- This topic has 263 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
(I recently read a portion of a book about your church, because I felt like I didn’t really understand where you were coming from. That and the quote you shared from your church’s website helped clarify me on some things. I should make it clear that the Jesus I believe in is co-eternal and con-substantial with the Father, (John 8:58) and was never created (John 1:3).)
(What I find so funny about this is how we are really using the same point to create two different views. As you say, it is clearly stated that they were both responsible for Creation, which I totally agree with. You use this as a point to suggest that they are one being, and there are many many other scriptures in the Bible that you could also point to that also makes plain their unity, but there is also many many scriptures in the Bible that makes plain their distinction.)
(Indeed. Since the Scriptures do not contradict themselves, we must somehow make sense of these distinctions and unities, in order to know who Jesus truly is. I’d like to quote something in response to the text you brought from your church’s website, but since I don’t affiliate with a specific denomination of Christianity, I am going to quote the Nicene Creed. Besides laying out what the Scriptures present to us in a concise form, this is a very old piece of literature (dated back to around AD 381!) and fascinating to look at from a writer’s perspective. It’s laid out similar to a liturgy, or poetic style.)
I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.I believe in one, holy, catholic (meaning faithful or universal) and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come.Amen.
~~~
(Yeah, coupling with our belief that He has a physical body, we affirm the belief that God is specifically a man, because we believe that gender is a divine, sacred, and fundamental quality not only in body, but in spirit.)
Do you mind if I throw a few verses at you on this subject? *proceeds to do so without waiting for an answer* (John 4:24; Luke 24:39; Deut. 4:14-20; 1 Tim. 6:16)
(I’m really curious now what would happen if we did a deep dive in the Bible with the soul intent on finding every scripture related to this topic, and compiling them, and then discuss them all, that would take a lot of time, but it sounds fun.) Would you ever be interested in doing something like that?
(Yeah, that would take a lot of time and commitment, but if you’re serious about it I’d go for it! I would also like to see what would happen if we set aside other sources and focused solely on what the Scripture says.) Were you planning to use the Book of Mormon too? (If so, I’d have to decline, since I don’t believe it to be part of the inspired Word of God. Again, I don’t mean to offend; I respect your dedication to the truth.)
(Such beautiful truth you’ve spoken, I wouldn’t change a thing of what you’ve said! We may differ on what it looks like, but we ultimately agree that our God and our Savior gave everything for us with an infinite love and humility.)
(Yes, amen!)
(Sure the theme was a little more mature, but that’s not what set it apart, but instead how silent it was the whole time about the subject, letting it simply be clearly seen by the viewers, letting them contemplate it for themselves. That was probably a rant you didn’t need, but I think it’s a good example on what your talking about?)
(Ok ok…I guess since you bore with my rant I must bear with yours. 😂 JK It did relate to what I was talking about. Theme has to be held to the “show and not tell” rule just like description. Even Jesus did this with His parables. He knew that showing the truth through a character’s actions [or lack of them] would help His listeners remember and relate to it.)
(Sounds interesting, I’ll have to look into that one! Reminds me of Mistborn, where the Lord-Ruler was an evil tyrant, but after finally overthrowing and killing him, a thieving crew has to suddenly rebuild a nation, and upon taking up the responsibility, they have to ask if the Lord-Ruler was really doing more good than harm, holding everything together. Questioning if he was actually a good guy, simply forced into the position of leadership where he had to choose to be oppressive for the greater good. I don’t think Sanderson was definitively put in his opinion here either, instead letting the readers question for themselves.)
(I’ve heard of Mistborn, but never read it.) What kind of fantasy is it? (dark, epic, etc)
(Thanks? Yeah, whenever I come across some abstract concept regarding life an reality, and I’ve judged to to be true, my first thought is how it applies to God’s greater Plan of Happiness, then my second thought is how I could turn this into some cool feature in my worldbuilding. I think exploring themes through characters and their journeys is probably the best way to do it. We are all humans, and we are social creatures, built to understand and empathize with each other, seeing someone else experience pain and suffering gets us to feel things, and can have an impact on us. I try to do that to, but I’m still not great with my characters, other than coming up with cruel and unusual ways to torture them…)
(Aha, the evil author emerges…) 😆 Why is it so satisfying to create a character and make it do whatever we want?
(I would would say that if you really want to do this for God, ask Him about it sincerely. If this is what He wants for you, then He will provide you with the inspiration to write. Something I like to think about is letting Him become the author of our story, give our will to Him entirely. If your able to write with the Spirit, then your story will hold that, and you will have an impact. I hope that is at all helpful, I must say I relate in many ways.)
(Thanks…that’s really good advice. I do find that my writing goes better when I pray about it, and God certainly will bless what we let His Spirit lead.)
Will we really relish in our relishing research on relish?🤣
(The research of relish would not be very relishing to me; the poor relish will have to wait until some other relish-relishing researcher decides to relish in some research on relish. 🤣 [This is somehow reminding me of a tongue twister.])
If I truly meant everything, what degree of concept would that include?
(Every degree, naturally. Which gives me doubt as to whether or not your first statement was actually true..🧐😄)
(I feel like when I look at one, it is hard not to mirror its face in response 😅😂)
😂
(In the same light of the relish question) If tomatoes are a fruit, is ketchup technically a smoothie?
Sure, why not? (Although I’ve never heard of vinegar as an ingredient in smoothies….*gags*)
(Happy Easter by the way! I hope this week has been one of contemplating our relationship with Him, what He did for us in the Garden and the Cross, and He’s resurrection on the third day!) How did we get from that to a bunny with colorful eggs?
(Happy Easter! Amen. Well, eggs represent new life, but chocolate and bunnies and candy hunts are rather distracting.)
He must increase, but I must decrease.
(I recently read a portion of a book about your church, because I felt like I didn’t really understand where you were coming from. That and the quote you shared from your church’s website helped clarify me on some things. I should make it clear that the Jesus I believe in is co-eternal and con-substantial with the Father, (John 8:58) and was never created (John 1:3).)
