Re: Jesus the CHOSEN, the APPOINTED, the CALLED OF GOD AS WAS AARON, the FAITHFUL servant.

"Richard" <madeupyeserdayNOTTOBEPARTOFEMAIL_email@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:3s197bFm15rtU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Three persons make up the Godhead. They are Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
>>
>> Yep
>>
>> > If the Holy Ghost communicates to me I can say I've had an experience
> with
>> > God.
>>
>> Yep
>>
>> > If the Son communicates with me I can say I've had an experience with
> God.
>>
>> Yep
>>
>> > If the Father communicates with me I can say I've had an experience
>> > with
>> > God.
>>
>> Yep
>>
>> > Each person of the Godhead are one in purpose and agreement. Each
>> > therefore
>> > are the source of the words of eternal life. Any one of them can lead
> us
>> > to
>> > salvation.
>>
>> Nope. There is salvation in only one name.
>
> You misunderstand. I said lead to salvation through preaching the gospel.
> The Father would say, beleive in my Son, The Son would say believe in me,
> the Holy Ghost would say believe in the Son of God.

Nope. The power of the gospel is the Holy Spirit revealing Christ to us and
in the process saving us. That is it's purpose. What you claimed was they
they are all the source of the words of eternal life. Yet you conversely
claim that they are all different and all began at different times.


>> > Neither one of them though are the same Being (For those who think they
>> > are).
>>
>> No they arent the same being.
>>
>> > The Father is the Most High God. He is the Father of the Son, because
> the
>> > Son was begotton of the Father. The Son, through laws of birthright
>> > and
>> > inheritance, (in the beginning), obtained His position in the Godhead.
> It
>> > has not been revealed exactly who the Holy Ghost is, but He is a
>> > personage.
>>
>> Nope. You dont inherit stuff off people until they die. The Father has
>> not
>> died. Nor were there any "laws of birthright" in existence "in the
>> beginning" for there to be any way for the Word (not the Son) to become
> God.
>
> That's precisely why mainstream Christianity does not understand the
> Bible.
> Neither the Jews nor Gentiles can grasp the symbolism conained in the Law
> of
> Moses. Why do you think the firstling of every flock is special, and had
> to
> be without blemish etc etc? Because it's symbolic of the heavenly law
> concerning the Saviour - the firstborn. Well, if you don't believe Moses.

Oh dear, what a very childish comment. The firstling was not special, it was
useless UNLESS it was perfect and then ONLY because it had to be in order to
be an acceptable sacrifice. First borns were not perfect or special.

Was Joseph the first born of his father? How about David? Solomon? etc etc
etc The idea of the primacy of the first born is not a universal truth. LDS
cant grasp even blatant scripture.


>> The Holy Ghost is the Holy Ghost.
>
>> > So, three persons formed themselves into a council of three. One of
> that
>> > council, the Son, was appointed the Word. It was decided that the
> Father's
>> > gospel would be given to the world through the Word, or the Messenger.
>> > Therefore, the Word or the Messenger would come to be known as the God
> of
>> > Israel.
>>
>> Nope. The son was not appointed to be the Word. The Word was in the
>> beginning. The role of son followed after. Likewise the role of Father.

> "Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also was faithful in all
> his
> house"

Indeed and it said "the Word" where? Does it mention "the Word"? Nope. Wanna
guess why?

1Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the
Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;
2Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful
in all his house.

3For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he
who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.

See what it says? "this man"!!!!!! So this is after the Word became flesh.
So you see Christ Jesus was appointed. But the Word, being God, existed
BEFORE.

Do you own a dictionary? Look up "before" and "beginning"


> Hebrews Ch. 3:2
>
>
>> > The Holy Ghost would take of the Son, and reveal it through the
>> > workings
>> > of
>> > the Holy Ghost to mankind.
>>
>> The Son is not an "it". His name is Jesus.
>
> I mean, the HG takes the words of Jesus and communuictes them to us
> through
> the Spirit.

The Holy Ghost is the Spirit.

>> > The Word was also appointed as the Lamb slain from before the
>> > foundation
>> > of
>> > the world, who, in the meridian of time, the Word would come down to
>> > earth,
>> > and under the direction of the Father preach the gospel.
>>
>> Not appointed. He chose to be.
>
> It's a matter of being firstborn, inheritance, appointed. The Father is
> greater than the Son, and the Father chose to send the Son, the Son did
> not
> chose to honour Himself.

Well you keep asserting it but as yet you have failed to back it up from
scripture. Perhaps you have a handy quote from the criminal Joseph Smith to
hand?

> "Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I
> proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent
> me.
> John Ch. 8:42.

Indeed. Jesus was sent from God. Well worked out. Now explain how that
denies the deity of the Word.

>> > However, it has always been the Word who communicated the gospel
>> > message
>> > to
>> > mankind. It was the Word who spoke with Moses.
>>
>> Nope. Read the bible it was often angels, prophets etc etc etc
>
> Well, of course, but when God Himself appeared to Moses it was the Word.

Well thats one example at least answered. What about all the others?

