This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Christianity - The Horse that Refuses to Die
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
107106
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
What? Are you serious? There really is no more evidence for mormonism then for my hypothetical elf religion. I'm not trolling you, I'm making a point. Please prove that there are miracles - and that if there are, they weren't created by my elf religion?
Because I have seen and have been on the receiving side of miracles. You are creating a hypothetical situation with no evidence to back it up, none at all. It is very severely offensive to me and I'm tired of it.
Post by
138638
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Pwntiff
Time to back that up with miracles then.
It was a miracle that they created the world.
It was a miracle that they contacted me.
It was a miracle that they allowed me to be born.
It was a miracle that they allowed themselves to be born into someones mind, and created as mythology in this world.
I'm done with you. You are creating a parody, a caricature, without any of the actual events that happened to help prove Jesus was the Christ.
In essence, you are trolling me. Have a good day.
What? Are you serious? There really is no more evidence for mormonism then for my hypothetical elf religion. I'm not trolling you, I'm making a point. Please prove that there are miracles - and that if there are, they weren't created by my elf religion?
The point is that there is equal evidence for each.
There is actually more evidence for the God of Abraham than your elves. Three distinct religions, each with their own sects within, have worshiped the same god for thousands of years, and there are historic documents and analyses that back up Biblical events and people.
Of course, the same argument works for Hinduism, Taoism, and Shinto.
Post by
nintendorichard
Yeah, all the responses I've recieved are why I don't participate in debates. I'm no good at them. :(
FYI, I do truly accept Jesus Christ as my savior, I'm not believing just as a safety net.
Good day. :)
Post by
Pwntiff
Yeah, all the responses I've recieved are why I don't participate in debates. I'm no good at them. :(
FYI, I do truly accept Jesus Christ as my savior, I'm not believing just as a safety net.
I'm agnostic. Christianity may be right. Hinduism may be right. Shinto may be right. I don't really care because I don't see it as relevant to me.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
chaosultimamage
Mormonism does not teach polytheism. If you believe there was another god who created the current god and an infinite progression both forwards and backwards then you are defying the standard beliefs of Mormonism. Hence, why I made up a religion name.
True and false at the same time. Mormonism teaches that there are other Gods, but that you should only worship Heavenly Father, as He was the one that created this earth, and Jesus, as He is God's son. Research first before telling me I'm living my religion incorrectly.
I verified my information on the LDS site before I posted, so I'm as right as I can possibly be. Quote below, as well as several links. The Mormon belief is that God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Ghost are 3 separate entities that constitute one "God". Did The Trinity create itself or did one of the 3 parts create the rest? Did God the Father create himself and the other two parts? My point still stands.
http://lds.org/general-conference/2007/10/the-only-true-god-and-jesus-christ-whom-he-hath-sent?lang=eng&query=polytheism
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_theosis.shtml#multi
There is a widely denounced LDS concept known as the "plurality of gods" which teaches that humans are sons and daughters of God - His offspring (Acts 17:28) - capable of becoming more like Him by accepting the fullness of the Gospel and grace of Christ (see also John 10:34,35; Matt. 5:48). The possibility of multiple "godlike" beings may be what Paul referred to when he said there are "gods many and lords many, but to us there is but one God, the Father" (1 Cor. 8:5,6) and what David meant in Psalm 8:4,5 when he said that man is "a little lower than the gods" (KJV gives "lower than the angels" but the Hebrew word is "gods" - I guess it was just too painful for the translators to put down the correct word).
If we fully follow Christ, we can become joint-heirs with Him (Romans 8:14-18), becoming like him (1 John 3:2) by putting on the divine nature (2 Peter 1: 4-10). Such Christ-centered beings are sons and daughters of God (Acts 17:28; Heb. 12:9) who can become the kind of beings that Christ called "gods" in John 10:34. In 1 Corinthians 8:5,6, Paul notes that there are many gods (in the small "g" sense), but these are not beings that we worship, for to us, there is only one God, the Eternal Father. We believe that there may be and will be many resurrected beings who have become joint-heirs with Christ and can thus be called "gods," but they are not our Savior, our Creator, our Lord, and our God. To us, there is and always will be but one God, that Being who is properly called the "God of gods" (Deut. 10:17), the Almighty God, even Elohim, the Eternal Father. We will always worship and follow Him. A son growing up to be more like his father in no way detracts from the father or weakens their relationship - but can add to the joy and glory of the father. Indeed, helping that to happen is what being a good father is all about. There is a reason why God's most preferred title seems to be "Father."
Critics abhor our doctrines on this issue and claim that we are polytheistic. It is true that we believe the Father and the Son are separate beings, but they are one and comprise, with the Holy Ghost, one united Godhead. I consider myself a monotheist, a worshiper of the one true God. Rejecting the "one in substance" concept of post-biblical creeds does not make me a polytheist, in my opinion.
Post by
Monday
So, you're attacking me on a terminology point? I'm afraid you're still wrong, as I was talking with my seminary teacher about this today.
