LDS doctrine teaches that we can become gods by temple marriage
The Church of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints believe that if you are married to your spouse in the temple, you will become gods and be eternally sealed to your spouse.
D&C 132:19-20, If married and sealed, you can become gods.
D&C 132:37, Are gods and will have multiple wives.
D&C 132:40-46, Will give Joseph Smith many wives.
D&C 132:62, Can marry many women.
What the Bible teaches
Isaiah 43:10-11, Before me there WAS NO GOD formed, neither shall there be after me. (God is the one and only, he was never a man under another god. God is eternal, with no beginning Deut 33:22.)
Isaiah 44:6, I am the first and I am the last and beside me their is NO GOD(He is the one and only God.)
Matt 22:30, For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God. (No marriage in Heaven period.)
Mark 10:6-9, But from the beginning of creation God made them Male and Female. (7) For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife. (8) and they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. (9) What therefore God hath joined together let not man separate.
Mark 10:11-12, And he saith unto them whosoever shall put away his wife, and marries another commits adultery against her. (If it is wrong on Earth it will be wrong in Heaven.)
What is the difference between God and god passingtheword? 'God' is capitalized as a titular pronoun, a specific title applied to a specific being. 'God' is not the same thing as 'god'.
LDS doctrine doesn't teach that anyone can become God, but that they can become gods. Like God, but not God.
Christ taught for us to be perfect as the Father is perfect... so that idea is supported in the Bible, whether or not you agree with the interpretation. I'll illustrate:
You have two sets of ingredients. One set of ingredients is vanilla ice cream, chocolate, and caramel. The other set of ingredients is vanilla ice cream, mustard, and pickles.
Using all ingredients in each set, make the 'perfect' sundae. Will the mustard/pickle sundae be as perfect as the chocolate/caramel sundae? Arguably, not even close.
LDS theology doesn't contradict the concept of one God.
how about this one.
"All those who are counted worthy to be exalted and to become Gods, even the sons of God, will go forth and have earths and worlds like those who framed this and millions on millions of others." (Journal of Discourses 17:143)
They are both capitalized.
The Book of Mormon does not claim to be the True Book. If you would look at it fir real, right in the prolog it states; "ANOTHER testimony to Jesus Christ" it tells you up front it is another accounting, a whitness, nothing more. No Comparison between them in truth.
no it claims to be the most correct.
"I told the brethren, [the twelve Apostles] that the Book of Mormon was the most correct book of any on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book." JSHC 7 Vol., 4:461
Besides, passingtheword, the Bible isn't a book. It's a collection of books... so which is the one true book?
I'm a Christian and I do not accept the Book of Mormon as the Word of God. In 2 Peter 1: 20, 21 it states, "No prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy did not come in ancient time by the will of man but by holy men of God who spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." Then Apostle Paul said in Galations 1:9 "If any man preach any other gospel to to you than that which you have received, let him be accursed."
But then - as has already been pointed out in that other thread - Pauls massive influence on the bible was quite possibly the false doctrine predicted by jesus himself.
Which book is the right one ? and if paul is taken out what does the remaining compound of books say. With pauls re-written and self-promoted story removed most of support for bigotry, moralising self righteousness and the unleashing of countless ignorant, script spouting morons are all condemned as wrong.
All the books combined create a single book.
The word Bible means book, google for origins and such.
They all agree from the first to last everyone with authors who have nothing in common except the God they serve and trust.
The Bible wasn't written as a single book, nor was it made into a single collection by a prophet or apostle. Nor does every scripture in the Bible agree with every other, there are contradictions.
'Bible' comes from the Greek 'biblia', meaning 'the books'. Be careful when you use Google, not everything on the internet is true.
Yes multiple perspectives plus translation equals the ability to push it aside if one truly desires so, but I don't think you're quite accurate in that they don't agree, much of the world would disagree, not just me. I don't make this stuff up, I study diligently.
Also, I know you googled it to wiki, but wiki only has part of the info, so caution should be taken in that regard, well said.
I didn't google it, I said you could. I have known for quite some time now.
Strongs concordance says book as book is a root of Bible, as well as do most all scholars familiar with both English and Greek.
There is a website dedicated to the Bible and dedicated to the translation of it into all the major languages.
The name of it? Biblos.com
Here is their own about page:
Further searching should verify all that.
And I don't use google as my primary search engine anyways, lol.
Thanks for being kind in your post.
A little deeper digging should show I'm not pulling your leg.
