes, but as has been clearly explained here, the Greek word for the office of apostle (apóstolos) is different than the common word for "sent" (apostéllō), and not all are apostles (apóstolos - of the apostolic office). Clearly those in the PAOC article are trying to make themselves "sent" ones (which is false apostle by definition) using the common word for sent (apostéllō - like when Herod "sent" out people to kill the babies). The Greek word apóstolos is only used for the apostolic office, and it was used for both Paul and Barnabas, and others, after the original twelve were called. And it is the apóstolos that Paul said would continue in the church until all "come to a unity of the faith" (Eph 4:11-14). 11 hours ago, theplains said: We have no indication from scripture that Paul specifically replaced James James was killed in Acts chapter 12. Paul and Barnabas were called and set apart in Acts chapter 13. 11 hours ago, theplains said: or who supposedly replaced Peter or Paul when they were killed. They couldn't be replaced, as there were no longer apostles available that were directed by revelation to call and set apart new apostles. The organization that Jesus established was taken away, and the church went into the wilderness. 1
telnetd Posted July 8, 2023 Posted July 8, 2023 On 7/5/2023 at 1:55 PM, InCognitus said: That shows the varying opinions that people have about how to interpret the Bible. Wouldn't it be good to have living apostles and modern revelation to address those questions? There are men from various christian-affiliated groups that claim to be apostles.
Chum Posted July 8, 2023 Posted July 8, 2023 19 minutes ago, telnetd said: There are men from various christian-affiliated groups that claim to be apostles. We had an alternate prophet stop in. That was it's own kind of awesome.
InCognitus Posted July 8, 2023 Posted July 8, 2023 2 hours ago, telnetd said: There are men from various christian-affiliated groups that claim to be apostles. Yes, but they claim to be apostles as in all believers (the common "sent" ones), and not divinely appointed apostles.
telnetd Posted July 10, 2023 Posted July 10, 2023 On 7/8/2023 at 1:26 PM, InCognitus said: Yes, but they claim to be apostles as in all believers (the common "sent" ones), and not divinely appointed apostles. I haven't seen anything about the FLDS or Community of Christ apostles claiming they are not divinely appointed.
InCognitus Posted July 10, 2023 Posted July 10, 2023 2 hours ago, telnetd said: I haven't seen anything about the FLDS or Community of Christ apostles claiming they are not divinely appointed. Both of those groups are break off groups from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is similar to the break off groups that occurred from Christ's church in New Testament times. But in both the New Testament church (while the twelve apostles were alive) and the Latter-day church, the twelve apostles continued to function in the original church, and directed the church accordingly. That's the purpose of having the living apostles in Christ's organization. 1
theplains Posted July 10, 2023 Posted July 10, 2023 On 7/7/2023 at 1:05 AM, InCognitus said: Where those things are found in LDS scripture (or whether or not you are representing the beliefs correctly - some of what you say above is a total misrepresentation of our beliefs) I made a reference to some LDS teachings. Let me know which of these are false: A] that Heavenly Father (who supposedly was a child of his own heavenly parents) was once a man who became a God? B] that Jesus is the first born child of heavenly parents who became a God in his pre-mortal life? C] that the Holy Spirit is also a spirit child of heavenly parents who became a God in his pre-mortal life? D] that Joseph Smith was able to refute the idea that God was not God from everlasting to everlasting? Quote And if a person has more revealed to them about God than is found in the Bible, then it doesn't mean they believe in a different god, it just means they know more things or different things than someone else about the God of the Bible. I believe God is God from everlasting to everlasting, from eternity to eternity (which is supported by the Bible, and even the LDS canon). That is why I see Joseph Smith introducing a belief and worship of a different god (someone who is not God from everlasting; a man who is said to have become a God with his wives - who are Goddesses themselves). The teaching of Heavenly Father’s polygamy is implied in D&C 132:31. Quote Both of us base our beliefs about God on the Bible. And yet the LDS version of Jesus is interpreted as not God from eternity to eternity but rather the first spirit child of heavenly parents who progressed into becoming a God. Let me know if I am misrepresenting these LDS teachings. Quote Can Christians believe things not found in the Bible like Jesus having two natures and still be saved? By Jesus having two natures, I mean Jesus being both God and man. Is that your understanding? Quote That's no big deal, all humans are already above all man-made gods or false gods, so that doesn't sound like a very powerful God to me. The God of the Bible is a powerful God because he is the God of gods, gods that exist in reality. When you refer to gods in the lower case sense, are you referring to deities? How is Satan a god in 2 Corinthians 4:4? Quote So why does Jesus have a God? According to the Bible, Jesus, who is God, has a God. (See John 20:17, Rom 15:6, 1 Cor 11:3, 2 Cor 11:31, Eph 1:3, Eph 1:17; Heb 1:8-9, 1 Pet 1:3, and Rev 3:12). I don’t fully understand this but I think it comes from the point of view of Christ associating himself with mankind. Like the references to Son of Man and also Son of God. I suppose Heavenly Mother’s God is not Heavenly Father himself but rather the same God as Heavenly Father’s God. From what I know of the Mormon faith, there is no idea of the identity of the God who never became a God. That is, the God who rules over the LDS pantheon of all the Gods in existence now and those who are taught will become Gods in the future. Quote What verses say that women held the priesthood in the Old Testament? They did not have the priesthood in the way that people understand an ordination today – of being officially ordained a male priest by a male higher up in authority like in the Catholic system. Women in the Old Testament temple, as opposed to women in LDS temples, could not officiate in any way. But there was the royal priesthood of believers, where even women offered up spiritual sacrifices (1 Peter 2). It was probably not fully understand until we come to the New Testament. Unless you believe the female prophets of the Old Testament were not really called or ordained by God himself. Quote Do you think you can figure out who is teaching a false gospel or false Christ all on your own today? Or does it come down to a disagreement between the two of us over interpretations of scripture? Yes. There is no doubt that different Christs and different gospels exist. I believe the Bible is sufficient to figure out who is teaching a false gospel or false Christ. If we misinterpret the scripture, then we must be prepared to suffer the consequences. It baffles me how anyone (focusing on the Jehovah’s Witnesses for now) could misinterpret the Bible and teach Jesus is Michael the Archangel or that the true church consists of only 144,000. Same for our church. We are damned if Jesus is really not God in human flesh because we have been proclaiming and worshipping a false Christ. There is no second chance after death. Quote Yes, Christ was establishing the church and organizing it in 3 Nephi 19, and they had to be baptized into the church even though some (like Nephi) had previously been baptized. Likewise, when the restored church was organized on April 6, 1830, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were baptized into the church as well, even though they had been baptized previously. In the New Testament, those that had only John's baptism were rebaptized into Christ's church as well (Acts 18:3-6). So this is perfectly in harmony with how Jesus directs his church. According to what I have read in the Book of Mormon, there never were apostles or seventies in the Nephite churches. But I see that they had many concurrent high priests. So this was not the way Jesus directed the churches that are said to have existed there before he was born in Bethlehem or after he rose from the dead. Quote The New Testament doesn't say there was "only one" high priest. Just because you can only name one high priest doesn't mean they had only one high priest. In the Old Testament system of things, there was only one holding the office of high priest. Jesus fulfilled the Law, becoming our high priest. That is why we don’t need any other high priests. Quote The organization that Jesus established was taken away, and the church went into the wilderness. For the wilderness part, I believe this is a reference to the future – the times when the beast and false prophet are exercising greater manifestations of their demonic power. At the Second Coming, Jesus defeats these two personages and casts them into the lake of fire (Revelation 19).