(Yep, no confusion here, I completely understand and respect that. It is a view that puts great emphasis on the ineffability of God, how He can be many and all places, and He doesn’t need to fit in any logical box we give Him, for we shall not tempt the Lord our God. We also put great emphasis on close to the same idea, but we believe that the Bible (and yes, addition scripture) is there, that we might know Him (which yes, I mean both of them, but as Christ says: If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. John 14:7) to the extent that we are able. As regards to the two very important verses you’ve noted, I do have to clarify a few things we believe. Indeed Christ is the I AM, God the Creator, our Lord and Savior, but not God the Father, this may seem very confusing, to which I apologies. I will specifically have to ask for forgiveness for not making it clear our belief in Christ’s deity, as it is something we do hold very dear. Christ’s deity before and after His reresection is in full force, and as I’ve mentioned before, He did create the Heavens and the Earth, indeed all things, but under the direction of God the Father. When we do simply say ‘God’ we are referring to God the Father, but we don’t remove Christ from Godly status, though we believe them to be two distinct beings, but we are not polytheistic, as we only worship one God, but do so through the Son, as God the Father glorifies His name in the Son. This may sound like a lot of different ideas, but I promise it all makes sense.😅 I do want to say that I don’t believe in a different Jesus. Yes, I don’t necessarily believe in the same mechanical nature in-between Him and the Father, but I believe in the Christ who choose to descend from Heaven with an infinite love, mercy, and humility, to save us from ourselves, because we are unable to reach any degree of perfection in our finiteness in comparison to Him, and yet He knows us at such a deep personal level far beyond how we could ever know ourselves, knowing our pain, sin, and heartache, and loving us despite our abominable wickedness, offering the way and the light, for He is the way and the light, if we only turn to Him. I am Christian to the core, and I don’t think many realize how Christian we really are, and how rooted our beliefs are in the Bible, and how we put all our focus on our Savior, with all our hearts, minds, and strength.)
Also out of curiosity, what book where you reading? Is it from the Church, or elsewhere?(It’s basically a 200 year meme of how comically misunderstood our church is because of biased literature and other content, so I’m just curious as to what it’s specifically clarifying and where it’s coming from if that’s ok.)
(Indeed. Since the Scriptures do not contradict themselves, we must somehow make sense of these distinctions and unities, in order to know who Jesus truly is. I’d like to quote something in response to the text you brought from your church’s website, but since I don’t affiliate with a specific denomination of Christianity, I am going to quote the Nicene Creed. Besides laying out what the Scriptures present to us in a concise form, this is a very old piece of literature (dated back to around AD 381!) and fascinating to look at from a writer’s perspective. It’s laid out similar to a liturgy, or poetic style.)
(Yeah, I’ll also mention that when it comes to using the phrase “the Scriptures do not contradict themselves”, we agree, but note that the Bible specifically has gone through countless retranslations and alterations for centuries whether by mistake or intention. These are the faults of man, not of God. Thus we say “We affirm the truths of the Bible as far as it is correctly translated”. Joseph Smith, the first prophet and founder of our Church has actually through priesthood authority and revelation has provided corrections to many verses throughout the Bible. We leave the Bible the same (KJV), but have those corrections provided in an appendix for those who want to dig a little deeper (And no, this isn’t a full reconstruction of the Bible, just a few clarifications here and there. The scriptures you’ve provided earlier for example are not touched by this, but are simple truths we also affirm). Forgive that tangent, because what you’ve said is very true regardless, the scriptures still seem to bear these confusions, and thus must be studied diligently and with direction with the spirit to find a true understanding. That’s a beautiful piece of writing, and I agree with it, save for a few points we’ve discussed, but that’s beside the point. I actually think it’s really cool that you don’t affiliate with any church or denomination at this time, because that means that you haven’t settled into being told how to think, but instead study the Bible yourself, and therefore are far more able to actively seek out the truth with a greater earnestness and desire. I know that wherever that takes you, it will be closer to Him!)
Do you mind if I throw a few verses at you on this subject? *proceeds to do so without waiting for an answer* (John 4:24; Luke 24:39; Deut. 4:14-20; 1 Tim. 6:16)
(Don’t mind at all! Great verses!) Could you elaborate on your thoughts on these verses? Do you feel that they are at all problematic with what I’ve said, or are you trying to make some other point? (I will mention that JST (Joseph Smith Translations) does elaborate on Tim 6:16, but even if it didn’t, the verse I still doesn’t seem problematic, if that is your intension.)
(Yeah, that would take a lot of time and commitment, but if you’re serious about it I’d go for it! I would also like to see what would happen if we set aside other sources and focused solely on what the Scripture says.) Were you planning to use the Book of Mormon too? (If so, I’d have to decline, since I don’t believe it to be part of the inspired Word of God. Again, I don’t mean to offend; I respect your dedication to the truth.)
(Right, I did explicitly say the Bible. I can do the Book of Mormon too, and D&C and Pearl of a Great Price also gives really interesting prospective on this topic as well, but I was saying just the Bible. I would do it for additional scripture as well, but I wanted to do it uniquely for the Bible both to have open discussion with other Christians, and to show how our beliefs are biblical. Perhaps that might sound like a biased entry, but I’ve already studied the Bible before, and have found the personal conviction of this already, I simply want to compile it to see the big picture with a little more exactitude. As for your thoughts on the Book of Mormon, I understand and respect that wholeheartedly, your commitment to the Bible is a beautiful thing.) Though sense you brought it up, I do have to ask, why? It’s completely fair that you don’t have a belief in the Book of Mormon right now, as you have not read it nor I assume prayed about it, but why so quick to dismiss the idea that God might give more knowledge and prophecy to His children as they are ready? Is that not what He did in the form of Christ’s ministry, fulfilling the law of Moses, and giving us a higher law to live by? Is there scripture in the Bible that suggests the something like the Book of Mormon isn’t God’s word? (Please know that this is in no way an attack either, I completely respect you beliefs and dedication to the truth also, but I just have to ask as it was brought up.)
(Ok ok…I guess since you bore with my rant I must bear with yours. 😂 JK It did relate to what I was talking about. Theme has to be held to the “show and not tell” rule just like description. Even Jesus did this with His parables. He knew that showing the truth through a character’s actions [or lack of them] would help His listeners remember and relate to it.)
(That’s an excellent point! Jesus spoke through parables to teach people at their level. For those who were able to discern His deeper meaning, they were able to find greater understanding and conviction of the truth. For those who did not yet see the deeper meaning, they were able to have a good story, and find a desire to be near their Savior, whether or not they had any understanding of Him and what He taught, they had something memorable to associate the good feelings they felt being around Him.)
(I’ve heard of Mistborn, but never read it.) What kind of fantasy is it? (dark, epic, etc)
(It’s epic fantasy, though it is on the darker end of his writing. I do recommend.) Have you read anything from Sanderson?