You really think the Bible doesn't contradict itself?
"There shall no man see me, and live."
"No man hath seen God at any time."
"And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
"They saw God, and did eat and drink."
like i said friend, your not writing in Hebrew or Greek, and i've been through this - and the accusations - and same quotes every time.
i don't have the time to repeat the apologetics witn you and it is off topic.
i have enough attacks at the moment will get to you soon.
yes, i don't need your post, i know what it says and they have websites to do it, that is a very minimal approach you bring.
but excellent effort, i'm sorry you disagree.
Jaxson, have you noticed that mormons always put down the bible in an attempt in make the BofM look good.
Here we go again, another ridiculous debate about nothing worth a crap. When they produce the so called Golden tablets and offer one drop of archaeological proof I will wipe the spit off the ground with my foot. Every LDS crazy person will soon be on here writing non-sense and if you believe in the Bible do not waste your time arguing with them. You can never prove a lie to those who seek no answers and only desire to prove the lies they keep. Lets study nothing and dwell in debate of the I am right because my brain washed soul depends on feeding you more fertilizer.
And the good obtained from your comment is?
Seems to me your ill and grouchy.
I think I'll stick to my methods, as that post sounds mean and i don't want to be like that.
I'm happy with my Lord Jesus in my heart, whether you like Him or not He brings happiness to everyone who loves Him.
And I Love Him dearly...
God bless, peace and love.
And I hope your day gets better.
Oh oh... And it's the Bible friend, by the way.
The book of mormon has incorrect geological information, and many others but start there and you'll find the truth about it.
Are you sure the BoM has incorrect information?
I'm not the one that determined it friend, most of the world knows.
Not sure the details, been awhile since I disproved it, google should lead to the descrepancy fairly quickly I believe.
I'll search myself if you can't find it, I don't mind. Just let me know.
What possible difference is there in the book of Mormon which is claimed to be a revelation from god and the larger part of your bible that Paul claimed was a revelation from god.
Both self proclaimed, both self promoting.
Trust me, I know about the supposed 'discrepancies'. It's always something like 'The BoM talks about X, but there was no X in the Americas at the time.'
This argument though, is lack of evidence. Just because we haven't found something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. About 80-90% of the anachronisms in the BoM have actually been shown to either have been true or plausible at this point.
Nope. Not even close!
Randy, I know you think you can just say something and that makes it true, but it doesn't work that way, unfortunately.
I noticed that you use that a lot. It isn't an argument, though. It's a logical fallacy simply because people can make up whatever they want and then make that statement in an attempt to support their claim. Sorry, it doesn't work.
I'm not using it as proof that the BoM is correct. What I'm saying is, 'Archaeologists haven't found X' isn't a valid counter-claim.
Yes, it is valid. But, what you said is not valid.
No, it's not valid.
The idea of religious text being inscribed on metal plates used to be an anachronism. Now it's not.
The use of iron used to be an anachronism. Now it's not.
The use of cement used to be an anachronism. Now it's not.
The idea of cultivated barley used to be an anachronism. Now it's not.
Depending on historical/archaeological anachronisms fails because historical/archaeological knowledge isn't complete.
Yes, your Strawman arguments are also logical fallacies. Deal with it.
They are absolutely not strawman arguments. These are criticisms that used to(some still are used ignorantly) be used as 'proof' that the BoM is false.
When archaeologists discover that something actually did exist at the time, the critics just ignore it and move on to the next idea on their list.
A strawman argument is misrepresenting an argument then disproving the misrepresentation.
Vector said the BoM has incorrect information.
I said that lack of information isn't the same as incorrect information, and backed that up with topics that used to fall under 'lack of information' but no longer do. If lack of information = incorrect information, then you would have to say that truth changes when we discover something new.
Anyone can use this argument and it helps you not, Jaxson. And it's not even an argument as TM pointed out. You have nothing but assertions to connect anything you've mentioned directly to the mythical Smith assertions. Nothing. You're wasting your time in this type of attempt. Find some other argument of substance in which you actually have something worth discussing.
Let's argue about bigfoot. This way we can both assert things there is no proof for. We'd probably get much further along in this type debate.
I'm not going to waste my time with you. I've already shown that iron was used at the time in the Americas, and that barley was cultivated.
You always come back with 'Prove that it was Joseph Smith's fictional people that were the ones doing that'.