InCognitus Posted July 17, 2023 Posted July 17, 2023 (edited) On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: I made a reference to some LDS teachings. What you say is (or is not) LDS teachings is irrelevant to the discussion about whether one can know if they are believing in a "different god" based on someone's interpretation of God in the Bible, and whether or not having more information about God makes him a "different god" than if someone has less information about him or has inaccurate beliefs about him. Your examples so far have been from Egyptian gods (which aren't based on the Bible at all). So how can one know if their interpretation of the Bible is the correct one? On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: I believe God is God from everlasting to everlasting, from eternity to eternity So do we. We also discussed what the Bible means by "from everlasting to everlasting" several times previously (here 07/09/2022, here 07/25/2022, here 08/10/2022, here 10/30/2022, here 11/12/2022, here 11/16/2022, here 11/21/2022, here 11/27/2022, and here 12/24/2022). You simply interpret the Bible differently than how that phrase was understood in Bible times. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: When you refer to gods in the lower case sense, are you referring to deities? The "gods" of Deuteronomy 10:17 refers to actual deities, yes. "For the Lord your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward" (Deuteronomy 10:17) I explained to you why this has to be so years ago (here). The phrases God of gods, Holy of Holies, Heaven of heavens, Sabbath of sabbaths, servant of servants, vanity of vanities, song of songs, King of kings, Lord of lords, etc. are all Hebrew superlatives. These kinds of superlatives are always stated as the greatest example over other versions of the same thing. When the Bible refers to the "Holy of holies" it's talking about the place that is the most holy of all other holy places. When the Bible refers to the "Heaven of heavens" it is referring to the highest and the greatest of all other heavens. Same with "King of kings", etc. So for "God of gods" to be referring to non-deities just doesn't work in the Hebrew superlative. It would have to say "The Demon of demons" for the "gods" to be referring to demons, or "The False God of false gods" to be referring to fake gods. This is why this can only mean actual "gods". God is the greatest of all other deities. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: How is Satan a god in 2 Corinthians 4:4? We discussed this already, here 09/05/2020, and other places. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: Quote So why does Jesus have a God? According to the Bible, Jesus, who is God, has a God. (See John 20:17, Rom 15:6, 1 Cor 11:3, 2 Cor 11:31, Eph 1:3, Eph 1:17; Heb 1:8-9, 1 Pet 1:3, and Rev 3:12). I don’t fully understand this but I think it comes from the point of view of Christ associating himself with mankind. Like the references to Son of Man and also Son of God. It can't only be from association of himself with mankind, since the resurrected Jesus (who sits at the right hand of God) refers to God the Father as "my God" four different times in Revelation 3:12. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: Quote What verses say that women held the priesthood in the Old Testament? They did not have the priesthood in the way that people understand an ordination today – of being officially ordained a male priest by a male higher up in authority like in the Catholic system. Women in the Old Testament temple, as opposed to women in LDS temples, could not officiate in any way. Right, so if that is the way it was in the Old Testament, then why do you try to take what Peter said when he is quoting from Exodus 19:5-6 of the Septuagint in 1 Peter 2:5-10 in application to New Testament Christianity, to make it apply to "all believers" when he never says any such thing and it never was that way in ancient Israel? The "priesthood of all believers" (just by believing) isn't found in the Bible. If there really was a priesthood of all believers, then it makes absolutely no sense for those who were baptized by Philip in Acts chapter 8 to need to wait for the apostles to arrive in order to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 8:12, 14-17). On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: But there was the royal priesthood of believers, where even women offered up spiritual sacrifices (1 Peter 2). Offering up spiritual sacrifices doesn't require any priesthood, so that doesn't help your case: "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." (Romans 12:1-2). "For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." (Psalms 51:16–17) But those who do hold the priesthood are to also offer up "spiritual sacrifices" now too. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: Unless you believe the female prophets of the Old Testament were not really called or ordained by God himself. This was already addressed here. The gift of prophesy is one of the gifts of the Spirit, and doesn't require ordination. So this doesn't help your case either. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: I believe the Bible is sufficient to figure out who is teaching a false gospel or false Christ. If we misinterpret the scripture, then we must be prepared to suffer the consequences. So it's Bible bashing all around without anyone to tell you who is right. Right? The Jehovah's Witnesses believe they have correct teachings, and they use the Bible to back up their beliefs. So if the Bible is sufficient to figure out who is teaching a false gospel or a false Christ, according to their point of view (based on the Bible), you are teaching a false gospel or a false Christ. This is why we must go directly to God for these answers and not to the Bible alone. This is what Joseph Smith did, and he received an answer. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: According to what I have read in the Book of Mormon, there never were apostles or seventies in the Nephite churches. Already explained here. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: In the Old Testament system of things, there was only one holding the office of high priest. Jesus fulfilled the Law, becoming our high priest. That is why we don’t need any other high priests. So basically you're telling me that you believe this based on your interpretation rather than anything actually stated in scripture. The New Testament doesn't say Jesus is the only High Priest. On 7/10/2023 at 2:34 PM, theplains said: Quote The organization that Jesus established was taken away, and the church went into the wilderness. For the wilderness part, I believe this is a reference to the future – the times when the beast and false prophet are exercising greater manifestations of their demonic power. At the Second Coming, Jesus defeats these two personages and casts them into the lake of fire (Revelation 19). While you are free to believe this (or whatever you want), that's not how Revelation 12 depicts it: "And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth. And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." (Revelation 12:13–17) This is clearly referring to the persecution of the saints of God following the death of the apostles (this can be documented). Earlier in the book of Revelation, John told those at the church of Smyrna that they basically had two options: Either faithful martyrdom or unfaithful apostasy: "Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." (Revelation 2:10) This is exactly why the apostle John explained in 1 John 2:18, that it is the "last time": "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time." Those events are already in the past. Edited July 17, 2023 by InCognitus 1
theplains Posted July 18, 2023 Posted July 18, 2023 On 7/16/2023 at 10:21 PM, InCognitus said: The "gods" of Deuteronomy 10:17 refers to actual deities, yes. "For the Lord your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward" (Deuteronomy 10:17) So for "God of gods" to be referring to non-deities just doesn't work in the Hebrew superlative. It would have to say "The Demon of demons" for the "gods" to be referring to demons, or "The False God of false gods" to be referring to fake gods. This is why this can only mean actual "gods". God is the greatest of all other deities. Just so I understand you correctly. Do you believe Heavenly Father is the God of Satan (a god, a non-deity) and the non-deities (the false gods of Egypt)? If Psalm 82 is a reference to Heavenly Father of our earth, what actual deities is he the God of in the context of its setting? I assume the setting is some council of heaven where Heavenly Father of our earth put forth a plan of salvation to save mankind (which I assume is very similar or exactly the same as his father God before him had done for some other earth). In LDS theology, Heavenly Father is not the greatest of all other deities in existence. As far as I know, Latter-day Saints of our earth do not know the God who never progressed into becoming a God. Quote It can't only be from association of himself with mankind, since the resurrected Jesus (who sits at the right hand of God) refers to God the Father as "my God" four different times in Revelation 3:12. I believe Jesus remains both God and man even after his ascension so in that sense he can refer to Heavenly Father as my God. Same as what he said when he was hanging on the cross. I don't desire to become a God in the future where my children will have the same relationship to me that I have with Heavenly Father (of our earth). I don't want them to worship me as their God. This goes far beyond Satan's temptation of Eve in the garden of Eden. Quote If there really was a priesthood of all believers, then it makes absolutely no sense for those who were baptized by Philip in Acts chapter 8 to need to wait for the apostles to arrive in order to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 8:12, 14-17). Are you saying that all the people who left Jerusalem that day had to wait for only a male apostle or only a male disciple to come to them, preach the gospel, and then baptize them? Quote The gift of prophesy is one of the gifts of the Spirit, and doesn't require ordination. So this doesn't help your case either. Do you believe that female prophets currently exist in both the LDS church and the Catholic church? If yes, what qualifies them to be prophets? Can Catholic women even have the gift of prophecy when some (or all) LDS believe they are not properly baptized by men holding authority? Quote This is why we must go directly to God for these answers and not to the Bible alone. This is what Joseph Smith did, and he received an answer. I heard that. Any he began teaching a Jesus and a Heavenly Father who were not always God but had to become Gods. Same for the Holy Spirit - supposedly a spirit child of heavenly parents who also progressed into becoming a God. On the church's website (Now You Know) there is an article called "What is an Apostle?" "Apostles are witnesses of Jesus Christ and testify to all the world of His divine mission. Christ Himself ordained twelve Apostles during His earthly ministry. Today twelve living Apostles have been given the same charge to teach and testify of Him". If I were editing that description, I would change that to "In the LDS Church today fifteen living Apostles have been given the same charge to teach and testify of Him". Quote While you are free to believe this (or whatever you want), that's not how Revelation 12 depicts it: ..snip... Those events are already in the past. See Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith - 1938 I'll quote some of what Joseph Smith taught about the Book of Revelation. "John saw that only which was lying in futurity and which was shortly to come to pass." "Now, I make this declaration, that those things which John saw in heaven had no allusion to anything that had been on the earth previous to that time, because they were the representation of things which must shortly come to pass and not of what has already transpired." "John saw beasts that had to do with things on the earth, but not in past ages." "The Book of Revelation is one of the plainnest books ever written." "The revelations do not give us to understand anything of the past in relation to the kingdom of God".