(Aha, the evil author emerges…) 😆 Why is it so satisfying to create a character and make it do whatever we want?
(In an odd way, I feel like it is because we like our characters, and we want them to grow… that or maybe writing is the outlet of the dark creepy corner of our minds.😂)
(Thanks…that’s really good advice. I do find that my writing goes better when I pray about it, and God certainly will bless what we let His Spirit lead.)
(Absolutely! It is something I’ve been pondering a lot lately of trying to make Him truly the center of my life, in every thought, step, and action. Though I love Him, and He is foundational in my life, I’ve struggled with making Him the foundation of my life.)
(The research of relish would not be very relishing to me; the poor relish will have to wait until some other relish-relishing researcher decides to relish in some research on relish. 🤣 [This is somehow reminding me of a tongue twister.])
How much Relishing Research would a Researcher Research on Relish?🤣
(Every degree, naturally. Which gives me doubt as to whether or not your first statement was actually true..🧐😄)
(Hmm, yes, if it was truly every degree of everything, that would truly be the set of all sets contained on this hotdog, which is a set that contains itself, which leads to Russel’s paradox. So the validity of the statement isn’t only impossible, but contradictory🧐🧐🧐)
Sure, why not? (Although I’ve never heard of vinegar as an ingredient in smoothies….*gags*)
Have you head of tomatoes as an ingredient in smoothies?
(Happy Easter! Amen. Well, eggs represent new life, but chocolate and bunnies and candy hunts are rather distracting.)
(Very true.)
If two mind readers read each other’s mind, what mind would actually be read?
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
@anyone
Is my red different from your red?
If ‘I have’ can be abbreviated as ‘I’ve’ and ‘have not’ can be abbreviated as ‘haven’t’, can ‘I have not’ be abbreviated as ‘I’ven’t’?
If no one has met a time traveler yet, does that mean time travel isn’t possible, or at least will never be achieved by humans?
If our knees bent the other way, what would chairs look like? (Chatgbt gave me this one🤣🤣🤣)
What does it have in it’s pocketses?
What are taters precious?
What is the answer to life, the universe, and everything?
What are the last 8 digits of pi?
Is .999… equal to 1?
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
- Rank: Chosen One
- Total Posts: 8156
Can I just say that I love this forum? (I love reading through the questions, responses, and the friendly debates on here. Maybe it’s just because I’ve been taking Logic this year and it has been my favorite class, 😂, but I still will say that I love this forum)
What are the last 8 digits of pi?
(the last 8 digits of Pi cannot be determined because Pi is an irrational number, thus cannot be expressed as the ratio of two integers (unlike something like, say, 1/2) thus it can never be completely divided out, thus leaving the final digits forever unknown)
(i may be way off, lol, math isn’t my strong suit, I just had to get involved in this a little bc it looks like so much fun 🤣 and I wanted to attempt to answer said question 😜)
@freedomwriter76
Can I just say that I love this forum? (I love reading through the questions, responses, and the friendly debates on here. Maybe it’s just because I’ve been taking Logic this year and it has been my favorite class, 😂, but I still will say that I love this forum)
(I’m so happy you enjoy it! Yeah, logic is so fun!😁)
(the last 8 digits of Pi cannot be determined because Pi is an irrational number, thus cannot be expressed as the ratio of two integers (unlike something like, say, 1/2) thus it can never be completely divided out, thus leaving the final digits forever unknown)
(A+! Though when you say ‘leaving the final digits forever unknown’ that suggests the assumption that the final digits do in fact exist. To suggest that there is a final digit must also suggest that it is finite in length, although, that statement isn’t as straightforward as one might think, in fact, it may not even be true depending on your axioms. This actually gets into set theory, which I won’t bore you with unless your interested.)
I’m curious now, what are your thoughts on the next question?
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
(idk if anyone asked this question already)
True or false, what is your favorite color of the alphabet?
"does anyone have any good ideas?"
"Oh yeah, but none for this"(I asked a very similar question when I first made this forum.)
9, but what does it smell like?
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
(Lol, I figured somebody would have asked it already)
Smell? Oh dear, how to answer that one? 🤔
"does anyone have any good ideas?"
"Oh yeah, but none for this"- Rank: Chosen One
- Total Posts: 8156
(I’m so happy you enjoy it! Yeah, logic is so fun!😁)
(Of course!!! Haha, I didn’t expect it to be fun XD But it is!!!)
(A+! Though when you say ‘leaving the final digits forever unknown’ that suggests the assumption that the final digits do in fact exist. To suggest that there is a final digit must also suggest that it is finite in length, although, that statement isn’t as straightforward as one might think, in fact, it may not even be true depending on your axioms. This actually gets into set theory, which I won’t bore you with unless your interested.)
(ah, true XD (tbh, I got lost on that last sentence or so tho 0_o 😂) I suppose a better way to put it is to say that the final digits don’t exist, since Pi is, in fact, infinite and an irrational number)
I’m curious now, what are your thoughts on the next question?
Is .999… equal to 1?
(oh gosh…idk about this one XD my brain is already tired just thinking about it 🤣 I would again say no, although it is a rational number because it can be expressed as a ratio between two integers (999 and 1,000), 1 is still of a higher value than .999, which could, in theory, continue on for infinity if certain things were done to it, such as division. but again, I may be way off 😂 I don’t like the math…although I’m not too bad at it XD)
Why does 4+4=8?
@freedomwriter76
(ah, true XD (tbh, I got lost on that last sentence or so tho 0_o 😂) I suppose a better way to put it is to say that the final digits don’t exist, since Pi is, in fact, infinite and an irrational number)
(Yep, what’s interesting is that every digit within pi is uniquely defined and has a place. Yet there is an infinite number of them, so if we think of this in terms of ordinals, we could go an infinite number of digits down to some digit position k. We realize that k is a unique digit, but there is the digit following position k, call it k+1, that also must be a unique digit, and we’ve already established that this is an infinite number of digits down, but it isn’t the last digit. That may seem confusing, ordinals are weird, and needed to be treated with caution.)
