Political Crossfire Forums

Norrin Radd · Joined: 08 Aug 2005 Posts: 2930

cap'n queasy wrote:
There is only one God.

When the ineffable and unknowable Father is incarnate in human form, this is the Son. When He is present in spiritual form this is the Holy Spirit.

The Father is not a man from another planet who achieved godhood and recieved the Earth as His dominion.

According to the site YOU POSTED at the AT forum...........

Reptilian aliens, also known as the
"Anunnaki," created (invented) human beings
via genetic experiments, and they still rule
Earth to this day.

THE INFORMATION YOU POSTED CONTINUES...........

1/2 of human beings (about 3 billion) are organic portals--soulless beings that keep real human beings in line with the status quo, on agenda with the matrix control system. "Organic portals form the backbone of the Matrix’s social control infrastructure. They are what keeps society running in a state of preoccupation with the mundane. From cradle to grave, souled humans are pressured to stay with the status quo and not ask dangerous questions" (Montalk.net). Organic portals possess no true individuality or free will and are used (unknowingly) as agents by the Reptilians. You yourself may be an organic portal.

http://www.truthism.com/

How can you believe that crap?

Jeesh.

MJB · Joined: 14 Apr 2006 Posts: 594

cap'n queasy wrote: God the Father is not a man, from another planet, that is more spiritually advanced than we are.

From a Mormon website.

Quote: But the maxim is true of the Father as well. As the Prophet Joseph Smith said, "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret" (TPJS, p. 345). Thus, the Father became the Father at some time before "the beginning" as humans know it, by experiencing a mortality similar to that experienced on earth.
http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/emmain.asp?number=91

That's not Christianity so it doesn't belong in the Christianity forum. .

Oh... right!

So why did you bring it into the Christian forum then, if it, "doesn't belong?"

I quoted from the Bible.

So what's the deal? Can't handle biblical quotes?

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

MJB wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: God the Father is not a man, from another planet, that is more spiritually advanced than we are.

From a Mormon website.

Quote: But the maxim is true of the Father as well. As the Prophet Joseph Smith said, "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret" (TPJS, p. 345). Thus, the Father became the Father at some time before "the beginning" as humans know it, by experiencing a mortality similar to that experienced on earth.
http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/emmain.asp?number=91

That's not Christianity so it doesn't belong in the Christianity forum. .

Oh... right!

So why did you bring it into the Christian forum then, if it, "doesn't belong?"

I quoted from the Bible.

So what's the deal? Can't handle biblical quotes?

Not if they are presented in such a way as to distort their meaning and prove that God was a normal mortal man, on another planet in another universe that existed before before Creation, and who was able to become the Creator because of "spiritual advancement".

If you want to believe stuff like that fine, but if you present it as what the Bible teaches we are going to have argue about it.

No hard feelings, eh?

MJB · Joined: 14 Apr 2006 Posts: 594

cap'n queasy wrote: MJB wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: God the Father is not a man, from another planet, that is more spiritually advanced than we are.

From a Mormon website.

Quote: But the maxim is true of the Father as well. As the Prophet Joseph Smith said, "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret" (TPJS, p. 345). Thus, the Father became the Father at some time before "the beginning" as humans know it, by experiencing a mortality similar to that experienced on earth.
http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/emmain.asp?number=91

That's not Christianity so it doesn't belong in the Christianity forum. .

Oh... right!

So why did you bring it into the Christian forum then, if it, "doesn't belong?"

I quoted from the Bible.

So what's the deal? Can't handle biblical quotes?

Not if they are presented in such a way as to distort their meaning and prove that God was a normal mortal man, on another planet in another universe that existed before before Creation, and who was able to become the Creator because of "spiritual advancement".

If you want to believe stuff like that fine, but if you present it as what the Bible teaches we are going to have argue about it.

No hard feelings, eh?

:lol:

I presented plainly spoken biblical quotes. They say exactly what they say.

If you can't handle the foundational truth of Christianity that Jesus Christ is the Son of God - that's obviously your problem buddy!

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 22954

Quote: Oh... right!

So why did you bring it into the Christian forum then, if it, "doesn't belong?"

I quoted from the Bible.

So what's the deal? Can't handle biblical quotes?