InCognitus Posted July 19, 2023 Posted July 19, 2023 8 hours ago, theplains said: Just so I understand you correctly. Do you believe Heavenly Father is the God of Satan (a god, a non-deity) and the non-deities (the false gods of Egypt)? God the Father is the one God "above all", so that covers everything and everyone. But that's not what Deuteronomy 10:17 is talking about when it uses the Hebrew superlative and says the "Lord your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords". The "gods" of the "God of gods" in that context must truly be deities and not false gods or devils, just as the "kings" in "King of kings" are truly kings and not playing cards or chess pieces, because otherwise the Hebrew superlative has no meaning. Anyone can be the "god" over false gods, just as anyone can be the "king" over playing cards and chess pieces. 8 hours ago, theplains said: If Psalm 82 is a reference to Heavenly Father of our earth, what actual deities is he the God of in the context of its setting? You've asked this same question over and over in the past. See my response to one of the times on 06/05/2022, and on January 13 of this year, where I said: Jesus quoted from Psalm 82 in John 10:34. The argument that Jesus is making in the context of John 10 is that he in his human state is claiming to be divine. His point is that since other humans have been made divine through God by receiving the word in scripture (“If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken”), then how much more so is the Son of God, who John points out is the very Word himself? But I think the original meaning of the verse has to do with the divine council of gods. This seems to be the view as noted in this statement from the First Presidency, 1912—April—Improvement Era 15:483-485 (April, 1912): Quote But the sole object of worship, God the Eternal Father, stands supreme and alone, and it is in the name of the Only Begotten that we thus approach Him, as Christ taught always. "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; He judgeth among the gods." (Psalms 82:1.) Jesus quoted this and did not dispute it (John 10:34-6). All the perfected beings who are rightly called gods, being, like the Savior, possessed of "the fullness of the Godhead bodily," are ONE, just as the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost are one. 8 hours ago, theplains said: I assume the setting is some council of heaven where Heavenly Father of our earth put forth a plan of salvation to save mankind No, the "divine council of gods" isn't the same thing as the council in heaven in the beginning. Many Biblical scholars have discussed the divine council of gods. See Michael Heiser's web page on that topic: https://www.thedivinecouncil.com/ And specifically this article from his page: https://thedivinecouncil.com/DivineCouncilLBD.pdf, or this one: THE DIVINE COUNCIL IN LATE CANONICAL AND NON-CANONICAL SECOND TEMPLE JEWISH LITERATURE. Also, the "BibleProject" web page has an interesting video series on The Divine Council. Their video in that series on the Elohim has this to say about Biblical monotheism: “Biblical monotheism” is that “Yahweh is the Elohim of Elohim, that is the chief Elohim among all the others. Or they’ll say, there is no Elohim beside Yahweh, meaning no other spiritual being compares to him because only he is the ruler and creator of all things.” And “That’s Biblical monotheism, that one Elohim (Yahweh) is above all other elohim, that is, the other spiritual beings”. 8 hours ago, theplains said: In LDS theology, Heavenly Father is not the greatest of all other deities in existence. False statement. See Abraham 3:19: "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." And: "In knowledge there is power. God has more power than all other beings, because he has greater knowledge; and hence he knows how to subject all other beings to Him. He has power over all." (Joseph Smith, TPJS p. 288) 8 hours ago, theplains said: I believe Jesus remains both God and man even after his ascension so in that sense he can refer to Heavenly Father as my God. Do you believe Jesus was both God and man before creation? Because Jesus said that God, his Father, "gave" him glory before the world was (see John 17:5 and 22). 8 hours ago, theplains said: Are you saying that all the people who left Jerusalem that day had to wait for only a male apostle or only a male disciple to come to them, preach the gospel, and then baptize them? Are you saying there are examples of females baptizing in the New Testament? And for the example I gave from Acts chapter 8 (12, 14-17), why didn't Philip just give the people the gift of the Holy Ghost? Why did they need to wait for the apostles to arrive to do that? As for teaching others about the gospel, anyone can do that, but only some are called and set apart to preach the gospel as their specific calling. Women can be called to do that. 8 hours ago, theplains said: Do you believe that female prophets currently exist in both the LDS church and the Catholic church? If yes, what qualifies them to be prophets? I already addressed that here and here. The gift of prophesy is one of the gifts of the Spirit, and doesn't require ordination, nor is it limited to members of the church. It is like other gifts of the spirit, like faith, wisdom, and teaching the words of wisdom. 9 hours ago, theplains said: If I were editing that description, I would change that to "In the LDS Church today fifteen living Apostles have been given the same charge to teach and testify of Him". There is the first presidency and twelve apostles. Similarly, the church in New Testament times after the resurrection of Jesus had 15 apostles, after Paul replaced James and Barnabas and others were ordained apostles. 9 hours ago, theplains said: See Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith - 1938 I'll quote some of what Joseph Smith taught about the Book of Revelation. "John saw that only which was lying in futurity and which was shortly to come to pass." You do understand that when Joseph Smith said that John saw that which was "shortly to come to pass", he was referring to John's time, right? Do you realize this supports everything I said above, about the church going into the wilderness and Satan persecuting the saints of God, and the apostle John saying "it is the last time", since all of those things came to pass "shortly" after John wrote them? 1
theplains Posted July 24, 2023 Posted July 24, 2023 On 7/19/2023 at 12:56 AM, InCognitus said: The "gods" of the "God of gods" in that context must truly be deities and not false gods or devils But in the overall scheme of things, Heavenly Father can be viewed as the God of Satan (a god). On 7/19/2023 at 12:56 AM, InCognitus said: Jesus quoted from Psalm 82 in John 10:34. I was meaning to create a new post about this topic down the road. I’ll look at the links your provided and hopefully provide (maybe?) a different way to view what Jesus said. No doubt we have seen various explanations. On 7/19/2023 at 12:56 AM, InCognitus said: False statement. See Abraham 3:19: "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." And: "In knowledge there is power. God has more power than all other beings, because he has greater knowledge; and hence he knows how to subject all other beings to Him. He has power over all." (Joseph Smith, TPJS p. 288) The statement I made was in the context of the realm where Heavenly Father is the greatest being among beings who are not yet Gods or Goddesses. For example, I would say (assuming a pantheon of Gods) that Heavenly Father of our Earth is not greater in intelligence than his heavenly father and mother (which organized him into one of their spirit children). When I look at the LDS plan of salvation, it seems the exalted beings of our Earth will be like Heavenly Father, having the same power and glory: https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/tad-r-callister/our-identity-and-our-destiny/ Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, God can exalt all His children—meaning empower them to become like Him. https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-e-1-1-july-1843-30-april-1844/343 Here, then is eternal life— to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be Kings and Priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you. ... but they shall be heirs of God, and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? to inherit the same power, the same glory, and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a God, and ascend the throne of eternal power the same as those who have gone before. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-18?lang=eng ... [The righteous who have died] shall rise again to dwell in everlasting burnings in immortal glory, not to sorrow, suffer, or die any more, but they shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a god, and ascend the throne of eternal power, the same as those who have gone before." On 7/19/2023 at 12:56 AM, InCognitus said: Do you believe Jesus was both God and man before creation? Because Jesus said that God, his Father, "gave" him glory before the world was (see John 17:5 and 22). God did not became a man until the incarnation. On 7/19/2023 at 12:56 AM, InCognitus said: Are you saying there are examples of females baptizing in the New Testament? And for the example I gave from Acts chapter 8 (12, 14-17), why didn't Philip just give the people the gift of the Holy Ghost? Why did they need to wait for the apostles to arrive to do that? I don’t find examples of females baptizing in the New Testament. I don’t know why the Ethiopian eunuch did not receive the gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 8 but Cornelius and the Gentiles did in Acts 10. Quote As for teaching others about the gospel, anyone can do that, but only some are called and set apart to preach the gospel as their specific calling. Women can be called to do that. I believe women were called to do this by Jesus. “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age”. The role of making disciples is not separate from baptism. On 7/19/2023 at 12:56 AM, InCognitus said: There is the first presidency and twelve apostles. Similarly, the church in New Testament times after the resurrection of Jesus had 15 apostles, after Paul replaced James and Barnabas and others were ordained apostles. Who do you believe is the first “first presidency” with their corresponding twelve apostles? In Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:30, who are the 12 sitting on the thrones? On 7/19/2023 at 12:56 AM, InCognitus said: You do understand that when Joseph Smith said that John saw that which was "shortly to come to pass", he was referring to John's time, right? Do you realize this supports everything I said above, about the church going into the wilderness and Satan persecuting the saints of God, and the apostle John saying "it is the last time", since all of those things came to pass "shortly" after John wrote them? I guess I was confused by Joseph’s references to the past. "Now, I make this declaration, that those things which John saw in heaven had no allusion to anything that had been on the earth previous to that time, because they were the representation of things which must shortly come to pass and not of what has already transpired." "John saw beasts that had to do with things on the earth, but not in past ages." "The revelations do not give us to understand anything of the past in relation to the kingdom of God" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 1938, pages 289-294).
