Christians - the LDS christ

[Terrywoodenpic]

These attacks on mormon beliefs are very sad.
particularly the attacks from A E who seems to want answers to his biased questions,
but is not prepared to give answers himself, to defend his own position.
This is not a debate, it is a witch hunt.
And like all witch hunts it is led by bullies.
Nowhere has Christ wanted Christians to go out and condenm other Christians.
nor would he have done if there was such a person as a Christian in his day.
A little more Christian charity is in order.

Terry___________________________
Blessed are those who suffer in the cause of right, the kingdom of heaven is theirs.

 

[Endless]

These are not attacks, but always when questions get a little too close from comfort do the questions become seen as attacks - especially when you press for an answer and the only one that can be given if one that does not want to be given. It is only the weak in faith that fear the questioning and where the questioning leads.

 

[Aqualung]

This is the problem, i'm not interpreting it - i'm taking it for what it means, it is you that is interpreting it into what you think it should mean.

Any time somebody tries to take something for what it means, they are interpreting it. You are interpreting what it means that God was the literal father of christ and that christ was begotten through "natural" means. You are interpreting natural means to be sex. I am interpreting (correctly, since I know what he meant when he said it) that naturual means that it came through the joining of 21 female chromosomes with 21 male chromosomes (or whatever the number is) to create a cell which then grew within the woman's uterus until a baby was born.

Your protests that i am misinterpreting are unsupported because you cannot answer my questions that i put up with the quotes.

We DID answer your questions! :banghead3 You refuse to listen to our answers.

No, i think it is you that should stop doing the interpretation and just read it.

I did just read it, and I read it knowing the background and history of the quote. Unlike you.

Remember i am unbiased, i am not a Morman, it doesn't make one bit of difference to me whether i am wrong or not.

You obviously are biased. If you weren't, you would see how silly it is to try to tell me what I believe, and to try to tell me that your interpretation of the quote is more valid than Mr. McConkie's.

As to the Holy Spirit you are correct, i had not realised that Mormans create a difference between the Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit. The first of which is a being, the second of which i believe you call the essence of God? Something like that. The only difference in the Bible is that Ghost is used instead of spirit in old english (hence the term Holy Ghost) but in modern english we call a Ghost a spirit (hence the term Holy Spirit). In anycase, it doesn't take away from the fact that you cannot answer my questions concerning the quotes - take my last quote of the question that i put to Dan, can you answer it? I don't think so.

What was the question in the first place? As I recall, your question hinged around a) the fact that the Holy Ghost is a man (which he isn't) and b) your fallacious interpretation of a quote.

 

[Endless]

No Aqualung you never did answer my questions - barr something along the lines that God didn't have sex with Mary - but of course you don't know how he impregnated her, but it sure as anything mustnt have been something natural.
And no - you don't interpret everything you read. I read the quotes and read that they say that Jesus was the Father's literal son - there is no interpretation required, it means what it says.

Ok Aqualung, humour me and answer this:

"And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events,...Christ is the Son of Man, meaning that his Father (the Eternal God!) is a Holy Man." (Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce McConkie, page 742.)

Tell me SoyLeche, the above quote states that Jesus was conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events - in the same personal, real and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. Could you then explain how the normal course of events in the same way that a son is born to a Father, does not include sex?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

- especially when you press for an answer

This is a Christian debate.
in a debate amongst equals one does not press for answers.
it is normal to accept the answers given and go on from there.

and the only one that can be given if one that does not want to be given.

This is a biased opinion, why should any one pre-decide what an answer should be.
They plainly do not agree with your interpretation, it is their right to give their answers in their own way.

Terry_______________________________
Blessed are the merciful, mercy shall be shown unto them.

-

 

[Endless]

This is a Christian debate.
in a debate amongst equals one does not press for answers.
it is normal to accept the answers given and go on from there.

This debate incase you haven't noticed is about whether Mormans are Christians - therefore some argue for and some argue against. You are on the side that argues for but not everyone assumes we are equals.
And no, pressing for answers is when people don't give you the answers.

They plainly do not agree with your interpretation, it is their right to give their answers in their own way.

Very true, but i have a right as well and that right is to question their interpretations. Or would you deny me this right? If so on what basis?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

These attacks on mormon beliefs are very sad.
particularly the attacks from A E who seems to want answers to his biased questions,

So you have evidence for such an accusation?

 

[SoyLeche]

It says "or following" SoyLeche. Meaning you don't have to if you don't wanna. Is this really the definition you want to stick with? I didn't know I could find LDS understanding of this by merely looking at local dictionary.

It says "or following the religion...". I'm sure you know what an "or" statement means. A Christian doesn't have to be associated with any church. If somebody accepts Christ as their Savior they are a Christian. End of story.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Because what other way do we have to debate this?

Perhaps we can go one-on-one with this sometime. Given that we speak a different theological language, I am happy to let you merrily go on with what you believe and I to do the same, recognizing and affirming our differences.

 

[SoyLeche]

This debate incase you haven't noticed is about whether Mormans are Christians - therefore some argue for and some argue against. You are on the side that argues for but not everyone assumes we are equals.
And no, pressing for answers is when people don't give you the answers.


Very true, but i have a right as well and that right is to question their interpretations. Or would you deny me this right? If so on what basis?

You have asked the same questions many times now, and have received the same answers an equal number of times. You would think that eventually you would move on. Let's get back to where we started -- Mormons believe that Mary was a virgin when Christ was born. Now, please stop trying to tell us that we don't believe that. We do, I promiss.

