LDS beliefs and the Bible

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by Sola'lor

Except that the Bible has polygamy too.

HOW ABOUT THE LAW OF CHRISTS YOU CLAIM YOU BELIEVE?

[Sola'lor]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

HOW ABOUT THE LAW OF CHRISTS YOU CLAIM YOU BELIEVE?

You said the Bible not the Law of Christ.

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by Sola'lor

You said the Bible not the Law of Christ.

I SHOULD HAVE USED THIS VERSE FOR THE BIBLE

ISAIAH 34:16

"Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

LET ME ASK YOU AGAIN, DOES THE LAW OF CHRIST, WHERE NOT A SMALLEST STROKE OF A PEN WILL DISAPPEAR CONTAIN POLYGAMY?

IF NOT EVEN THE SMALLEST STROKE OF THE PEN WILL DISAPPEAR FROM THE LAW, HOW CAN IT BE INCOMPLETE FOR A NEED OF CONTINUOUS REVELATION?

fine, i made a mistake in quoting the bible, instead of christs Law for mat 5:18.

but that does not in anyway get you off the hook. as a matter of fact, you stated you believe mat 18:5. then why did you think it was incomplete and that continuous revelation was necessary?

I am tired of repeating the same things over and over, i do not wish to make enemies out of you, for our struggle is not of flesh and blood...

let us just accept that polygamy is not accepted in the Law of Christs, the law is to have your own husband instead of burning in passion. it did not saty co-own a husband.

You are free to use your extra biblical references, that is your right. That makes "a few" LDS beliefs as not biblically founded.

ok? let us stop this ... we can all have different Christs and remain friends ... besides i already presented the truth, my responsibility is done.

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

I said your prophet has a lot of wives.. is that not a fact?

Had. That's past tense. Or don't doesn't the college where you teach English require you to know the difference? Our current prophet has only one wife.

I said he had sex with countless virgins... oh? is there a specific number?

Of course there is a specific number. A specific number is not the same thing as "countless." It's actually the opposite.

I said his wolf hungry for sex, you can only hypocritically deny that you know

You're the one that made the statement. You prove it. Prove that Joseph Smith was what you have accused him of being. Was Abraham "wolf hungrry for sex"? Did you get married because you were wolf hungry for sex? If you did, please don't tell your wife. I'm sure she wouldn't be at all flattered to think that you just see her as a sex object.

off topic? i have highlighted the difference between the bible and LDS belief. polygamy!!

Yes, ad nauseum.

really? thats all you have to say huh?

No. I have a question for you, ***_bidg. Why the fixation with sex? Is sex all you think about? It sure seems like it.

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

Had. That's past tense. Or don't doesn't the college where you teach English require you to know the difference? Our current prophet has only one wife.

Of course there is a specific number. A specific number is not the same thing as "countless." It's actually the opposite.

You're the one that made the statement. You prove it. Was Abraham "wolf hungrry for sex"?

Yes, ad nauseum.

No. I have a question for you, ***_bidg. Why the fixation with sex? Is sex all you think about? It sure seems like it.

I CAN MAKE ALL THE GRAMMATICAL ERRORS IN THE WORLD KATSPUR... BUT I DO NOT SPEAK FOR MY SELF, I AM NOTHING BUT WORTHLESS. YOU CAN'T PUT ME DOWN ANY FURTHER....

THE GOOD THING IS THE WORDS THAT I POSTED ARE NOT MINE, THEY ARE FROM GOD, GOD DOES NOT ERR...I WOULD, BUT GOD WOULDN'T!

[Sola'lor]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

I SHOULD USED THIS VERSE FOR THE BIBLE

ISAIAH 34:16

"Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

LET ME ASK YOU AGAIN, DOES THE LAW OF CHRIST, WHERE NOT A SMALLEST STROKE OF A PEN WILL DISAPPEAR CONTAIN POLYGAMY?

When Joseph Smith recieved that revelation in the 1800s.

IF NOT EVEN THE SMALLEST STROKE OF THE PEN WILL DISAPPEAR FROM THE LAW, HOW CAN IT BE INCOMPLETE FOR A NEED OF CONTINUOUS REVELATION?

Becuase we don't know all of the Law. We know those parts that God reveales to us at any given time. It's not that it is incopmlete. The Law is complete and perfect. But God doesn't give us everything all at once. He gives us those things that will be to our best benefit.

For eample: The Law of the Gospel was in effect since the foundation of the world. THe People Moses lead out of egypt were supposed to have lived the Law of teh gospel. But they couldn't because they were not prepared. So God gave them the Law of Moses. Ths is still part of Christ's Law(Law of theGospel). Just different aspects were presented in different ways so that those people could get the most out of it.

Polygamy isn't something in the Law of the Gospel that says, "Everyone must live polygamy all the time, no exceptions." What I imagine the provision for polygamy is in Christ's Law is, "Polygamy may be allowed in certain circumstances at certain times."