InCognitus Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 (edited) 13 hours ago, theplains said: But in the overall scheme of things, Heavenly Father can be viewed as the God of Satan (a god). But Satan is not "a god" in the sense that God is the "God of gods". The only way that Satan is "a god" is when humans allow him to be their "god", by following him. Satan only has the power to be "a god" if we give it to him. 13 hours ago, theplains said: On 7/18/2023 at 10:56 PM, InCognitus said: Jesus quoted from Psalm 82 in John 10:34. I was meaning to create a new post about this topic down the road. I’ll look at the links your provided and hopefully provide (maybe?) a different way to view what Jesus said. No doubt we have seen various explanations. But we've discussed that topic with you before, several times now. In this post from you on 04/01/202, you outlined your view of Psalm 82 and Jesus' use of it in John 10:34 as follows: Quote If the Jews understood Psalm 82:6 as being a reference to people who were not Deities, why did they want to kill Jesus despite this reference in John? I believe he was trying to get them to admit that Jesus was not claiming to be the wicked gods (human judges) like those who he was speaking to were but rather he was claiming much more. If you read the context of that chapter in Psalms, it is a pronouncement of judgment on the rulers (the judges; i.e. those in authority) and this is why Jesus is pronouncing judgment on his audience in John's passage. This explanation makes sense to me if one looks at the deeper meaning Christ was trying to convey. With respect to your interpretation above, a different article by Michael S. Heiser (where he is supposedly critiquing "Mormonism's Use of Psalm 82") explains why your interpretation doesn't work. The article is: You've Seen on Elohim, You've Seen Them All? A Critique of Mormonism's Use of Psalm 82. Here is a relevant quote from his article that deals with your point of view (starting on page 224 of the journal, or page 6 of the PDF): Quote Evangelical objections to divine plurality in Psalms usually take the form of casting the plural ĕlōhîm of certain passages as human beings. It is convenient at this point to reference several verses in Psalm 82: 1 God (ĕlōhîm) stands in the divine council; in the midst of the gods (ĕlōhîm) he passes judgment. . . . 6 I said, “you are gods (ĕlōhîm), sons of the Most High, all of you.” 7 Therefore you shall die as humans do, and you shall fall as one of the princes. A few observations will suffice. Notice that in verse one the first ĕlōhîm must point to a singular being, the God of Israel, due to grammatical agreement with singular verb forms in the verse (nissab and yišpō†). The second ĕlōhîm must be plural because of the preposition that precedes it. Appeals to the Trinity here are indefensible since the plural ĕlōhîm are being judged for their corruption in the rest of the psalm and sentenced to “die like humankind.” In verse six, the plural ĕlōhîm of 82:1 are referred to once again as ĕlōhîm but are further identified as sons of the God of Israel (the Most High). The power of the “divine beings” interpretation of the plural ĕlōhîm in this psalm derives from both internal and external considerations. With respect to the former, if the ĕlōhîm in Psalm 82 are humans, why are they sentenced to die “like humans”? This sounds as awkward as sentencing a child to grow up or a dog to bark. The point of verse 6 is that, in response to their corruption, the ĕlōhîm will be stripped of their immortality at God’s discretion and die as humans die. Second, what is the scriptural basis for the idea that this psalm has God presiding over a council of humans that governs the nations of the earth? At no time in the Hebrew Bible did Israel’s elders ever have jurisdiction over all the nations of the earth. In fact, other divine council texts such as Deuteronomy 32:8–9 have the situation exactly opposite—Israel was separated from the nations to be God’s personal possession and the focus of his rule. Lastly and most tellingly, Psalm 89:5–8 (Hebrew, vv. 6–9) renders a human interpretation for the plural ĕlōhîm nonsensical since this unambiguously parallel text clearly states that the council of the sons of God is in heaven, not on earth: 5 Let the heavens praise your wonders, O Lord, your faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones! 6 For who in the skies (bašša˙aq) can be compared to the Lord? Who among the sons of God (bibnê ēlîm) is like the Lord, 7 the fearsome God in the council of the holy ones, great and awesome above all who are around him? 8 O Lord God of hosts, who is as powerful as you are, O Lord, with your faithfulness all around you? (Psalm 89:5–8) He goes on, but this should suffice to get the point across. And if you are interested in the Latter-day Saint response to his critique of his supposed LDS view later on in the same article, see: David E. Bokovoy, Ye Really Are Gods': A Response to Michael Heiser concerning the LDS Use of Psalm 82 and the Gospel of John. And Daniel McClellan also offered his point of view on how Jesus used Psalm 82 in John 10 in this article: Psalm 82 in Contemporary Latter-day Saint Tradition 13 hours ago, theplains said: For example, I would say (assuming a pantheon of Gods) that Heavenly Father of our Earth is not greater in intelligence than his heavenly father and mother (which organized him into one of their spirit children). What you say above is not necessarily the view we take (or Joseph Smith for that matter). I take what God says in Abraham 3:19 and what Joseph Smith says about God having more "power than all other beings" to mean exactly what it says. 13 hours ago, theplains said: When I look at the LDS plan of salvation, it seems the exalted beings of our Earth will be like Heavenly Father, having the same power and glory: https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/tad-r-callister/our-identity-and-our-destiny/ Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, God can exalt all His children—meaning empower them to become like Him. Those who become "like God" will not change their relationship with God. For God will always be our God, and we will always be His sons and daughters (Rev 21:7; Psa 136:2-3). 13 hours ago, theplains said: .. [The righteous who have died] shall rise again to dwell in everlasting burnings in immortal glory, not to sorrow, suffer, or die any more, but they shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a god, and ascend the throne of eternal power, the same as those who have gone before." This quote explains how it works, by "ascend[ing] the throne of eternal power" is an increase, from one station to another. And thus, God the Father will always be greater than all others in power and glory. 13 hours ago, theplains said: On 7/18/2023 at 10:56 PM, InCognitus said: Do you believe Jesus was both God and man before creation? Because Jesus said that God, his Father, "gave" him glory before the world was (see John 17:5 and 22). God did not became a man until the incarnation. Then why did God the Father "give" glory to Jesus before the world was if Jesus was already God? Why was Jesus subject to his Father before creation? 13 hours ago, theplains said: I don’t find examples of females baptizing in the New Testament. I don’t know why the Ethiopian eunuch did not receive the gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 8 but Cornelius and the Gentiles did in Acts 10. There's a reason you don't find examples of females baptizing in the New Testament (they couldn't do it). My references in Acts chapter 8 wasn't to the Ethiopian eunuch, I asked you about Acts 8:12-17, where Phillip baptized both men and women, and the word of it went to Jerusalem and the apostles sent Peter and John to give them the gift of the Holy Ghost. Why didn't Philip just give the people the gift of the Holy Ghost? Why did they need to wait for the apostles to arrive to do that? 13 hours ago, theplains said: I believe women were called to do this by Jesus. “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age”. The role of making disciples is not separate from baptism. As mentioned before, you are taking Matthew 28:18-20 out of context. Those verses are specifically spoken to the "eleven" apostles (see verse 16). Later on, others were called and sent out, like in Acts 6:1-6 where Philip was among the seven men chosen, called, and set apart for the work, or when Paul and Barnabas were called and set apart for the work in Acts 13:1-3, or as Paul says to Titus: "thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee" (Titus 1:5). If Matthew 28:18-20 applies to everyone, then why did specific individuals need to be called and set apart for that work later on? Why didn't Matthew 28:18-20 cover all of it? 13 hours ago, theplains said: Who do you believe is the first “first presidency” with their corresponding twelve apostles? Peter, James, and John (obviously). They were the three chosen to be with our Lord on certain special occasions: at the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mark 5:37), at the Transfiguration (Matt. 17:1; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28), and at Gethsemane (Matt. 26:37; Mark 14:33; see also Mark 10:30, 41; 13:3; Luke 8:51; 9:54). The corresponding twelve apostles occurred after the ascension of Jesus, but not until after the martyrdom of James. Paul and Barnabas were called to be apostles after the martyrdom of James (Acts 13:1-3), and scripture doesn't tell us when Andronicus and Junia were called (but certainly it was before Paul's epistle to the Romans was written and possibly before Paul). 13 hours ago, theplains said: In Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:30, who are the 12 sitting on the thrones? Do you think Judas Iscariot is one of them (he was there at the time when Jesus said this). The answer to this is the same as what I gave for your question on Revelation 12:14, that was answered here. 13 hours ago, theplains said: I guess I was confused by Joseph’s references to the past. "Now, I make this declaration, that those things which John saw in heaven had no allusion to anything that had been on the earth previous to that time, because they were the representation of things which must shortly come to pass and not of what has already transpired." "John saw beasts that had to do with things on the earth, but not in past ages." "The revelations do not give us to understand anything of the past in relation to the kingdom of God" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 1938, pages 289-294). It's all in the context (isn't it always?). You missed how Joseph Smith started out this section: "There is a grand difference and distinction between the visions and figures spoken of by the ancient prophets, and those spoken of in the revelations of John. The things which John saw had no allusion to the scenes of the days of Adam, Enoch, Abraham or Jesus, only so far as is plainly represented by John, and clearly set forth by him. John saw that only which was lying in futurity and which was shortly to come to pass." In other words, John only saw things that were future to the time of John (unless he said otherwise), and some of those things very "shortly" came to pass after John wrote the epistle (like the "woman" [the church] being driven into the wilderness and Satan persecuting the saints of God and the martyrdom of the saints). Edited July 25, 2023 by InCognitus 1