(oh gosh…idk about this one XD my brain is already tired just thinking about it 🤣 I would again say no, although it is a rational number because it can be expressed as a ratio between two integers (999 and 1,000), 1 is still of a higher value than .999, which could, in theory, continue on for infinity if certain things were done to it, such as division. but again, I may be way off 😂 I don’t like the math…although I’m not too bad at it XD)
(Well, we may need to think in terms of limits if you want to think about it as being expressed as a ratio. We would have a sequence of 9/10, 99/100, 999/1000, 9999/10000, … Which yes never reaches 1, but approaches 1 as we approach infinity, so with limits, we can define it as 1. However, the limit of some function isn’t always the same as the actual value, but there are other methods we can use. A very simple trick that might convince you is consider .333…, or 1/3. Now multiply this by 3, we get .999…, or 3/3, or 1. There are more rigorous ways of proving this though. This is the case with the traditional set of axioms for the real numbers, however, some like to use a different set of axioms called the surreal numbers, and using this system, .999… isn’t equal to 1, but instead an infinitesimal less than 1.)
Why does 4+4=8?
(Believe it or not, there is some real depth to this question. This gets into the philosophy of mathematics, as well as the deep baseline broken down rigor to the highest degree. Bertrand Russell and Alfred Whitehead, two German mathematicians, worked together to try building the entirety of mathematics with the same set of rigorously defined axioms, pioneering what is now called set theory. They decided that if they were going to do something like this, they needed to define logic at the most fundamental level, if a statement is not true, then it is false, if it is not false, then it is true. With ground logic, they spent 300 pages to prove that 1+1=2, with the footnote ‘The above statement is occasionally useful’. Unfortunately, their decade journey to unify mathematics ended up having many problems shown by another mathematician Kurt Gödel, and Russell himself. These holes have been patched to some extent, but the damage has been done where the entirety of mathematics can’t quite be unified, at least with our current level of understanding.)
What does this mean? Is mathematics invented or made? Is logic itself paradoxical? Does God live in a domain beyond mathematics and logic, or does He live with a higher law that shows how these paradoxes aren’t paradoxical at all?
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
- Rank: Chosen One
- Total Posts: 8156
(Yep, what’s interesting is that every digit within pi is uniquely defined and has a place. Yet there is an infinite number of them, so if we think of this in terms of ordinals, we could go an infinite number of digits down to some digit position k. We realize that k is a unique digit, but there is the digit following position k, call it k+1, that also must be a unique digit, and we’ve already established that this is an infinite number of digits down, but it isn’t the last digit. That may seem confusing, ordinals are weird, and needed to be treated with caution.)
(Huh, interesting! 😁)
(Well, we may need to think in terms of limits if you want to think about it as being expressed as a ratio. We would have a sequence of 9/10, 99/100, 999/1000, 9999/10000, … Which yes never reaches 1, but approaches 1 as we approach infinity, so with limits, we can define it as 1. However, the limit of some function isn’t always the same as the actual value, but there are other methods we can use. A very simple trick that might convince you is consider .333…, or 1/3. Now multiply this by 3, we get .999…, or 3/3, or 1. There are more rigorous ways of proving this though. This is the case with the traditional set of axioms for the real numbers, however, some like to use a different set of axioms called the surreal numbers, and using this system, .999… isn’t equal to 1, but instead an infinitesimal less than 1.)
(Lol, never thought about it that way! XD (i love the thought you put into all of these answers!!!))
(Believe it or not, there is some real depth to this question. This gets into the philosophy of mathematics, as well as the deep baseline broken down rigor to the highest degree. Bertrand Russell and Alfred Whitehead, two German mathematicians, worked together to try building the entirety of mathematics with the same set of rigorously defined axioms, pioneering what is now called set theory. They decided that if they were going to do something like this, they needed to define logic at the most fundamental level, if a statement is not true, then it is false, if it is not false, then it is true. With ground logic, they spent 300 pages to prove that 1+1=2, with the footnote ‘The above statement is occasionally useful’. Unfortunately, their decade journey to unify mathematics ended up having many problems shown by another mathematician Kurt Gödel, and Russell himself. These holes have been patched to some extent, but the damage has been done where the entirety of mathematics can’t quite be unified, at least with our current level of understanding.)
(Wow, that’s so deep! Math really does have a lot of holes, but I think when we have a Biblical worldview it helps us to understand where it really came from, even though I do hate so much of it, XD, I still appreciate the fact that God made ways for us to understand his creation a little bit more😊)
What does this mean? Is mathematics invented or made? Is logic itself paradoxical? Does God live in a domain beyond mathematics and logic, or does He live with a higher law that shows how these paradoxes aren’t paradoxical at all?
(I don’t know if I trust myself to answer these questions! 🤣 But I shall do my best. I believe mathematics were already made by God as a way for us to examine, test, record, and observe the world around us, as a way to see his handiwork and to witness his design (1+1=2 because God has ordained it to be so.) Logic is not paradoxical because when we begin to understand and study logic, we see it in the world around us, but it is important to note that we cannot understand everything because God thinks much differently than we do and we can never fully understand what he knows (Isaiah 55:8-9). God created math and logic and thus will use them in his creation, however, God does have a higher power, and thus has the power to break the laws of nature on occasion to, say, perform miracles as he chooses. Logic and Mathematics are not paradoxes because God has created them, God is a perfect designer, and God cannot contradict himself. (2 Tim. 2:13))
(do please keep in mind that this is my first time ever doing something like this…answering these questions and everything XD I’ve never gotten into a debate or answered questions like these, lol, so please have compassion 😂 I am merely giving my thoughts, not trying to say I have the EXACT answers XD)
(i’m going blank on a good question to ask……XD)
@freedomwriter76
(Huh, interesting! 😁)
(Lol, never thought about it that way! XD (i love the thought you put into all of these answers!!!))
(Thanks! Yeah, I tend to rant, especially in regards to things like this😅)
(Wow, that’s so deep! Math really does have a lot of holes, but I think when we have a Biblical worldview it helps us to understand where it really came from, even though I do hate so much of it, XD, I still appreciate the fact that God made ways for us to understand his creation a little bit more😊)
(I agree, when you really take the time with it, exhaust all logic, you find that the only way it really makes sense is with a divine and loving Creator.)