Post by
138638
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
chaosultimamage
So, you're attacking me on a terminology point? I'm afraid you're still wrong, as I was talking with my seminary teacher about this today.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, Christianity has about as many holes in it as a fishing net. The people teaching people the religion can't even agree.
Post by
Gone
I don't usually participate in religious debates, but I just wonder, why would you not believe in God?
If there is no God, alright, cool. You die and nothing happens.
If there is a God, and you don't believe in him, then you don't go to Heaven. If there is a God and you believe in him, you go to Heaven.
Also with this logic you would have to believe in everything. And nothing, in case it backfires. Maybe unicorns don't like it when people believe in them.
EluraE is actually touching on a good point, with that logic you would have to believe in just about every religion just in case.
Sure "believe" in god just in case but which god and religion would you "believe" in just in case?
He has already adressed this, scroll up
Post by
ExDementia
I don't usually participate in religious debates, but I just wonder, why would you not believe in God?
If there is no God, alright, cool. You die and nothing happens.
If there is a God, and you don't believe in him, then you don't go to Heaven. If there is a God and you believe in him, you go to Heaven.
Also with this logic you would have to believe in everything. And nothing, in case it backfires. Maybe unicorns don't like it when people believe in them.
EluraE is actually touching on a good point, with that logic you would have to believe in just about every religion just in case.
Sure "believe" in god just in case but which god and religion would you "believe" in just in case?
Richard already admitted that his response was why he didn't argue in the first place. Lets not give him too many black eyes over it....
Post by
Monday
So, you're attacking me on a terminology point? I'm afraid you're still wrong, as I was talking with my seminary teacher about this today.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, Christianity has about as many holes in it as a fishing net. The people teaching people the religion can't even agree.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, you are a horrible debater. You refuse to read what I wrote. I very clearly said that I worship God the Father and Jesus Christ because they are the ones that created this world. There have been other worlds created, however, and other resurrected beings that watch over them (that I call gods for convenience).
Post by
Gone
So, you're attacking me on a terminology point? I'm afraid you're still wrong, as I was talking with my seminary teacher about this today.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, Christianity has about as many holes in it as a fishing net. The people teaching people the religion can't even agree.
So do you not see how comments like that are offensive? or are you just trying to enflame people?
Post by
138638
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Gone
I don't usually participate in religious debates, but I just wonder, why would you not believe in God?
If there is no God, alright, cool. You die and nothing happens.
If there is a God, and you don't believe in him, then you don't go to Heaven. If there is a God and you believe in him, you go to Heaven.
Also with this logic you would have to believe in everything. And nothing, in case it backfires. Maybe unicorns don't like it when people believe in them.
EluraE is actually touching on a good point, with that logic you would have to believe in just about every religion just in case.
Sure "believe" in god just in case but which god and religion would you "believe" in just in case?
He has already adressed this, scroll up
I already saw the post your referring to, however the thing is that a lot of people use that exact same argument to justify why agnostics or athiests should turn to X religion
None of whome are here. So once again a genrelasation
EDIT: once again see the original post, the OP is the one trying to force his athesitic beleifs down peoples throat.
Post by
Monday
So, you're attacking me on a terminology point? I'm afraid you're still wrong, as I was talking with my seminary teacher about this today.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, Christianity has about as many holes in it as a fishing net. The people teaching people the religion can't even agree.
So do you not see how comments like that are offensive? or are you just trying to enflame people?
No, because either
Some Christian, somewhere, in some past time, was rude to him.
Or it is the only way to get people to listen and come to the "truth."
Post by
ExDementia
So, you're attacking me on a terminology point? I'm afraid you're still wrong, as I was talking with my seminary teacher about this today.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, Christianity has about as many holes in it as a fishing net. The people teaching people the religion can't even agree.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, you are a horrible debater. You refuse to read what I wrote. I very clearly said that I worship God the Father and Jesus Christ because they are the ones that created this world. There have been other worlds created, however, and other resurrected beings that watch over them (that I call gods for convenience).
But you said the other gods were the ones preceding our current god. A god that created him, and then behind him a god that created him and so on.
So there is a god who created god?
This is what I believe, yes.
Post by
chaosultimamage
So, you're attacking me on a terminology point? I'm afraid you're still wrong, as I was talking with my seminary teacher about this today.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, Christianity has about as many holes in it as a fishing net. The people teaching people the religion can't even agree.
And this is why, on top of many other reasons, you are a horrible debater. You refuse to read what I wrote. I very clearly said that I worship God the Father and Jesus Christ because they are the ones that created this world. There have been other worlds created, however, and other resurrected beings that watch over them (that I call gods for convenience).
I did read and I responded wholly appropriately and even quoted the official LDS site to make my point the idea of the current God being created by another God or any infinite amounts of other gods is completely contrary to the teachings of not only Mormonism, but EVERY division of Christianity, as well as Islam, which is based on the exact same monotheistic principles.
You're illicitly stating at this point that you're mixing a belief of quantum physics and the altering of space-time with Mormonism, which doesn't make any sense at all and is even less able to be proven than a single God's perpetual existance.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.