teddyaware Posted July 25, 2023 Posted July 25, 2023 (edited) On 7/25/2023 at 12:47 AM, InCognitus said: But Satan is not "a god" in the sense that God is the "God of gods". The only way that Satan is "a god" is when humans allow him to be their "god", by following him. Satan only has the power to be "a god" if we give it to him. But we've discussed that topic with you before, several times now. In this post from you on 04/01/202, you outlined your view of Psalm 82 and Jesus' use of it in John 10:34 as follows: With respect to your interpretation above, a different article by Michael S. Heiser (where he is supposedly critiquing "Mormonism's Use of Psalm 82") explains why your interpretation doesn't work. The article is: You've Seen on Elohim, You've Seen Them All? A Critique of Mormonism's Use of Psalm 82. Here is a relevant quote from his article that deals with your point of view (starting on page 224 of the journal, or page 6 of the PDF): He goes on, but this should suffice to get the point across. And if you are interested in the Latter-day Saint response to his critique of his supposed LDS view later on in the same article, see: David E. Bokovoy, Ye Really Are Gods': A Response to Michael Heiser concerning the LDS Use of Psalm 82 and the Gospel of John. And Daniel McClellan also offered his point of view on how Jesus used Psalm 82 in John 10 in this article: Psalm 82 in Contemporary Latter-day Saint Tradition What you say above is not necessarily the view we take (or Joseph Smith for that matter). I take what God says in Abraham 3:19 and what Joseph Smith says about God having more "power than all other beings" to mean exactly what it says. Those who become "like God" will not change their relationship with God. For God will always be our God, and we will always be His sons and daughters (Rev 21:7; Psa 136:2-3). This quote explains how it works, by "ascend[ing] the throne of eternal power" is an increase, from one station to another. And thus, God the Father will always be greater than all others in power and glory. Then why did God the Father "give" glory to Jesus before the world was if Jesus was already God? Why was Jesus subject to his Father before creation? There's a reason you don't find examples of females baptizing in the New Testament (they couldn't do it). My references in Acts chapter 8 wasn't to the Ethiopian eunuch, I asked you about Acts 8:12-17, where Phillip baptized both men and women, and the word of it went to Jerusalem and the apostles sent Peter and John to give them the gift of the Holy Ghost. Why didn't Philip just give the people the gift of the Holy Ghost? Why did they need to wait for the apostles to arrive to do that? As mentioned before, you are taking Matthew 28:18-20 out of context. Those verses are specifically spoken to the "eleven" apostles (see verse 16). Later on, others were called and sent out, like in Acts 6:1-6 where Philip was among the seven men chosen, called, and set apart for the work, or when Paul and Barnabas were called and set apart for the work in Acts 13:1-3, or as Paul says to Titus: "thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee" (Titus 1:5). If Matthew 28:18-20 applies to everyone, then why did specific individuals need to be called and set apart for that work later on? Why didn't Matthew 28:18-20 cover all of it? Peter, James, and John (obviously). They were the three chosen to be with our Lord on certain special occasions: at the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mark 5:37), at the Transfiguration (Matt. 17:1; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28), and at Gethsemane (Matt. 26:37; Mark 14:33; see also Mark 10:30, 41; 13:3; Luke 8:51; 9:54). The corresponding twelve apostles occurred after the ascension of Jesus, but not until after the martyrdom of James. Paul and Barnabas were called to be apostles after the martyrdom of James (Acts 13:1-3), and scripture doesn't tell us when Andronicus and Junia were called (but certainly it was before Paul's epistle to the Romans was written and possibly before Paul). Do you think Judas Iscariot is one of them (he was there at the time when Jesus said this). The answer to this is the same as what I gave for your question on Revelation 12:14, that was answered here. It's all in the context (isn't it always?). You missed how Joseph Smith started out this section: "There is a grand difference and distinction between the visions and figures spoken of by the ancient prophets, and those spoken of in the revelations of John. The things which John saw had no allusion to the scenes of the days of Adam, Enoch, Abraham or Jesus, only so far as is plainly represented by John, and clearly set forth by him. John saw that only which was lying in futurity and which was shortly to come to pass." In other words, John only saw things that were future to the time of John (unless he said otherwise), and some of those things very "shortly" came to pass after John wrote the epistle (like the "woman" [the church] being driven into the wilderness and Satan persecuting the saints of God and the martyrdom of the saints). A very brief but concise way to explain why Latter-Day Saint theological thought embraces the concept of full theosis can be sustained by understanding that the atoning sacrifice of Christ is an infinite and eternal in nature, meaning that Christ not only sacrificed his sacred body and precious blood, but that he also sacrificed his spiritual oneness with the Father at the time that he plunged into the depths of hell in Gethsemane, and again during the three hours of darkness on the cross. Although according to man’s reckoning of time Christ appeared to spend only several hours in hell as he “descended below all things” in suffering for sin and spiritual estrangement from the Father, in reality, and in a way far beyond human understanding, as far as the demands of justice are concerned, it truly was as if he had spent all eternity in outer darkness, and did it that he might bequeath to us, by means of the Holy Spirit, his perfect infinite and eternal relationship with the Father, and this that we might be joint heirs with Christ in the possession of all things that the Father himself possesses. The most effective and believable way to explain our doctrine of full theosis, that men can become fully one with the Father and the Son, is to make it perfectly clear that the deification of those who overcome the world is only made possible by means of Christ’s love inspired sacrifice of ALL that he himself had obtained from the Father, and he did it that we might become, in the fullest sense of the expression, the sons of God, to be seated on thrones of eternal rulership as kings and priests. 21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. (Revelation 3) Edited July 26, 2023 by teddyaware
theplains Posted July 27, 2023 Posted July 27, 2023 On 7/25/2023 at 12:47 AM, InCognitus said: The only way that Satan is "a god" is when humans allow him to be their "god", by following him. Satan only has the power to be "a god" if we give it to him. By “god”, do you mean a true deity or a false deity? On 7/25/2023 at 12:47 AM, InCognitus said: What you say above is not necessarily the view we take (or Joseph Smith for that matter). I take what God says in Abraham 3:19 and what Joseph Smith says about God having more "power than all other beings" to mean exactly what it says. Abraham 3:19 is about the realm of the Heavenly Father of earth after he became a God of it. Joseph Smith taught Heavenly Father was once a man who became a God so he cannot have more power than all other beings because he did not have all power before he was born to his own heavenly parents (aka, Jesus’ grandparents). Quote Those who become "like God" will not change their relationship with God. For God will always be our God, and we will always be His sons and daughters (Rev 21:7; Psa 136:2-3). Exactly. This is what the 1997 Gospel Principles teaches. https://ia800509.us.archive.org/27/items/GospelPrinciples1997/Gospel Principles 1997.pdf 1. They will live eternally in the presence of Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ (see D&C 76). 2. They will become gods. 3. They will have their righteous family members with them and will be able to have spirit children also. These spirit children will have the same relationship to them as we do to our Heavenly Father. They will be an eternal family. 