(I don’t know if I trust myself to answer these questions! 🤣 But I shall do my best. I believe mathematics were already made by God as a way for us to examine, test, record, and observe the world around us, as a way to see his handiwork and to witness his design (1+1=2 because God has ordained it to be so.) Logic is not paradoxical because when we begin to understand and study logic, we see it in the world around us, but it is important to note that we cannot understand everything because God thinks much differently than we do and we can never fully understand what he knows (Isaiah 55:8-9). God created math and logic and thus will use them in his creation, however, God does have a higher power, and thus has the power to break the laws of nature on occasion to, say, perform miracles as he chooses. Logic and Mathematics are not paradoxes because God has created them, God is a perfect designer, and God cannot contradict himself. (2 Tim. 2:13))
(I really like that view, and I love those verses! Personally though I feel that God did not make mathematics, but uses it as a tool, bearing a perfect mastery over it to put fourth creation. Although I’ve been talking about stuff like this with @felicity for a while now, and I pointed out basically the observable real proof that our logical understanding of reality has a very particular limit in that of causality, and how we are trapped in that, and how God must exist outside of that. But I still personally believe that God works with mathematics and logic, though I feel that it is of a far higher law far beyond our mortal comprehension. I would actually use the two verses you provided for this point actually. Isaiah 55:8-9 talks about how the Lords thoughts and ways are higher than ours, but they are still thoughts and ways, or a higher law. Same with (2 Tim. 2:13), He cannot deny Himself, that is a higher law He follows. Perhaps I’m wrong, but I believe Him to be a God of natural law, not to hinder or lessen Him, but to accentuate His perfect divinity and glory. No worries about having the perfect answer, it is always amazing to hear the testimonies of others, and we don’t need to be aligned with each other in belief, we just need to be in align with Him, which indirectly will lead us to better align with each other in faithfulness, humility, and love. Thanks for the awesome thoughts!)
(i’m going blank on a good question to ask……XD)
(No worries, I got one😂) How would you feel if I provided a proof that 1=2, and would you believe me?
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
(As regards to the two very important verses you’ve noted, I do have to clarify a few things we believe. Indeed Christ is the I AM, God the Creator, our Lord and Savior, but not God the Father, this may seem very confusing, to which I apologies. I will specifically have to ask for forgiveness for not making it clear our belief in Christ’s deity, as it is something we do hold very dear. Christ’s deity before and after His reresection is in full force, and as I’ve mentioned before, He did create the Heavens and the Earth, indeed all things, but under the direction of God the Father. When we do simply say ‘God’ we are referring to God the Father, but we don’t remove Christ from Godly status, though we believe them to be two distinct beings, but we are not polytheistic, as we only worship one God, but do so through the Son, as God the Father glorifies His name in the Son. This may sound like a lot of different ideas, but I promise it all makes sense.😅)
(I did realize some of these things as I researched more about your church’s theology. But thanks for the clarity! So you only worship one God (the Father), through Jesus (who is a God, but not the Father). And you don’t worship Jesus, because you are not polytheistic. Did I get it straight? 😅 .)
(I do want to say that I don’t believe in a different Jesus. Yes, I don’t necessarily believe in the same mechanical nature in-between Him and the Father, but I believe in the Christ who choose to descend from Heaven with an infinite love, mercy, and humility, to save us from ourselves, because we are unable to reach any degree of perfection in our finiteness in comparison to Him, and yet He knows us at such a deep personal level far beyond how we could ever know ourselves, knowing our pain, sin, and heartache, and loving us despite our abominable wickedness, offering the way and the light, for He is the way and the light, if we only turn to Him. I am Christian to the core, and I don’t think many realize how Christian we really are, and how rooted our beliefs are in the Bible, and how we put all our focus on our Savior, with all our hearts, minds, and strength.)
(Your dedication and acknowledgement of such things is encouraging. But logically, if you believe that Jesus is a created God, but not the Father, and I believe that Jesus and the Father are One, eternally existing and uncreated, then we believe in different Jesus’. However, we do agree on much of what Jesus did, His life here on earth, His sacrifice, etc. There are many different “jesus'” but only one True Jesus. For example, Muslims believe in a different Jesus than both of us, which, I assume, we would both agree is not the true Jesus. The question is, which one is the true Jesus? There is only One Way.)
(Also out of curiosity, what book where you reading? Is it from the Church, or elsewhere?(It’s basically a 200 year meme of how comically misunderstood our church is because of biased literature and other content, so I’m just curious as to what it’s specifically clarifying and where it’s coming from if that’s ok.)
(I understand how facts can be misunderstood and bias can skew people’s interpretation of things, especially when LDS authorities are rather secretive about some things (?) (correct me if I’m wrong). But I tried to read something unbiased because I wanted the truth. I did read some things on your church’s website, but it was a bit vague. I read something called the CES Letter (you may already be familiar with it), which has been enlightening so far.)
(Yeah, I’ll also mention that when it comes to using the phrase “the Scriptures do not contradict themselves”, we agree, but note that the Bible specifically has gone through countless retranslations and alterations for centuries whether by mistake or intention. These are the faults of man, not of God. Thus we say “We affirm the truths of the Bible as far as it is correctly translated”.)
(Yes, this is a really good principle and one that is overlooked quite often! I don’t know Ancient Greek or Hebrew😅, but I do like using resources (Septuagint, Reference books, etc) to try to get as close to the original meaning as possible. It’s tricky. But I do believe that God’s Word will last forever (Isaiah 40:8) so I’m thinking/studying about the idea that even with the translation “mistakes”, God will preserve His Word.)
(Don’t mind at all! Great verses!) Could you elaborate on your thoughts on these verses? Do you feel that they are at all problematic with what I’ve said, or are you trying to make some other point? (I will mention that JST (Joseph Smith Translations) does elaborate on Tim 6:16, but even if it didn’t, the verse I still doesn’t seem problematic, if that is your intension.)
(I referred to these verses intending the Word to speak for itself. It seems to imply that God is a Spirit without a physical body. But since we have already touched on this I will leave it at that.)
(Though sense you brought it up, I do have to ask, why? It’s completely fair that you don’t have a belief in the Book of Mormon right now, as you have not read it nor I assume prayed about it, but why so quick to dismiss the idea that God might give more knowledge and prophecy to His children as they are ready? Is that not what He did in the form of Christ’s ministry, fulfilling the law of Moses, and giving us a higher law to live by? Is there scripture in the Bible that suggests the something like the Book of Mormon isn’t God’s word? (Please know that this is in no way an attack either, I completely respect you beliefs and dedication to the truth also, but I just have to ask as it was brought up.)
(Yep, I did bring it up. I guess it would have come up sooner or later. Proverbs 30:6 warns not to add to His Words and also Revelations 22:18-19. Alas, we come to Joseph Smith. I believe that when the facts are brought to light about who this man really was, many things are made clear. Again I refer to the CES Letter.)
(I don’t think that getting into a huge argument or debate about these things will be profitable in the long term. So, now that we have discussed many things about our beliefs, I propose that we let the matter rest and meditate personally on what was said, looking to the Scriptures and prayer for wisdom. May the Lord guide you in your quest for truth!)