Now you're getting smart, Jaxson! But you will indeed continue to waste your time, if not with me, then with some other bored realist. You cannot help yourself because you wish the hoax to be true. None of the things you've put out there in your desperate attempts at proving Smith was anything but a conman have been remotely connected to his outrageous claims. Not one thing.
So yes, you are indeed wasting your time. But I'm not, because I love a humorous debate. Thanks for the laughs!
I don't believe the Bible was ever meant to be taken literally and only serves a teaching tool. Obviously we don't put people to death for working on the Sabbath or gouge out our eye if we gauk at a hot chick or guy. I never read the Book of Morman, and since it's less than 200 years old, who knows what Joeseph Smith meant when he wrote it. I don't buy his notion that he had visions of an angel that directed him to a buried book of golden plates, inscribed with a Christian history of ancient American civilizations - the guy was wacked or a good con artist or both.
That was for Israel, BEFORE Jesus friend..
God never meant for the gentiles to follow that, which is the reason He gave it you, yes, you guessed it.. Israel.
Jesus came, fullfiled the Law, now you are under the Law of grace as determined by Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ came, died and rose, forgives sins and judges those who recieve salvation through His fulfilment of the Law and sacriface in order to impart it towards you or anyone else who accepts Him and He determines to grant it to. That is why He is the King of kings.
Those that have lived by faith in their belief that Jesus is Lord and Savior and look for his appearing will be raptured. Then what will be left is the God of Israel. God will be using Israel to demonstrate once again his power and that they are not a myth but was used to write Truth (the Bible) to the world at Israel's expense! Like days of old....this little nation will be God's tool to demonstrate What Truth Is and Where Truth Sits. That's why the Battle of Armageddon is not no where else but in the Valley of Jehosphat outside of the borders of Israel. The Book of Mormons and every other book out there wont tell you that because God did not inspire those works! The Church believe God's word by faith. The rest of the world will see this reality based on facts...which the Book of Revelations is there to say "I told you so". It happened to Israel 2000 years ago during Christ first Coming and it's about to happen to the Gentiles in regards to His Second. What a beautiful plan by the Supreme Being who made us all!
Like the eyes of an owl you see very clearly. The question you ask is a reluctant yes...it comes with much mourning and due to the title's much abuse, I prefer to be known as "minister of the prophetic word". It more clearly identifies who I speak for and the source.
Many have eyes but do not see driven by their pride...even in their religious pride they fail to see God's righteousness which is shortly to be performed per scripture. I call the spiritual observation "In All Fairness.....Such is the Lord's Righteousness". It is not based on nationalism, racialism, culturalism, traditionalism, politicism or any ism's at all. The bottom line is what is our view of Israel. And so it shall be the shoe on the other foot so to speak when the gentile world in it's unbelief shall do so against Israel nailing them to the cross (symbolic paraphrase) and then Truth will rise up from the ashes of Time and declare Itself. And the Grace of God would have run it's course as judgement would then take it's rightful place....at last and how sad the loss of souls.
The Word isn't going to allow unbelievers to destroy the writers of the Word which was used to tell unbelievers who their Creator is!! This is how I see the Bible restoring itself as Truth before men who using free will chose to think otherwise. For the record, the Book of Mormon has some serious issues that conflict with scripture. And while it may look good on the outside as a religion...doctrinally is way off base from the Bible and there are those who like it that way.
by JaxsonRaine5 years ago
I'm wondering how people feel about this subject around here.I truly believe that Mormons are sincere Christians, and that the majority of people who don't agree are simply ignorant to Mormon beliefs, or the Bible.I...
by Ahmad Usman3 years ago
===> Saint Barnabas & the Bible:Among the disciples of Jesus, Barnabas was a dynamic evangelist. He was a Jew from the tribe of Levite and was one of the earliest Christian disciples and convert to Christianity...
by haj33966 years ago
Is there a Third Coming of Jesus Christ. YES!!! Jesus comes the first time as a Baby. Jesus will come again to take us to Heaven, and he will come a third time to bring us back to each where we will...
by Julie Grimes5 years ago
Has these titles, which are often used to describe Christ's relationship with God, been taken out of context? Or do you honestly believe that Jesus Christ is God's son? I wonder, can a person still be a...
by passingtheword6 years ago
The bible says Isaiah 43:10,11 10 (the Lord says) â��You are my witnesses,â�� declares the LORD, â��and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I...
by maestrowhit8 years ago
Without delving into a lot of deep studying on the origins of words, I'll make a suggestion. Could it be that Jesus was redefining what God is when He called Himself the Son of Man?THink about it: He often referred to...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.