4. They will receive a fulness of joy. 5. They will have everything that our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ have—all power, glory, dominion, and knowledge. Point #3 means that that male Latter-day Saints (who become Gods) will be worshipped by their spirit children just like Heavenly Father of Earth (once a man who became a God like Joseph Smith taught) was in turn worshipped by his spirit children. Quote This quote explains how it works, by "ascend[ing] the throne of eternal power" is an increase, from one station to another. And thus, God the Father will always be greater than all others in power and glory. Do you believe Heavenly Father of our earth is greater than all the other Gods of LDS theology? Quote Then why did God the Father "give" glory to Jesus before the world was if Jesus was already God? Why was Jesus subject to his Father before creation? I don’t know how to answer that question. But I suppose Heavenly Father (before he became a God) was also subject to his heavenly mother and father too when he was being reared up to maturity in their celestial home. Quote My references in Acts chapter 8 wasn't to the Ethiopian eunuch, I asked you aboutActs 8:12-17, where Phillip baptized both men and women, and the word of it went to Jerusalem and the apostles sent Peter and John to give them the gift of the Holy Ghost. Why didn't Philip just give the people the gift of the Holy Ghost? Why did they need to wait for the apostles to arrive to do that? I don’t know. Paul received the gift of the Holy Ghost without the help of any apostles before he became an apostle. As for the Gentiles of Acts 10, they also received the gift of the Holy Ghost without any laying on of hands by the apostles. Quote As mentioned before, you are taking Matthew 28:18-20 out of context. Those verses are specifically spoken to the "eleven" apostles (see verse 16). Yes, but the principle is the same for all those who are called. You seem to restrict the baptizing of people only to men. If a woman is led by the Lord to teach, preach, and baptize in a home church in her country, who am I to stop Christ building his church. Quote If Matthew 28:18-20 applies to everyone, then why did specific individuals need to be called and set apart for that work later on? Why didn't Matthew 28:18-20 cover all of it? Different people are called for different roles. Not all are called to be travelling missionaries. But if a woman wants to have a home church in her area and baptize the villagers therein, then I’m okay with that. As noted before, high priests and quorums of the seventy are not roles in the New Testament church. Quote Do you think Judas Iscariot is one of them (he was there at the time when Jesus said this). The answer to this is the same as what I gave for your question on Revelation 12:14 I don’t think Judas Iscariot is there, but I think Matthias is. I looked at the post you reference but it doesn’t indicate what you believe are the names of the twelve apostles sitting on the thrones of Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:30. Do you believe Peter, James, and John are there or were they swapped out by replacements when they died? Quote It's all in the context (isn't it always?). You missed how Joseph Smith started out this section: "There is a grand difference and distinction between the visions and figures spoken of by the ancient prophets, and those spoken of in the revelations of John.The things which John saw had no allusion to the scenes of the days of Adam, Enoch, Abraham or Jesus, only so far as is plainly represented by John, and clearly set forth by him. John saw that only which was lying in futurity and which was shortly to come to pass." I see then that the war in heaven which John saw was in the future, John’s future. “Shortly come to pass” is a reasonable phrase when you consider eternity past and eternity future. We have been in the “last days” for many years now and who knows how many more years will make up these “last days”.
InCognitus Posted July 29, 2023 Posted July 29, 2023 (edited) On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: On 7/24/2023 at 10:47 PM, InCognitus said: The only way that Satan is "a god" is when humans allow him to be their "god", by following him. Satan only has the power to be "a god" if we give it to him. By “god”, do you mean a true deity or a false deity? The word "god" has multiple meanings. (We talked about this many times now). Remember this post? I posted the following definition ofTheos (Θεός) and broke it down for you (here's the relevant portion of that post): Here’s a link to Thayer's Greek Lexicon definition for Theos (Θεός) on Bible Hub. https://biblehub.com/str/greek/2316.htm The lexicon breaks down the definition into four categories, of which the forth one has a sub category that I will assign a separate number for clarity (Thayer’s #4 is divided into my #4 and #5). “A general appellation of deities or divinities”. This could be either false gods or gods that exist in reality. In application to Christ as God Spoken of the only and true God: with the article… and very often; with prepositions Θεός is used of whatever can in any respect be likened to God, or resembles him in any way: Hebraistically, equivalent to God's representative or vicegerent, of magistrates and judges Of the devil (“the god of this age”), 2 Corinthians 4:4; the person or thing to which one is wholly devoted, for which alone he lives, e. g. the belly in Philippians 3:19. So the Exodus 7:1 passage in application to Moses fits with #4, and the 2 Corinthians 4:4 verse in application to Satan fits #5, neither one of which would be considered deities in the real sense. Definition #1 could be applied to false gods or to real deities, gods who exist in reality like those who would be sitting with God in God’s throne. And #2 and #3 are most certainly Divine. [End of quote from the prior post] So for Satan, he falls under #5, and is only a "god" in the sense that people pay devotion to his ways. This is far far different than the deities or divinities in the phrase "God of gods" (Deut 10:17). On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: Abraham 3:19 is about the realm of the Heavenly Father of earth after he became a God of it. Or, it's actually that he is the God over all other gods (see below). On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: Do you believe Heavenly Father of our earth is greater than all the other Gods of LDS theology? That's what Doctrine and Covenants 121:32 teaches: "According to that which was ordained in the midst of the Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world was, that should be reserved unto the finishing and the end thereof, when every man shall enter into his eternal presence and into his immortal rest." On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: Quote Then why did God the Father "give" glory to Jesus before the world was if Jesus was already God? Why was Jesus subject to his Father before creation? I don’t know how to answer that question. The verse shows that Jesus was subject to the Father before he became flesh and dwelt among us. Thus, the idea that the only reason Jesus calls his Father "God" is because of his human nature is a false notion, since he didn't have a human nature before the world was. God the Father is the very God and Father of Jesus Christ (the Bible says so). On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: I don’t know. Paul received the gift of the Holy Ghost without the help of any apostles before he became an apostle. Scripture doesn't tell us where Paul received the Holy Ghost, does it? Paul was baptized by Ananias, but it doesn't say how Paul received the Holy Ghost. Any Melchizedek priesthood holder could bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost, it didn't need to be the apostles only. Apparently Philip didn't hold the Melchizedek priesthood in Acts chapter 8, because those baptized by him had to wait for the apostles to arrive so they could lay hands on them to receive the Holy Ghost. On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: As for the Gentiles of Acts 10, they also received the gift of the Holy Ghost without any laying on of hands by the apostles. The Holy Ghost can "fall upon" any one who seeks the Lord, but having a witness from the Holy Ghost is different than receiving the "gift of the Holy Ghost". Acts 10 doesn't say how they received the gift of the Holy Ghost, it just says that the gift was poured out to the Gentiles starting at that point. On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: Quote As mentioned before, you are taking Matthew 28:18-20 out of context. Those verses are specifically spoken to the "eleven" apostles (see verse 16). Yes, but the principle is the same for all those who are called Obviously not, or else the New Testament wouldn't describe others being called and set apart for that purpose later (like Paul and Barnabas in Acts 13:1-3). If you take Matthew 28:18-20 out of context and make it apply to "all believers" as you assume, then certainly Paul and Barnabas wouldn't need to be called and set apart for that same purpose later. On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: You seem to restrict the baptizing of people only to men. You seem to assume you can go beyond anything said in scripture to make God's authority to apply to whoever and however you want. On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: Quote If Matthew 28:18-20 applies to everyone, then why did specific individuals need to be called and set apart for that work later on? Why didn't Matthew 28:18-20 cover all of it? Different people are called for different roles. Not all are called to be travelling missionaries. Different people are called for different roles, like Matthew 28:18-20 is in application to the eleven apostles (not everyone). The apostles have different roles than everyone else. And you are right, not all (like the apostles) were called to be travelling missionaries. On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: As noted before, high priests and quorums of the seventy are not roles in the New Testament church. Jesus sent out the seventy. And Jesus directs his church by revelation today just like he did in New Testament times, so if he wants to call another seventy today he can do that. On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: I looked at the post you reference but it doesn’t indicate what you believe are the names of the twelve apostles sitting on the thrones of Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:30. The twelve thrones are for the original apostles to judge the twelve tribes of Israel, since they ministered at the beginning of the dispensation of the gospel when it was still being preached to the tribes of Israel and before it went to the Gentiles. The heads of each dispensation will participate in judging those who are included in each dispensation. On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: I see then that the war in heaven which John saw was in the future, John’s future. Joseph Smith said that John said it was future "only so far as is plainly represented by John". The flashback in Revelation 12 to the war in heaven is setting the stage for how the dragon persecuted the saints of God, leading to the woman going into the wilderness (for the time of apostasy). On 7/27/2023 at 8:31 AM, theplains said: “Shortly come to pass” is a reasonable phrase when you consider eternity past and eternity future. We have been in the “last days” for many years now and who knows how many more years will make up these “last days”. But remember, John said "it is the last time" (relative to the church and martyrdom of the saints - 1 John 2:18) at his time. The "woman" is the church that fled into the wilderness right after John's time, and the martyrdom of the saints of God was also prophesied by John for those in his day (Revelation 2:10), "be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." You didn't say anything about what I posted about your interpretation of Psalm 82, either here or in the new thread. Are you going to address that? Edited July 29, 2023 by InCognitus 1