You didn't quote any dcripture that says the Father is a man, or has a body...or any thing that even hints at that. You quoted one that backs up the belief in the Trinity. A Tri-unity.

MJB wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: MJB wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: God the Father is not a man, from another planet, that is more spiritually advanced than we are.

From a Mormon website.

Quote: But the maxim is true of the Father as well. As the Prophet Joseph Smith said, "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret" (TPJS, p. 345). Thus, the Father became the Father at some time before "the beginning" as humans know it, by experiencing a mortality similar to that experienced on earth.
http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/emmain.asp?number=91

That's not Christianity so it doesn't belong in the Christianity forum. .

Oh... right!

So why did you bring it into the Christian forum then, if it, "doesn't belong?"

I quoted from the Bible.

So what's the deal? Can't handle biblical quotes?

Not if they are presented in such a way as to distort their meaning and prove that God was a normal mortal man, on another planet in another universe that existed before before Creation, and who was able to become the Creator because of "spiritual advancement".

If you want to believe stuff like that fine, but if you present it as what the Bible teaches we are going to have argue about it.

No hard feelings, eh?

:lol:

I presented plainly spoken biblical quotes. They say exactly what they say.

If you can't handle the foundational truth of Christianity that Jesus Christ is the Son of God - that's obviously your problem buddy!

Well....do it in a Morman thread...because it isn't what Christians believe, and it is off the topic of the thread.

LetsGetReal · Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 5791 Location: Peoria, AZ

Go back to the mormon thread re-read it because you didn't win there and if this keeps going you wouldn't win here.

Mark 12:29 The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.

JESUS SAID THIS NOT SOME RELIGIOUS NUTJOB

Todd D. · Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:28 pm Post subject:

I wonder what John and LGR would think if there were more Mormons (or JW's, or Menonites, or Catholis) here, and they started telling them to "Stay out of the Christian threads, do it in Protestant threads, because that's not what Christians believe". I'm thinking you'd (rightly) feel pretty offended.

And MJB, why did you feel the need to de-rail a thread that had nothing to do with what you are talking about? The topic at hand was whether or not Mary had relations with Joseph and gave birth to children other than Jesus. Why you felt the need to chime in with "Well God had physical relations with Mary" is beyond me, but really decimated what I felt was a fairly interesting debate.

John Galt · Joined: 04 May 2004 Posts: 20985 Location: Minnesota

Islam "believes in Jesus" although not in the same way as Chrisitans. John has been cordial at least, but please everyone settle down. I do understand you don't want your thread derailed. In the Christian forum, however, there can be critiques of Christianity from Christians and non-Christians alike. And so, while I do understand you don't want your thread derailed, critiques from Mormons should be allowed to stay esp. since there is no Mormon sub-forum. Perhaps if there was such a call then we could venture down that path, but as it stands I have not heard of anyone wanting it. But even if there was a Mormon subforum they could still post here. But I will agree with John that God having carnal relations with Mary really has nothing to do with whether Mary had carnal relations with Joseph and attempts to move the thread off in a direction that it seems no one spare one want to is frowned upon.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 22954

Quote: I wonder what John and LGR would think if there were more Mormons (or JW's, or Menonites, or Catholis) here, and they started telling them to "Stay out of the Christian threads, do it in Protestant threads, because that's not what Christians believe". I'm thinking you'd (rightly) feel pretty offended.

Do you think that believing on polytheism is compatible with Christianity?

BTW...nobody told him to stay out of Christian thread....just to stop hijacking a thread and turning it into a Mormon bandwagon.

Mormons DO believe that they are the only true Christians and that if you are not a part of the Mormon Church...then you have been deceived. A Mormon doesn't believe that your baptism preformed in the Catholic Church was a valid baptism. Only a Mormon elder has the authority to baptize.

Edit: posted before seeing John Galts post.

Todd D. · Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:52 pm Post subject:

Quote: Do you think that believing on polytheism is compatible with Christianity
Not to derail the thread (further), but do you think that praying to Mary and believing that the Eucharist is the literal body of Jesus is compatible with Christianity? Do I think that the rapture is compatible with Christianity? I can't answer for you, but I can say that I don't believe the rapture is compatible with what the Bible teaches, that doesn't mean I don't consider you to be Christian, though.

