@SamaHoole "the line, it turns out, is forty thousand of anything, all agreeing." - a good principle to live by, especially when you're the bee up against a big predator
@TJ1day1@RealCandaceO I would have more respect if they just shut it down and restarted as TP-IsraelFirst. I would not watch and would still heckle and jeer, but it would be with a tiny grain of respect.
Nice word play. It doesn't only say that we should have no other gods besides him or before him. It says there are no other gods greater than him. It says God always was, always is, always will be. This means he was not created. He was not a man. And he's not married.
Jesus was not born. He was not created. Jesus always was, always is, always will be a part of God. (John 1)
It should be clear from the above that Satan is not his brother. Satan was a created angel who was cast out. Note the difference. Created is not a god.
Seems obvious that my God and your God are two different things. One of them is Christian, because Christ is God, uncreated
@TamaraLBennett1@MadMikeIsenberg The LDS teaches Jesus was 'born' with Satan as his 'brother'. That is not past eternal. Being born is having a beginning.
Christians all have one thing in common. Genesis 1, John 1, Romans 10, Galatians 1. God is eternally past and future, uncreated. Always was God, is God, will be God - the highest diety. Jesus was, is, and will continue to be God. The God who created the universe is the only high God and Jesus is a part of that deity - uncreated because he is the same deity. We can debate how this possibly is or is not multiple entities, but we cannot debate that one is and the other is not, or was not, God.
The LDS believe that Jesus was created. Automatic fail of the litmus test.
LDS believe the the God who created the universe was a man, created. Another fail of the litmus test.
LDS believe an Angel gave extended knowledge of the Bible. Automatic fail of Galatians 1:8, to which there is zero variance. A fail.
The LDS highest prophets up until 2008 agreed they are not Christian. Failing these basic ideas and their own admission, I see no reason they should be considered Christian or would want to be called Christian.
@SamaHoole It's mind boggling how evil they are.
Kids NEED milk. It's good for you.
Butter is BAD. No one should eat it.
...and the indoctrination was so complete that most people thoroughly believed it.
You know nothing of the four gospels' timeline. Mark was written before Galatians. Luke and Matthew a little later. Not even one a decade later. John came later. But none of that is relevant except your wrong thinking goes beyond theology. Nicean Creed was not the birth of Trinity. I read the Trinity in Genesis in the Creation account, and also in John's creation account. I read the Trinity in Exodus. I can find it in most of the Bible including Revelation. Nicean Creed created no theology that the early church fathers did not espouse. Irenaeus and Clement wrote of it. Tertullian was the first to use this word, but not the first to write of it. So how did the council create that which had been discussed for the entirety of church history and is so clearly in the Bible?
I am glad Chik-Fil-A saves the cows. More for me.
Also, to further prove your point, have you seen the ingredients for their amazing chicken? Injected marinade full of things I cannot pronounce, including copious amounts of sugars.
The ingredients in the best burgers: beef and salt. And I am happy if they forget the salt.
@Kaysuede@SaltofGod1611@valorthodoxia The Church is not a part of the major thing. Is one saved by the Church? No. You are arguing the minors. Peace be with you.
@rYsentrout@gwowls So Galations, which sits in the NT and was written after Thessalonians 1 and Ephesians, came after the NT? Wild take. Nicean Creed is irrelevant to this. And the NT cannot be a new gospel since it is the gospel. Only one.
All y'all are off your rockers. While I love a good theological debate amongst friends, this is public with a terrible attitude. A bad look at minimum.
At the end, when standing before our Creator on Judgement Day, what is the answer you have for allowing you in? Do you talk to God about your theological position? Do you argue that the last guy should not have gone in?
What about the theif on the cross? Was his soteriology right? Doubt it. He said, "The man on the middle cross said I could."
I have read Romans 10:9 a few hundred times and I do not see the things you guys think are so important. Yes, I have been to university and got a bible degree, have read cover to cover many times, have studied it deeply for 50 years. I know what it says. I know what the early fathers wrote about it. I know the silly long names for various theological positions.
No, the theif had the right answer. Specifically, Jesus said I can enter because I declare with my mouth that โJesus is Lord,โ and believe in my heart that God raised him from the dead. From that I was eternally changed. I repented of my rebellion against Him.
I am going to go out on a limb and just say it. You're both wrong, if for nothing else, it's the lack of understanding each other. Remember to love first. The academics is great. Truly. Use it in love.
@gwowls From the Christian side, we agree with the previous leaders of the church. They claim an Angel gave them a new word that accompanied the Bible and superceded it. Our Bible says do not believe any changes even if an Angel delivers the news (Galatians 1)
Even the church's own highest positions, from the beginning until 2008, decreed that they were most definitely NOT Christian. They took offense at the mention of it. Now that their membership rolls are nose diving, they think they can get people in by claiming something they never wanted.