theplains Posted August 1, 2023 Posted August 1, 2023 On 7/29/2023 at 7:12 PM, InCognitus said: The word "god" has multiple meanings. “A general appellation of deities or divinities”. This could be either false gods or gods that exist in reality. In application to Christ as God Spoken of the only and true God: with the article… and very often; with prepositions Θεός is used of whatever can in any respect be likened to God, or resembles him in any way: Hebraistically, equivalent to God's representative or vicegerent, of magistrates and judges Of the devil (“the god of this age”), 2 Corinthians 4:4; the person or thing to which one is wholly devoted, for which alone he lives, e. g. the belly in Philippians 3:19. So the Exodus 7:1 passage in application to Moses fits with #4, and the 2 Corinthians 4:4 verse in application to Satan fits #5, neither one of which would be considered deities in the real sense. Definition #1 could be applied to false gods or to real deities, gods who exist in reality like those who would be sitting with God in God’s throne. And #2 and #3 are most certainly Divine. [End of quote from the prior post] So for Satan, he falls under #5, and is only a "god" in the sense that people pay devotion to his ways. This is far far different than the deities or divinities in the phrase "God of gods" (Deut 10:17). In the five categories of “gods”, do the gods of Deuteronomy 10:17 fit into category 1 (A general appellation of deities or divinities”. This could be either false gods or gods that exist in reality)? On 7/29/2023 at 7:12 PM, InCognitus said: Or, it's actually that he is the God over all other gods (see below). That's what Doctrine and Covenants 121:32 teaches: "According to that which was ordained in the midst of the Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world was, that should be reserved unto the finishing and the end thereof, when every man shall enter into his eternal presence and into his immortal rest." Who is “Eternal God” referring to? Who is “all other gods” a reference to? On 7/29/2023 at 7:12 PM, InCognitus said: The Holy Ghost can "fall upon" any one who seeks the Lord, but having a witness from the Holy Ghost is different than receiving the "gift of the Holy Ghost". Acts 10 doesn't say how they received the gift of the Holy Ghost, it just says that the gift was poured out to the Gentiles starting at that point. Based on what is recorded, it did not happen with the laying on of hands. They received the gift of the Holy Ghost when it was poured out on them. They put themselves in “wanting to receive” when they sent for Simon (Peter) from Joppa (verses 30-33). The reception of the gift is evidenced by an audible sign. “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God”. On 7/29/2023 at 7:12 PM, InCognitus said: You seem to assume you can go beyond anything said in scripture to make God's authority to apply to whoever and however you want. While I see that Doctrine and Covenants 132 can be used to show Heavenly Father is a polygamist, I see Joseph Smith going way beyond the scripture to teach that God is not God from eternity to all eternity but rather that he was once a man who became a God. I also see the LDS church goes beyond the scripture when it says children born to exalted Mormon males will have the same relationship to them as they do to their Heavenly Father. That is, the children won’t worship a grandfather God but they will worship their own Heavenly Father. On 7/29/2023 at 7:12 PM, InCognitus said: Jesus sent out the seventy. And Jesus directs his church by revelation today just like he did in New Testament times, so if he wants to call another seventy today he can do that. There is nothing about the seventy in the Book of Mormon or seventies (with all the additional quorums of 70s) in the Bible after the resurrection. Those 70 (72 in some translations) were a one-time commission of Christ; directed to go into the locations where Jesus would visit before the crucifixion. “After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him, two by two, into every town and place where he himself was about to go” (ESV). The New Testament church has only one high priest (Jesus Christ). On 7/29/2023 at 7:12 PM, InCognitus said: The twelve thrones are for the original apostles to judge the twelve tribes of Israel, since they ministered at the beginning of the dispensation of the gospel when it was still being preached to the tribes of Israel and before it went to the Gentiles. Is Matthias the twelveth? On 7/29/2023 at 7:12 PM, InCognitus said: The heads of each dispensation will participate in judging those who are included in each dispensation. I see something else taught. The Twelve Apostles of the Lamb shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel (1 Nephi 12:9, D&C 29:12). On 7/29/2023 at 7:12 PM, InCognitus said: Joseph Smith said that John said it was future "only so far as is plainly represented by John". The flashback in Revelation 12 to the war in heaven is setting the stage for how the dragon persecuted the saints of God, leading to the woman going into the wilderness (for the time of apostasy). But remember, John said "it is the last time" (relative to the church and martyrdom of the saints - 1 John 2:18) at his time. The "woman" is the church that fled into the wilderness right after John's time, and the martyrdom of the saints of God was also prophesied by John for those in his day (Revelation 2:10), "be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." You didn't say anything about what I posted about your interpretation of Psalm 82, either here or in the new thread. Are you going to address that? Revelation 12::13 says, “And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child”. When did the dragon first start persecuting the woman?
InCognitus Posted August 4, 2023 Posted August 4, 2023 (edited) On 8/1/2023 at 11:10 AM, theplains said: In the five categories of “gods”, do the gods of Deuteronomy 10:17 fit into category 1 (A general appellation of deities or divinities”. This could be either false gods or gods that exist in reality)? The "gods" of Deuteronomy 10:17 (where it says God is "God of gods and Lord of lords") can only be divine beings that are gods that exist in reality for the reasons stated previously: The phrases God of gods, Holy of Holies, Heaven of heavens, Sabbath of sabbaths, servant of servants, vanity of vanities, song of songs, King of kings, Lord of lords, etc. are all Hebrew superlatives. These kinds of superlatives are always stated as the greatest example over other versions of the same thing. When the Bible refers to the "Holy of holies" it's talking about the place that is the most holy of all other holy places. When the Bible refers to the "Heaven of heavens" it is referring to the highest and the greatest of all other heavens. Same with "King of kings", etc. So for "God of gods" to be referring to non-deities just doesn't work in the Hebrew superlative. It would have to say "The Demon of demons" for the "gods" to be referring to demons, or "The False God of false gods" to be referring to fake gods. This is why this can only mean actual "gods". God is the greatest of all other deities. On 8/1/2023 at 11:10 AM, theplains said: Who is “Eternal God” referring to? Who is “all other gods” a reference to? The "Eternal God" is referring to the one God "above all" (Eph 4:6). And "all other gods" are referring to all other gods. On 8/1/2023 at 11:10 AM, theplains said: Based on what is recorded, it did not happen with the laying on of hands. They received the gift of the Holy Ghost when it was poured out on them. They put themselves in “wanting to receive” when they sent for Simon (Peter) from Joppa (verses 30-33). The reception of the gift is evidenced by an audible sign. “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God”. The witness of the Holy Ghost fell upon them, which confirmed their belief in what Peter taught them. It is by the power of the Holy Ghost that we may know the truth of all things, and it is sometimes accompanied by manifestations of the Spirit. But not every account of a conversion to Christianity in the book of Acts gives every detail of what took place, as in this case it doesn't mention the gift of the Holy Ghost was given by the laying on of hands like it does in other places. And in some situations it doesn't even mention that the believer received the Holy Ghost at all, like in Acts chapter 9 after Paul's experience on the road to Damascus. Ananias says to Paul that Jesus sent him "that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost" (Acts 9:17), but the verses that follow say that Paul was baptized, but it doesn't say anything about Paul receiving the Holy Ghost (or how or if that ever happened). We assume he received it, but we aren't told any of the details in chapter 9. Maybe Paul missed out on that since it never says he received it in that chapter. On 8/1/2023 at 11:10 AM, theplains said: There is nothing about the seventy in the Book of Mormon or seventies (with all the additional quorums of 70s) in the Bible after the resurrection. Those 70 (72 in some translations) were a one-time commission of Christ; directed to go into the locations where Jesus would visit before the crucifixion. “After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him, two by two, into every town and place where he himself was about to go” (ESV). Where does it say the seventy were a "one-time" commission of Christ? On 8/1/2023 at 11:10 AM, theplains said: The New Testament church has only one high priest (Jesus Christ). Where does it say the New Testament church has only one high priest? (Hint: It doesn't - we've been over this before). Jesus is our Great High Priest. On 8/1/2023 at 11:10 AM, theplains said: Is Matthias the twelveth? Presumably, yes. On 8/1/2023 at 11:10 AM, theplains said: On 7/29/2023 at 5:12 PM, InCognitus said: The heads of each dispensation will participate in judging those who are included in each dispensation. I see something else taught. The Twelve Apostles of the Lamb shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel (1 Nephi 12:9, D&C 29:12). 