Quote: BTW...nobody told him to stay out of Christian thread....just to stop hijacking a thread and turning it into a Mormon bandwagon.
cap'n queesy wrote: From a Mormon website.
Quote: But the maxim is true of the Father as well. As the Prophet Joseph Smith said, "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret" (TPJS, p. 345). Thus, the Father became the Father at some time before "the beginning" as humans know it, by experiencing a mortality similar to that experienced on earth.
http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/emmain.asp?number=91

That's not Christianity so it doesn't belong in the Christianity forum. .
Just sayin'

So.....Mary and Joseph....how about 'em?

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 22954

Quote: Not to derail the thread (further), but do you think that praying to Mary and believing that the Eucharist is the literal body of Jesus is compatible with Christianity? Do I think that the rapture is compatible with Christianity? I can't answer for you, but I can say that I don't believe the rapture is compatible with what the Bible teaches, that doesn't mean I don't consider you to be Christian, though.

None of these issues have anything to do with the nature or WHO God is. If you miss out on WHO God is...then you miss out on what Calvary and Jesus dying for our sins means. You miss the WHOLE Christian message.

I don't care if you pray to Mary...seems like a waste of time to me...but if you have recieved Christ (the real Christ) and been born again then it really doesn't matter a whole lot. Rapture? Who cares if people believe it is going to happen before of after a short 7 years time period? I think it's the truth...so I guess it's important in that aspect. But it's not a Savational issue....as many Mormon beliefs are.

Todd D. · Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:09 pm Post subject:

John wrote: Quote: Not to derail the thread (further), but do you think that praying to Mary and believing that the Eucharist is the literal body of Jesus is compatible with Christianity? Do I think that the rapture is compatible with Christianity? I can't answer for you, but I can say that I don't believe the rapture is compatible with what the Bible teaches, that doesn't mean I don't consider you to be Christian, though.

None of these issues have anything to do with the nature or WHO God is. If you miss out on WHO God is...then you miss out on what Calvary and Jesus dying for our sins means. You miss the WHOLE Christian message.

I don't care if you pray to Mary...seems like a waste of time to me...but if you have recieved Christ (the real Christ) and been born again then it really doesn't matter a whole lot. Rapture? Who cares if people believe it is going to happen before of after a short 7 years time period? I think it's the truth...so I guess it's important in that aspect. But it's not a Savational issue....as many Mormon beliefs are.
Fair enough, fair enough.

MJB · Joined: 14 Apr 2006 Posts: 594

John wrote: MJB wrote: :lol:

I presented plainly spoken biblical quotes. They say exactly what they say.

If you can't handle the foundational truth of Christianity that Jesus Christ is the Son of God - that's obviously your problem buddy!

Well....do it in a Morman thread...because it isn't what Christians believe, and it is off the topic of the thread.

Well there you have it! John has now actually said it!

That isn't what Christians believe?! :shock:

That is just brilliant John! :roll:

Jesus' claim of being the Son of God is why he was accused of blasphemy, why he was accused of being mad, and why he was accused of having a devil!

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 22954

MJB wrote: John wrote: MJB wrote: :lol:

I presented plainly spoken biblical quotes. They say exactly what they say.

If you can't handle the foundational truth of Christianity that Jesus Christ is the Son of God - that's obviously your problem buddy!

Well....do it in a Morman thread...because it isn't what Christians believe, and it is off the topic of the thread.

Well there you have it! John has now actually said it!

That isn't what Christians believe?! :shock:

That is just brilliant John! :roll:

Jesus' claim of being the Son of God is why he was accused of blasphemy, why he was accused of being mad, and why he was accused of having a devil!

Deceitful games aren’t going to help your agenda. The context of your conversation was polytheism.

MJB · Joined: 14 Apr 2006 Posts: 594

Todd D. wrote: And MJB, why did you feel the need to de-rail a thread that had nothing to do with what you are talking about? The topic at hand was whether or not Mary had relations with Joseph and gave birth to children other than Jesus. Why you felt the need to chime in with "Well God had physical relations with Mary" is beyond me, but really decimated what I felt was a fairly interesting debate.

EXCUSE ME?!

I said NOTHING about God having physical relations with Mary!