So God may want to emphasze certain part of His law at certain times. This is why we need living prophets. Also if there is another part of His Law that we don't know yet(but is still part of His Law) he can reveal it to us through His prophets.

fine, i made a mistake in quoting the bible, instead of christs Law for mat 5:18.

but that does not in anyway get you off the hook. as a matter of fact, you stated you believe mat 18:5. then why did you think it was incomplete and that continuous revelation was necessary?

I don't believe it is incomplete. I believe it is perfect. But our understanding and knowledge of it is limited and imperfect. That's because we are imperfect beings. So God has given us living prophets to do what I described above.

I am tired of repeating the same things over and over, i do not wish to make enemies out of you, for our struggle is not of flesh and blood...

I'm actually one of those people who may disagree with someone in one thread and agree with someone on the next. I don't try to make enemies.

let us just accept that polygamy is not accepted in the Law of Christs, the law is to have your own husband instead of burning in passion. it did not saty co-own a husband.

If you want that limited view of God then that is your choice. But I accept that God can sometimes allow polygamy in His commandments for us.

You are free to use your extra biblical references, that is your right. That makes "a few" LDS beliefs as not biblically founded.

Well here we agree.

ok? let us stop this ... we can all have different Christs and remain friends ... besides i already presented the truth, my responsibility is done.

I understand you feel it is your responsibility to present what you believe to be the truth. Just as it is my responsibility to live by what I believe to be the truth.

I would still like to know where to get a perfect Bible though.

[Mestemia]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

I SHOULD HAVE USED THIS VERSE FOR THE BIBLE

ISAIAH 34:16

"Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

There is no way in hell that this verse is referring to the currently accepted 66 book Bible.
None.

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

IF NOT EVEN THE SMALLEST STROKE OF THE PEN WILL DISAPPEAR FROM THE LAW, HOW CAN IT BE INCOMPLETE FOR A NEED OF CONTINUOUS REVELATION?

Huh?
This question makes no sense.
Unless you take the unsupported/unsupportable position that it was complete d in the first place AND that you have the complete law.
Mighty big leap of faith there.
Especially given your lack of knowledge concerning the assembly of the current Bible.

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

I am tired of repeating the same things over and over,

I seriously doubt it.

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

let us just accept that polygamy is not accepted in the Law of Christs, the law is to have your own husband instead of burning in passion. it did not saty co-own a husband.

Can't.
At least i can't agree with you until you present something that not only follows the rules you set in place, but actually supports your claim.

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

You are free to use your extra biblical references, that is your right. That makes "a few" LDS beliefs as not biblically founded.

Opinion.
And an opinion that has not been supported with anything other than out of context verses, irrelevant verses, rule violating opinions of men, more of your own opinions.

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

ok? let us stop this ... we can all have different Christs and remain friends ...

Sure can.

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

besides i already presented the truth,

Thus proving the point that religious truth is much to subjective to be reliable for anything other than the ratification of your beliefs.

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

my responsibility is done.

*bite tongue really hard*

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by Sola'lor

Becuase we don't know all of the Law. We know those parts that God reveales to us at any given time. It's not that it is incopmlete. The Law is complete and perfect. But God doesn't give us everything all at once. He gives us those things that will be to our best benefit.

For eample: The Law of the Gospel was in effect since the foundation of the world. THe People Moses lead out of egypt were supposed to have lived the Law of teh gospel. But they couldn't because they were not prepared. So God gave them the Law of Moses. Ths is still part of Christ's Law(Law of theGospel). Just different aspects were presented in different ways so that those people could get the most out of it.

Polygamy isn't something in the Law of the Gospel that says, "Everyone must live polygamy all the time, no exceptions." What I imagine the provision for polygamy is in Christ's Law is, "Polygamy may be allowed in certain circumstances at certain times."

So God may want to emphasze certain part of His law at certain times. This is why we need living prophets. Also if there is another part of His Law that we don't know yet(but is still part of His Law) he can reveal it to us through His prophets.

This is your opinion, it is not biblically founded, if there are biblical conceptes tackled in this post above, we have had discussed it a million times.

As i said two contradicting concepts cannot be both true, two contradicting laws happening one after the other cannot be both true, especially if we remain faithfull to a sole basis.

You do not believe on a sinlge basis, I do. this is the reason why this exchange has been running along for the longest time....

I don't believe it is incomplete. I believe it is perfect. But our understanding and knowledge of it is limited and imperfect. That's because we are imperfect beings. So God has given us living prophets to do what I described above.

Our understanding may not perfect, but Christs law's that are written are perfect, if he said "have you own spouse" and not co-own" I will believe it as as such, unless the same bible will tell otherwise. but you have admitted that acceptance of polygamy is extrabiblical, and i refuse to acknowledge extrra biblical reference expecially if contradicts the law of Christs. look, having one wife, is different from having more than one.

If you want that limited view of God then that is your ch