1 Nephi 12:9 and D&C 29:12 is not "something else taught", it's exactly what I said would be happening. There will be a whole hierarchy of judges who will judge the inhabitants of this world and others, under the direction of Jesus Christ. The twelve apostles of the the Lamb (the original twelve in Jerusalem) will judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28, 1 Nephi 12:9, Doctrine and Covenants 29:12), and the twelve Nephite disciples will judge the Nephites (3 Nephi 27:27). We also know that the saints "shall judge the world" and "angels" as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 6:2-3. Mormon also explains the above in Mormon 3:18-19, and adds that the twelve disciples of the Book of Mormon will be judged by the twelve apostles chosen by Jesus in the land of Jerusalem: "Yea, behold, I write unto all the ends of the earth; yea, unto you, twelve tribes of Israel, who shall be judged according to your works by the twelve whom Jesus chose to be his disciples in the land of Jerusalem. And I write also unto the remnant of this people, who shall also be judged by the twelve whom Jesus chose in this land; and they shall be judged by the other twelve whom Jesus chose in the land of Jerusalem." (Mormon 3:18–19) So no, this is not "something else taught". On 8/1/2023 at 11:10 AM, theplains said: Revelation 12::13 says, “And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child”. When did the dragon first start persecuting the woman? Jesus said he saw Satan cast down to the earth before John ever wrote Revelation (likely in the beginning - see Luke 10:18). From John's perspective, Satan began persecuting "the woman" immediately after Jesus was born, but Satan has been making war with God's people since the beginning. Revelation chapter 12 depicts the woman going into the wilderness multiple times with Satan (the dragon or serpent) going after her to persecute her multiple times. Verse 4 says that the dragon stood before the woman which was about to be delivered to devour her child as soon as it was born, and verse 6 says the woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her. Then verses 7 through 10 talks about the war in heaven and Satan being cast out down to earth (that's the flashback), and how Satan is "the accuser of our brethren", and verse 11 explains that those saints overcame him by the blood of the Lamb. Verse 12 pronounces woes to the inhabitants of the earth, because the devil was cast down to earth. And verse 13 depicts the dragon persecuting the woman after she brought forth the man child, and this goes with verse 4 which says that the dragon was there before she was to be delivered. And verse 14 depicts the woman going into the wilderness again (a repeat of what it says in verse 4). And verses 15-17 depict the persecution of the saints of God by the dragon, with the dragon making "war with the remnant of her seed". There is a "remnant" left, but they become martyrs as John said earlier in Revelation. So it's not a chronological depiction of events in this chapter, since it repeats events to provide information about why the saints of God were persecuted and put to death after the time of John. Edited August 4, 2023 by InCognitus
theplains Posted August 4, 2023 Posted August 4, 2023 17 hours ago, InCognitus said: The "gods" of Deuteronomy 10:17 (where it says God is "God of gods and Lord of lords") can only be divine beings that are gods that exist in reality for the reasons stated previously: In your use of the word “divine”, do you believe you are a god right now? 17 hours ago, InCognitus said: God is the greatest of all other deities. The "Eternal God" is referring to the one God "above all" (Eph 4:6). And "all other gods" are referring to all other gods. Doctrine and Covenants 121:32 says, "According to that which was ordained in the midst of the Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world was, that should be reserved unto the finishing and the end thereof, when every man shall enter into his eternal presence and into his immortal rest". Who is this Eternal God, the greatest of all other deities? Quote Where does it say the seventy were a "one-time" commission of Christ? We never find the seventy or the organizing of other groups of 70 mentioned or commissioned again anymore by Jesus or the Apostles. The seventy were not even commissioned when Jesus reportedly visited the Nephites. 17 hours ago, InCognitus said: Where does it say the New Testament church has only one high priest? (Hint: It doesn't - we've been over this before). Jesus is our Great High Priest. Yes. The Old Testament only had one living high priest at a time. In the New Testament, Jesus is our Great High Priest. That is why none of the Apostles identified themselves were high priests. They realized that the temple veil was torn by Christ, giving them and other disciples direct access to the Father. We don’t need Catholic priests or LDS high priests. 17 hours ago, InCognitus said: The twelve apostles of the the Lamb (the original twelve in Jerusalem) will judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28, 1 Nephi 12:9, Doctrine and Covenants 29:12), and the twelve Nephite disciples will judge the Nephites (3 Nephi 27:27). Since the LDS church teaches Joseph Smith is a descendant of Lehi’s son Joseph, would he [Joseph Smith] also be judged by the 12 Nephite disciples? Or is this only for the Nephites who lived on the American continent before the Lamanites killed them?
InCognitus Posted August 6, 2023 Posted August 6, 2023 On 8/4/2023 at 5:27 PM, theplains said: In your use of the word “divine”, do you believe you are a god right now? I answered this in the other thread here. On 8/4/2023 at 5:27 PM, theplains said: Doctrine and Covenants 121:32 says, "According to that which was ordained in the midst of the Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world was, that should be reserved unto the finishing and the end thereof, when every man shall enter into his eternal presence and into his immortal rest". Who is this Eternal God, the greatest of all other deities? God the Father. On 8/4/2023 at 5:27 PM, theplains said: We never find the seventy or the organizing of other groups of 70 mentioned or commissioned again anymore by Jesus or the Apostles. The seventy were not even commissioned when Jesus reportedly visited the Nephites. Jesus instituted the principle based on the seventy elders of Exodus 24:1, 9, and Numbers 11:16. It is a sound biblically based commissioning. God did it before and he can do it again. On 8/4/2023 at 5:27 PM, theplains said: Yes. The Old Testament only had one living high priest at a time. Yes, but that was the old covenant, not the new covenant. On 8/4/2023 at 5:27 PM, theplains said: Jesus is our Great High Priest. That is why none of the Apostles identified themselves were high priests. They realized that the temple veil was torn by Christ, giving them and other disciples direct access to the Father. We don’t need Catholic priests or LDS high priests. Actually, Jesus as the Great High Priest made it so that we can all be High Priests and enter the holy of holies. The New Testament never says there is only one high priest forever. On 8/4/2023 at 5:27 PM, theplains said: Since the LDS church teaches Joseph Smith is a descendant of Lehi’s son Joseph, would he [Joseph Smith] also be judged by the 12 Nephite disciples? Or is this only for the Nephites who lived on the American continent before the Lamanites killed them? You have this wrong. Joseph Smith is a descendant of the Joseph that was sold into Egypt (in the Bible), not a descendant of Lehi's son Joseph. See 2 Nephi 3:6 and JST Genesis 50. It can get confusing since there are four Joseph's mentioned in 2 Nephi 3. This New Era article from February 2020 might help sort it out. 1
theplains Posted August 8, 2023 Posted August 8, 2023 On 8/6/2023 at 12:19 AM, InCognitus said: Actually, Jesus as the Great High Priest made it so that we can all be High Priests and enter the holy of holies. The New Testament never says there is only one high priest forever. When do LDS women become High Priests, entering the holy of holies? On 8/6/2023 at 12:19 AM, InCognitus said: You have this wrong. Joseph Smith is a descendant of the Joseph that was sold into Egypt (in the Bible), not a descendant of Lehi's son Joseph. See 2 Nephi 3:6 and JST Genesis 50. It can get confusing since there are four Joseph's mentioned in 2 Nephi 3. This New Era article from February 2020 might help sort it out. I figured Joseph Smith was said to be a descendant of Lehi’s son Joseph because of what Lehi said to his son in verses 23-24. I added some text in [] : "Wherefore, because of this covenant thou [Lehi is speaking to his son Joseph] art blessed; for thy [Joseph, Lehi’s son’s seed] seed shall not be destroyed, for they shall hearken unto the words of the book. And there shall rise up one mighty among them [in the seed through Lehi’s son Joseph], who shall do much good, both in word and in deed, being an instrument in the hands of God, with exceeding faith, to work mighty wonders, and do that thing which is great in the sight of God, unto the bringing to pass much restoration unto the house of Israel, and unto the seed of thy brethren".
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now