(It’s epic fantasy, though it is on the darker end of his writing. I do recommend.) Have you read anything from Sanderson?
(I haven’t! Although I’ve heard a lot of good things about him and his writing style. I’ll have to check it out.)
(In an odd way, I feel like it is because we like our characters, and we want them to grow… that or maybe writing is the outlet of the dark creepy corner of our minds.😂)
(Yes, either that or we just love creating something and “watching” it do all kinds of stuff that we would never do in reality. 😂)
(Absolutely! It is something I’ve been pondering a lot lately of trying to make Him truly the center of my life, in every thought, step, and action. Though I love Him, and He is foundational in my life, I’ve struggled with making Him the foundation of my life.)
(Amen! Yes, this is a challenge.)
How much Relishing Research would a Researcher Research on Relish?🤣
(Relish Researcher Relishes Research while Relishing Relish. 😂🤣)
(Hmm, yes, if it was truly every degree of everything, that would truly be the set of all sets contained on this hotdog, which is a set that contains itself, which leads to Russel’s paradox. So the validity of the statement isn’t only impossible, but contradictory🧐🧐🧐)
(Uh…yes. I almost forgot this was even about a hotdog…)
Have you head of tomatoes as an ingredient in smoothies?
(Yes, technically.)
If two mind readers read each other’s mind, what mind would actually be read?
(Well they would both read the other person’s, and then the next second they would be reading their own minds, because they would be each thinking of what the other person had been thinking about…)
He must increase, but I must decrease.
(I did realize some of these things as I researched more about your church’s theology. But thanks for the clarity! So you only worship one God (the Father), through Jesus (who is a God, but not the Father). And you don’t worship Jesus, because you are not polytheistic. Did I get it straight? 😅 .)
(Kinda. I really don’t want to say that we don’t worship Christ, because we do in a lot of ways, as He is the head and center of our Church. Many members will say plainly that we worship God the Father and the Son. It’s really more simple than I’m making it sound, and I feel like its more just the term worship and what that really means.)(Your dedication and acknowledgement of such things is encouraging. But logically, if you believe that Jesus is a created God, but not the Father, and I believe that Jesus and the Father are One, eternally existing and uncreated, then we believe in different Jesus’. However, we do agree on much of what Jesus did, His life here on earth, His sacrifice, etc. There are many different “jesus’” but only one True Jesus. For example, Muslims believe in a different Jesus than both of us, which, I assume, we would both agree is not the true Jesus. The question is, which one is the true Jesus? There is only One Way.)
(True, however I don’t feel the need to highlight these differences with the terminology of “We believe in a different Jesus”, because that sets borders, and generates contention. I think it’s fun to talk about our differing beliefs, but I feel it important that we must remember to re-center ourselves, remember that we may feel differently about some of these things, but know that we are all ultimately doing everything in our power to live the Gospel Christ has given us. To be a “Bible believing, Gospel living, follower of Jesus Christ” as some put it. The Christ we believe, we must do everything in our power to align with the Christ that is, so we might know Him to the greatest extent we are able in this life, but the Christ that is, we all collectively know as Christians would have us show love and compassion to our neighbor and enemy alike, even if we don’t agree with them, even if we know they are wrong. Christs apostles themselves squabbled over all the little things of what was and wasn’t the right thing to do, all trying to follow the will of their Savior with what parts of the whole they understood, and He had to consistently re-direct them to what was truly important. Yes, there is only one true Jesus, but that one true Jesus would have us remove contention and borders from our lives, and have us all seek Him, because as the true Jesus, He is the light and the way, and we don’t need to point out the details to be able to love Him and what He did for us. So yes, it is valid to say that we believe in a different Jesus, but I feel like its just a contentious phrase, we have a different idea of Jesus, but not a different Jesus is something a friend mentioned to me that I think is a good way of putting it, but maybe I’m wrong to think this way, because you are still right in the view you gave.)(I don’t think that getting into a huge argument or debate about these things will be profitable in the long term. So, now that we have discussed many things about our beliefs, I propose that we let the matter rest and meditate personally on what was said, looking to the Scriptures and prayer for wisdom. May the Lord guide you in your quest for truth!)
(I wanted to respond here first before continuing, sorry. I agree that further debate is unnecessary, however there are many things you just now pointed out that I feel a great need to explain, because the angle you just showed you were coming from is an angle I don’t think you mean to be coming from. I want to let it rest, but the responses I’m giving are instead exhaustive, because I want to make things clear, as some of the things you’ve pointed out I don’t feel fit the light you mean to paint, but instead the opposite. I’m here not to argue, but to clarify misinterpretation. If anything I say feels contentious, please let me know. Please don’t feel a need to read everything I say, as you make an excellent petition that we rest, which I wish to follow after I’ve clarified a few things if that’s ok.)(I understand how facts can be misunderstood and bias can skew people’s interpretation of things, especially when LDS authorities are rather secretive about some things (?) (correct me if I’m wrong). But I tried to read something unbiased because I wanted the truth. I did read some things on your church’s website, but it was a bit vague. I read something called the CES Letter (you may already be familiar with it), which has been enlightening so far.)