>> > As to the scripture:
>> >
>> > John 1:
>> > 1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
> Word
>> > was God.
>> >
>> > To amplify you could write:
>> >
>> > In the beginning was the Word (Son), and the Word (Son) was with God
>> > (Father). and the Word was God (Of the Old Testament).
>>
>> That is not an amplification but a twisting of the text.
>
> If you knew that Jesus was the God of the OT you would agree.

So if I knew that what Joseph Smith made up was true then I would believe
that what you just made up was also true?

Gosh the intellectual paucity of that argument is outstanding.

>> > "Word was God" is not meant to convey the meaning that God and the Word
>> > are
>> > the same Being. No, just that the Son, who is a member of the Godhead,
> was
>> > the God of the OT. This arises because Jesus was chosen to be the Word.
>>
>> Wrong again. The Word BECAME flesh in Jesus, not Jesus became the Word.
>
> These things were planned in the beginning. The Word is Jesus. Always was,
> always will be.

Nope. Jesus was born. He had a beginning. Its in the bible. Try reading it.
Matthew would be as good a place as any to discover the truth.


>> > This is how things really are.
>>
>> Nope its how you claim they are with zero scripture for support all the
> way
>> along. You only quote what you wish to alter to suit your theology.
>
> On the contrary.
>
>> > "The Father and I are One" (John 10:30). This also is not meant to
> convey
>> > that Father and Son are the same Being.
>>
>> Well done. You got one right.
>>
>> > Jesus is God because He was appointed to the Godhead. He is just as
> much
>> > God as He needs to be by that appointment. Nothing else is required,
>> > but
>> > to
>> > be chosen and called.
>>
>> Wrong. I am a son, chosen and called. I am not God because my nature
>> (essence) is not God. The Word, who became flesh, was God in the
> beginning.
>> There is nothing before the beginning. Nothinh happened before the
>> beginning. God is telling us how it started.
>
> Christianity does not understand the beginning.

Well then you have something in common with it.

Did you have an argument btw or was that it?

>> > However, some people talk about Jesus being "Very God". Their notion is
>> > that
>> > you can only be worshipping the God of the Bible by worshipping Jesus,
>> > classified as "Very God". Worshipping "Very God" is only possible (In
>> > their
>> > eyes), if you confess that Father and the Son are considered the same
>> > Being, or essence. That is the way Jesus is "Very God". To these
> people,
>> > saying Jesus was the firstborn of God's children proves, in their eyes,
>> > that
>> > you do not worship "Very God". It is surmised, how can a firstborn Son
> be
>> > "Very God", be of the same Being or of the same essence as the Father.
>>
>> Jesus was the firstborn from the dead. But the Word was NEVER born. The
> Word
>> was, and is, and always will be because He was God "in the beginning".
> Which
>> part of 2in the beginning" can you not understand?
>
> What part of the law of Moses dealing with firstborn sons or firstlings do
> you not understand?

Ah I see, you have no argument, no defense so you just ask random questions.
lol

>> Acts
>> 33God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath
> raised
>> up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my
> Son,
>> this day have I begotten thee.
>>
>> > But, there are many tell-tale scriptures in the Bible that give the
>> > insightful reader the knowledge that Father and Son are two
>> > individuals,
>> > and
>> > there is no need at all for Jesus to be the same Being, or of the same
>> > essence of God. The Bible tells us that the Word or Jesus was the
>> > firstborn
>> > Son of the Father, who was appointed heir. Part of that inheritance
>> > was
>> > to
>> > be the Word, and thus our God.
>>
>> You appear confused. How many Gods do you worship? I worship only one God
>> because there is only one. You appear to believe there are 3 so how many
> do
>> you worship?
>
> Three persons constitute the Godhead. If that's three Gods then so be it.

At last. You see I already know that LDS are poly theists. I went out with
one, read their stuff and my sister used to be one. But thanks for admitting
it here.

>> > It is sufficient that a Son will suffice as an inheritor, Saviour and
> God.
>> > No need to bring in the notion "Very God" or for any complex and
> fanciful
>> > theories surrounding this notion.
>>
>> Word first.
>>
>> > Remember, that there are aspects of an eternal nature. The gospel
>> > itself
>> > is
>> > eternal, with neither beginning or end. Resurrection is not new. But
>> > never-the-less some things have a beginning and an end. It's knowing
> what.
>>
>> You have not understood the original language properly. The gospel had a
>> beginning but it will not cease to exist therefore it is now eternal. The
>> Word already was "in the beginning".
>
> Christianity does not know what the beginning means.

lol Exterminate, exterminate

>> > For instance, Jesus overcame the world and the Father exalted Him. Will
>> > Jesus have to do it again and again? Answer: no.
>>
>> Lots of words, not very much scripture and then zero context for what was
>> used.
>>
>> How many Gods are there? 1? 2? 3?

Answer. There is One.

The LDS believe in many gods. They are polytheists. (it is admitted further
up in this post by the LDS man on the spot)

Their claim to be true followers of Christ is as true as my claim to be the
true Pope despite not being RC, being married, never having been ordained
and in opposition to the doctrines that make the RCC what it is.

Phil
.

Relevant Pages