 

[Quiddity]

It says "or following the religion...". I'm sure you know what an "or" statement means. A Christian doesn't have to be associated with any church. If somebody accepts Christ as their Savior they are a Christian. End of story.

Okie Dokie...

 

[Green Gaia]

These attacks on mormon beliefs are very sad.
particularly the attacks from A E who seems to want answers to his biased questions,
but is not prepared to give answers himself, to defend his own position.
This is not a debate, it is a witch hunt.
And like all witch hunts it is led by bullies.

Terry, let's be fair here. It was an LDS person who started the thread asking for a debate and called out AE. No one here from what I've read has personally attacked anyone else. If we don't allow ideas and beliefs to be debated, then we might as well close up shop. But personal attacks are not allowed, but I see none in this thread. If I've missed something or anything else that infringes upon the rules of the forum, please use the Report Button and report it. Thank you.

 

[Endless]

Mormons believe that Mary was a virgin when Christ was born. Now, please stop trying to tell us that we don't believe that. We do, I promiss.

I am well aware of what you believe SoyLeche, and you are correct because Mary was a Virgin when Christ was born. But what i am saying is that Morman descriptions of how Jesus was conceived cannot allow Mary still to be a Virgin - unless the normal course of events was not followed (as you believe) but then you contradict your own doctrine.
So you believe the truth, but cannot from your doctrines explain what was said. You have still to answer my last question - the one i put to you, Dan and Aqualung. It remains unanswered because it cannot be answered without agreeing that God had sex with Mary - the logical conclusion from that is that Mary could not have been a Virgin. Therefore in this section Morman doctrine is incorrect.

Personally i prefer the Biblical account of how the Holy Spirit (biblical definition, not Morman definition) caused Mary to become impregnated and so be a virgin with child. Is that so hard to accept - i find it far better than the morman doctrine of this father God in flesh coming down to do the job himself inline with the natural course of events. From what you believe SoyLeche you would be better believing the Biblical account, because it makes much more sense - and Mary is actually a Virgin at the end. Were those prophets falliable - did they make a mistake and there was something 'mystical' (ie unnatural) about the conception of Jesus?

 

[Endless]

Maize - Dan did imply i was an idot - apparently taking stuff off websites instead of reading it up for yourself makes you an idot I'm only messing btw, i didn't consider that a personal attack and neither should you.
Just a bit of fun folks...(peering out looking for a crowd gathering to stone me)

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

=Endless]This debate incase you haven't noticed is about whether Mormans are Christians -

What's wrong with the LDS christ? A_E keeps insisting that LDS and christians follow a different christ. Is this true? If so, which is following the "wrong" christ?

You are wrong the above was the original question. not whether LDS are christians.
most of the argument has been off topic.

Very true, but i have a right as well and that right is to question their interpretations. Or would you deny me this right? If so on what basis?

Sure can, If you are a good boy and ask nicely; but you still may not get the answers you want.

Terry, let's be fair here. It was an LDS person who started the thread asking for a debate

Quite true, But they have not debated the subjet as stated, just attacked LDS writings and beliefs.

Terry______________________
Blessed are the pure of heart, they shall behold their God.

 

[Aqualung]

Ok Aqualung, humour me and answer this:

The normal, natural course of events. The egg came down the falopian tubes, it was fertalized, it implanted in the wall of the uterus, divided and divided and divided, and then a baby popped out. The quote says nothing to effect that the sperm got into the uterus through penetration with a penis, which ejactulated semen into the vagina.

I read the quotes and read that they say that Jesus was the Father's literal son - there is no interpretation required, it means what it says.

There's lots of interpretation. Would I be able to say my father was my literal father even my father's sperm artificially fertilised my mother's egg? Yes. You're interpreting "literal son" to mean "a son who was created through sexual intercourse." I am interpreting it to simply mean "half the genes came from the father."

 

[Aqualung]

So you believe the truth, but cannot from your doctrines explain what was said. You have still to answer my last question - the one i put to you, Dan and Aqualung. It remains unanswered because it cannot be answered without agreeing that God had sex with Mary - the logical conclusion from that is that Mary could not have been a Virgin. Therefore in this section Morman doctrine is incorrect.

We have told you about a billion times that someone can be somebody else's literal father without having sex. I'm not exactly sure here, but is it possible that you are blind? That would explain why you haven't seen the answer.

 

[Aqualung]

BTW, endless, are you christian?

 

[Green Gaia]

Quite true, But they have not debated the subjet as stated, just attacked LDS writings and beliefs.

I don't understand... we shouldn't allow debates that question LDS writing and beliefs? Why should we single out this one group to not allow debate on?

 

[fromthe heart]

You are wrong the above was the original question. not whether LDS are christians.
most of the argument has been off topic.

Sure can, If you are a good boy and ask nicely; but you still may not get the answers you want.
Quite true, But they have not debated the subjet as stated, just attacked LDS writings and beliefs.

Terry______________________
Blessed are the pure of heart, they shall behold their God.

I'm sorry folks I feel the same as Maize...I read the thread and a lot of you are somewhat off the topic but the thread flow has seemed to still have the OP in question as such..I have seen where some questions posted have NOT been answered and this IS a place for debate so how about this: We remember to be more kind to each other and we try to answer questions posted to the best of our ability. Non-LDS please remember to keep in mind of who a real Christian is cuz a lot of you are starting to sound VERY UN-Christian. Same goes for the LDS Christians!


Let's try to just stick to the OP and be nice OK??