(Unfortunately I do need to correct you on that. Our Church is very misunderstood because of a very complex history with a lot of finite prospectives from many angles objectifying what they saw, and even straight up lies have been spread in the early days of it (and still many to this day). No joke, people have called us a cult of lizard people from mars before (obviously an extreme case, but similar ideas have been spread before more than once, even before the invention of the internet). In other words, it’s misunderstood because people are people, so it may not be any more misunderstood than other faiths, but there’s something particular about the Church for some reason. The General Authorities of the Church are not secretive, but instead the very opposite. They affirm what we believe, and speak plainly about who we are as followers of Jesus Christ, and sure they regard our history good and bad with open acknowledgement. Where you may have gotten that idea from is the fact that our Temples can only be entered by members, and some of the ordinances inside are meant only to be talked about inside. We use the phrase “Sacred not Secret” for this, as it can be talked about, but it is something that requires high reverence, and we don’t want the world to slander on it as the world unfortunately Slanders on our Savior’s name and His gospel constantly, He takes the cruelty on Himself, but reserves some things for those who can be respectful. As for the CES Letter, I’ve head of it before, but I never really new much about it. Upon some research, and reading a little, I’ve found that it regards many arguments I am familiar with. A thing to note is that if you want unbiased content, this is not where to look, because Runnells is a ex-member who just compiled many of the arguments against the Church, not a man who is learning about the Church and it’s history with a simple curiosity regardless of what the truth is that would be necessary to be unbiased. He states explicitly himself “I’m a disaffected member who lost his testimony so it’s no secret which side I’m on at the moment.” Which is a clear statement declaring plainly that He is very biased, and very biased against the Church. The arguments he makes are either skewed, the faults of man, or flat out untrue. This is what I’ve seen from all the ex-members I’ve met, read, or watched from thus far, they give the reason the church has offended them, like something we believe, and I immediately realize how untrue their claim is. I cannot speak for them and their experiences, but all the people I’ve seen leave the Church, simply never understood the Church in the first place, despite being raised in it. I believe many of them to be good people, but they failed to understand it all, and it saddens me when they leave with a bad taste in their mouth, and even becoming hateful to the Church, trying to lead others from it also. Another thing you should know about the author is that he is now an atheist. After leaving the Church, he became a non-denominational Christian, but after applying the same methods of truth seeking he did on the Church, he decided that Christianity in general is a complete and utter falsehood, so if you agree with his methods to find the truth, then you will have to figure out why his method to find out the truth for Christianity didn’t work, and you will find that it is because the research he made was skewed, the faults of man, or flat out untrue. Obviously being a very biased individual on the matter myself, I don’t know of many sources to point you to for learning about our Churches theology and history. However A few things I can point you to is HelloSaints ( h ttps://www.youtube.com/c/HelloSaints ), a YouTube channel from a pastor taking the time to simply learn about and understand the Church, I’ve been watching his channel, and he gives many arguments against and praises for the Church, but all are respectful. Another Channel is 52 churches in 52 weeks ( h ttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrbYj1sUKoDd5SaC1ikcXXw ), a protestant Christian just attending a different Church each week, and somewhat recently he has attended our Church twice, and attended General Conference, though that was bending the rules for the original challenge, but I think it was really interesting to hear his honest thoughts and impressions as he attended those and other churches as well. That’s pretty much the most unbiased content I’ve seen, I haven’t really read any books I’ve found unbiased yet, but even if these sources I gave are biased, they are biased on your behalf. As for content in the Church, I’m sorry the website seems pretty vague to you, but you should be able to find the right answer quickly on there if you know where to look, and your search filter may be set to something specific, If you could clarify on how its being vague, I would like to know, because it gets very in depth about what we believe and where we stand on specific topics if you take the time to search the site. Other content for the Church is another channel Saints Unscripted ( h ttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2LBmYIOq6Eu_ZC14i_YkIg ) a channel that discusses all sorts of stuff about our Church, and one of their series Faith and Beliefs gets specifically into many of the topics that are actually mentioned in the CES Letter, they have one video in the series discussing it specifically as well. Something you can actually read is Saints, planned to be four volumes total, the first volume is called The Standard of Truth, a series compiled by historians and Church Authorities to get into the very bottom of the history of the Church. I’ve listened to an audiobook of it, and it gets very in depth very fast, referencing accounts from hundreds of Saints from the beginnings of the Church, as well as countless other documents from the time. It regards many skepticisms made at the time both by members and nonmembers, not explaining them, but simply giving the history and accounts, and can be found on the Churches site and elsewhere. But Ultimately, If you really want the truth about our Church, I would say ask God honestly, humbly, and sincerely, ask for discernment of what is and isn’t truth before you believe what you read (James 1:5). I hope any of this is helpful when it comes to good resources. I’m really glad your trying to learn and understand us more. I’ve been seeing bridges being made between the different denominations of Christianity lately, especially my church being more accepted as followers of Christ, speaking more peacefully to one another, and having more open and respectful discussion, and I’m really glad that you and I can participate in that.)(Yes, this is a really good principle and one that is overlooked quite often! I don’t know Ancient Greek or Hebrew😅, but I do like using resources (Septuagint, Reference books, etc) to try to get as close to the original meaning as possible. It’s tricky. But I do believe that God’s Word will last forever (Isaiah 40:8) so I’m thinking/studying about the idea that even with the translation “mistakes”, God will preserve His Word.)
(Amen! Those are great resources to gain more truth, and the Lord will absolutely preserve His truth for His children for the rest of the eternities!)(I referred to these verses intending the Word to speak for itself. It seems to imply that God is a Spirit without a physical body. But since we have already touched on this I will leave it at that.)
Can we go through each verse and think about the implications? (Don’t feel a need to read these. This is just me taking the time to think about what is being said, and what must be accepted, while what I don’t think necessarily must imply.)God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:24
(God is a spirit, yep everything checks out so far. We must worship Him in spirit also, what does this mean if not that we must worship Him with our own spirit, being honest in our Worship. If we worship Him with our mouths, but deny Him in our hearts/spirit, then we only deny Him, because the spirit is what goes back to Him in the end, (Ecclesiastes 12:7) Thus I at the more important level, am also a spirit.)“Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” Luke 24:39
(So the context of this scripture is that Christ’s apostles assumed Him to basically be a spirit, or some other apparition. He then had them touch Him, to show that what they saw was a physical body, because a spirit alone is not flesh and bone. However we know that Christ still has and is a spirit, dwelling in one sense or another in or with His body. It would be odd to say that Christ isn’t a spirit as much as it would be odd to say that Christ isn’t a body. Thus we can say Christ is a spirit, as He has a spirit, and that spirit is His sense of “Self” rather than His body. So to say that God is a Spirit, and that a spirit hath not flesh and bone, I don’t think is enough evidence to say that God doesn’t also have flesh and bone along with His spirit. While that could be what it is implying, I don’t think it has to be. Maybe there’s some language loopholes being used here, in which case it would be interesting to try getting into the original Greek material to further investigate it.)“And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.
Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire:
Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,
The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air,
The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth:
And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the Lord thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.