And we believe no such thing!

The question of this thread had to do with Jesus having siblings, and, I might point out to you that Lord Hargreaves, himself, also commented that, "that would only make them half-siblings if Joseph didn't father Jesus."

I might also point out to you that John asked perdidochas why it would be inconceivable for Mary to have more children, saying, "Jesus was 100% normal human being (physically speaking). It wasn't like He had magic blood or anything."

I said:

MJB wrote: Being a 100% normal human being, also means he had both a mother and a Father (as Jesus did).

The difference between Jesus and other men is that God was his Father, instead of a mortal man.

So you tell me, please, what I derailed and how that hijacked anything? After all - Jesus could only have half-siblings, if one of his parents had other biological children.

Or are there those here that are too genetically challenged to understand that?

MJB · Joined: 14 Apr 2006 Posts: 594

John wrote: BTW...nobody told him to stay out of Christian thread....just to stop hijacking a thread and turning it into a Mormon bandwagon.

Bible verses turning a thread into a Mormon bandwagon, huh? That's a first. :roll:

MJB · Joined: 14 Apr 2006 Posts: 594

John wrote: MJB wrote: John wrote: MJB wrote: :lol:

I presented plainly spoken biblical quotes. They say exactly what they say.

If you can't handle the foundational truth of Christianity that Jesus Christ is the Son of God - that's obviously your problem buddy!

Well....do it in a Morman thread...because it isn't what Christians believe, and it is off the topic of the thread.

Well there you have it! John has now actually said it!

That isn't what Christians believe?! :shock:

That is just brilliant John! :roll:

Jesus' claim of being the Son of God is why he was accused of blasphemy, why he was accused of being mad, and why he was accused of having a devil!

Deceitful games aren’t going to help your agenda. The context of your conversation was polytheism.

Deceitful games? Oh please!

Discussing the paternity of Jesus Christ, in relation to the possibility of him having siblings is deceitful?

Take note here. YOU are the one who is now trying to bring polytheism into this thing - not me.

Todd D. · Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 3:13 pm Post subject:

MJB wrote: Todd D. wrote: And MJB, why did you feel the need to de-rail a thread that had nothing to do with what you are talking about? The topic at hand was whether or not Mary had relations with Joseph and gave birth to children other than Jesus. Why you felt the need to chime in with "Well God had physical relations with Mary" is beyond me, but really decimated what I felt was a fairly interesting debate.

EXCUSE ME?!

I said NOTHING about God having physical relations with Mary!

And we believe no such thing!

The question of this thread had to do with Jesus having siblings, and, I might point out to you that Lord Hargreaves, himself, also commented that, "that would only make them half-siblings if Joseph didn't father Jesus."

I might also point out to you that John asked perdidochas why it would be inconceivable for Mary to have more children, saying, "Jesus was 100% normal human being (physically speaking). It wasn't like He had magic blood or anything."

I said:

MJB wrote: Being a 100% normal human being, also means he had both a mother and a Father (as Jesus did).

The difference between Jesus and other men is that God was his Father, instead of a mortal man.

So you tell me, please, what I derailed and how that hijacked anything? After all - Jesus could only have half-siblings, if one of his parents had other biological children.

Or are there those here that are too genetically challenged to understand that?
The topic at hand was never denied to be the supposed half-siblings of Christ, the debate was whether or not they came from Mary. If Mary had further children, they would de-facto be half-brothers and sisters of Jesus, and I don't think anyone denied that. What you suggested, or rather how John took that, was that Mary conceived in the "normal" way, only Jesus's father was an immortal. If I took that wrong, I apologize, but judging by how this thread has progressed since then, I would say that I wasn't alone in that interpretation.

In an attempt to bring it back to the topic at hand, I am curious: What is the LDS position on whether Mary had children after Jesus?

LetsGetReal · Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 5791 Location: Peoria, AZ

Mark 12:29 The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

LetsGetReal wrote: Mark 12:29 The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one

I think the problem is Mormon's subordinationist doctrine distort the concept of three separate states of being as meaning the existence of three separate beings.

Saying that these three separate beings act together is not equal to to oneness. It is still three gods, which is polytheism, with two of them being human beings that are spiritually advanced enough to reach godhood.