But the Lord hath taken you, and brought you forth out of the iron furnace, even out of Egypt, to be unto him a people of inheritance, as ye are this day.” Deut. 4:14-20
Ok, so I’m assuming you gave this verse in reference to what I said about gender, is that correct? (If so, I really don’t think this is at all relevant to that. We do not make any graven image in the likeness of male or female, ect.) Does this mean God Himself isn’t male or female? (I don’t think so. We’re not idolatrous in depicting Him in the form of a man, nor believing Him to truly be masculine.) If this is to be taken in that light, why would God take on a masculine form, then command His children not to think that He is masculine? (Christianity also depicts Christ all the time, and worships Him in His manly image. Maybe you had a different intended effect with this scripture, but if not, I don’t think this carries any weight on this particular matter.)“Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.” Tim. 6:16
(This one is talking about the greatness of God. How we cannot see or touch Him in all of His greatness.) Does that mean He doesn’t have a physical form? (I don’t think so, just because you can’t see something that is physically real, doesn’t mean it isn’t there, Christians of all people know this. There are many ways something can both be physical and invisible, but when it comes to God, I personally (and this isn’t scriptural, just my own thoughts) think that He dwells in a higher dimensional plan, which actually makes a lot of sense, adding to His infinite nature, how angels can appear and disappear, be untouchable, yet be intimately close to us, and many other things seems to just click for me when thought of in this light, but it doesn’t have to be that way, there are many many other ways something can be physical but cannot be seen or touched.)Can I also show the JST version?
“Whom no man hath seen, nor can see, unto whom no man can approach, only he who hath the light and the hope of immortality dwelling in him.” Tim. 6:16 JST
(This simply clarifies that we believe that God can be seen, but only to those “who hath the light and the hope of immortality dwelling in him” We actually believe many individuals throughout the Bible did witness the true face of God, for example, Enoch in Genesis 5:24, and Moses in Exodus 34:28-30, the Pearl of a Great Price getting into that particular encounter more directly. I again personally love the extra dimensional idea for this, as it shows that God can show Himself if He wants to. However any who isn’t transfigured to endure His presence would burn up in His glory.)(Yep, I did bring it up. I guess it would have come up sooner or later. Proverbs 30:6 warns not to add to His Words and also Revelations 22:18-19. Alas, we come to Joseph Smith. I believe that when the facts are brought to light about who this man really was, many things are made clear. Again I refer to the CES Letter.)
(We’ve all heard those before. Proverbs is in the old Testament, and revelation has continued since then. This verse is talking about a man making up scripture, putting words in God’s mouth, but that doesn’t mean God won’t continue to speak from that point on, like all the rest of the old testament following, and more importantly, Christ came after the point of this scripture. As for Revelation, it says “this book” which at the time of writing wouldn’t have been compiled with the rest of the Bible, meaning it was specifically the book of Revelation we are not to add or take from, which yes, again we should never put words in God’s mouth, but that doesn’t mean He won’t stop talking. The book of Revelation was also not the last book in chronologically written order in the cannon Bible, but was chosen as the last book at a much later date. As for Joseph Smith, again, if your gaining your information from the CES Letter, you are obviously absorbing very biased content, yes, Runnells was a member, knowing some things, but He got into some anti-material, causing Him to lose His faith in the Church, but this can happen to any religion not properly understood by its followers, again, the same man left Christianity as a whole using the same methods of logic. Joseph Smith is a controversial individual to many, and yes, he did some things in his life that could have been done better, but he is a man, and is therefore very imperfect, but he dedicated his life to serving the Lord the best he knew how. There is a common argument against Christianity that you may be familiar with, or more of a rationalization. Some say that Christ was a good man, but a deceiver, saying He was God’s Begotten son, and that following His death, His apostles took His body, and claimed that He was risen. You, I assume can see right through this, having a better understanding and a more open mind to that which is true. You know that this cannot be the case because you know that Christ could never serve and love the way He did, and also be a man glorifying Himself as someone divine while being that, those are contradictory statements, for we know by His fruits that He can only be telling the truth of His divinity, not even lunacy can be a reasonable explanation. And You know that His apostles wouldn’t just fake it, because they new that they would be persecuted, and they new that it would even mean death, they would have every reason to tell the truth if it weren’t true, you know the only thing that makes sense is that they truly saw their Redeemer live, and they died for what they new to be true, no one would die just for a prank on the world, especially not 11 people, you’d think at least one would falter, saying its not true if it really wasn’t true. I apply a similar reasoning to Joseph Smith. He dedicated his life to do his Father’s will, sometimes struggling with what that was, feeling that the Lord wouldn’t speak to him in his later life, and was an imperfect man, but there are countless accounts and documents from saints at the time that knew Joseph personally, or just meeting him, and testifying of him as being a kind, thoughtful, good natured man dedicated to God and serving others. Yes, he made some mistakes, but no prophet of God hasn’t, only Christ is perfect. The important thing is that He did everything in his power to do that which he believed to be right, and eventually gave his life up for it. He was persecuted, imprisoned, threatened, and eventually killed, always given the opportunity to just denounce what he testified to be true, but he never did, he wouldn’t die for a lie, just like the apostles wouldn’t. You could always say something else, something wrong with what I believe, because there always will be something you can say, but atheists do the same for general Christianity, there is always something wrong with what we believe, even when there isn’t. The Spirit is the only true form of discernment, not a ex-member who is an imperfect individual giving only arguments to attack the Church and Joseph Smith. Again, that is the very opposite of unbiased truth seeking. I don’t know the experience this man had and what lead him to lose his faith, but his arguments are well antiquated. I want to make it clear that I’m not trying to convince you that it’s true, it could be all wrong, but I’m just trying to put things into prospective. I hope none of this comes off as contentious to you, I don’t want to project that light, but you pointed at something that I hold dear, and said “when the facts are brought to light about who this man really was, many things are made clear.” with the clear implication that the things made clear is that Joseph Smith was a deceiver one way or another, and the Church isn’t true, when I know there is really far more going on when it comes to “the facts”. It is not so simple, and I feel I must make that clear.)(I haven’t! Although I’ve heard a lot of good things about him and his writing style. I’ll have to check it out.)
(Yeah! I just finished Tress and the Emerald Sea. It’s very different from his typical writing, being very whimsical and lighthearted, but you could still see all the Sandersonisms in it, and it was just a very fun read. He never fails to disappoint, and is constantly coming out with more quality novels, so he’s an author I defiantly recommend.)(Yes, either that or we just love creating something and “watching” it do all kinds of stuff that we would never do in reality. 😂)
(Us authors are an odd bunch.😂)(Uh…yes. I almost forgot this was even about a hotdog…)
(Yes, a spacetime breaking hotdog.🤣)(Well they would both read the other person’s, and then the next second they would be reading their own minds, because they would be each thinking of what the other person had been thinking about…)
(Yes yes, indeed.) Would the previous thought be discarded, or would it be kept as their own thought vs the thought their reading, in which case it would stack up?He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
(Ok, so for some reason quotes didn’t work) It’s not too confusing to tell who’s who is it?😅
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
