Evangelicals, Mormons on Same Side of Cultural Divide

c814t

c271t [a] [/a]

c80t [a] [/a]

c144t [a] [/a]

c682t [a] [/a]

c234t [a] [/a]

c315t [a] [/a]

c642t [a] [/a]

c55t [a] [/a]

c162t [a] [/a]

c482t [a] [/a]

c125t [a] [/a]

c801t [a] [/a]

c803t [a] [/a]

c423t [a] [/a]

c607t [a] [/a]

c723t [a] [/a]

c201t [a] [/a]

c164t [a] [/a]

c594t [a] [/a]

c679t [a] [/a]

c941t [a] [/a]

c920t [a] [/a]

c375t [a] [/a]

c753t [a] [/a]

c196t [a] [/a]

c681t [a] [/a]

c602t [a] [/a]

c502t [a] [/a]

c418t [a] [/a]

c136t [a] [/a]

c845t [a] [/a]

c443t [a] [/a]

c907t [a] [/a]

c807t [a] [/a]

c306t [a] [/a]

c829t [a] [/a]

c845t [a] [/a]

c283t [a] [/a]

c806t [a] [/a]

c582t [a] [/a]

c832t [a] [/a]

c625t [a] [/a]

c632t [a] [/a]

c677t [a] [/a]

c788t [a] [/a]

c784t [a] [/a]

c72t [a] [/a]

c398t [a] [/a]

c642t [a] [/a]

c957t [a] [/a]

c715t [a] [/a]

c155t [a] [/a]

c650t [a] [/a]

c680t [a] [/a]

c742t [a] [/a]

c674t [a] [/a]

c702t [a] [/a]

c366t [a] [/a]

c609t [a] [/a]

c249t [a] [/a]

c254t [a] [/a]

c707t [a] [/a]

c672t [a] [/a]

c857t [a] [/a]

c688t [a] [/a]

c397t [a] [/a]

c283t [a] [/a]

c977t [a] [/a]

c587t [a] [/a]

c427t [a] [/a]

c424t [a] [/a]

c27t [a] [/a]

c688t [a] [/a]

c985t [a] [/a]

c375t [a] [/a]

c626t [a] [/a]

c876t [a] [/a]

c520t [a] [/a]

c653t [a] [/a]

c782t [a] [/a]

c614t [a] [/a]

c272t [a] [/a]

c560t [a] [/a]

c358t [a] [/a]

c292t [a] [/a]

c891t [a] [/a]

c368t [a] [/a]

c929t [a] [/a]

c662t [a] [/a]

c723t [a] [/a]

c176t [a] [/a]

c718t [a] [/a]

c418t [a] [/a]

c996t [a] [/a]

c62t [a] [/a]

c241t [a] [/a]

c819t [a] [/a]

c354t [a] [/a]

c59t [a] [/a]

c762t [a] [/a]

c470t [a] [/a]

c700t [a] [/a]

c270t [a] [/a]

c10t [a] [/a]

c670t [a] [/a]

c128t [a] [/a]

c361t [a] [/a]

c257t [a] [/a]

c949t [a] [/a]

c86t [a] [/a]

c882t [a] [/a]

c124t [a] [/a]

c394t [a] [/a]

c468t [a] [/a]

c865t [a] [/a]

c473t [a] [/a]

c167t [a] [/a]

c831t [a] [/a]

c56t [a] [/a]

c456t [a] [/a]

c237t [a] [/a]

c280t [a] [/a]

c786t [a] [/a]

c885t [a] [/a]

c157t [a] [/a]

c320t [a] [/a]

c517t [a] [/a]

c533t [a] [/a]

c412t [a] [/a]

c725t [a] [/a]

c243t [a] [/a]

c866t [a] [/a]

c615t [a] [/a]

c374t [a] [/a]

c98t [a] [/a]

c702t [a] [/a]

c443t [a] [/a]

c957t [a] [/a]

c718t [a] [/a]

c301t [a] [/a]

c382t [a] [/a]

c807t [a] [/a]

c820t [a] [/a]

c407t [a] [/a]

c793t [a] [/a]

c841t [a] [/a]

c467t [a] [/a]

c778t [a] [/a]

c674t [a] [/a]

c788t [a] [/a]

c806t [a] [/a]

c205t [a] [/a]

c806t [a] [/a]

c595t [a] [/a]

c819t [a] [/a]

c548t [a] [/a]

c43t [a] [/a]

c771t [a] [/a]

c872t [a] [/a]

c559t [a] [/a]

c1000t [a] [/a]

c199t [a] [/a]

c486t [a] [/a]

c275t [a] [/a]

c480t [a] [/a]

c87t [a] [/a]

c362t [a] [/a]

c866t [a] [/a]

c220t [a] [/a]

c833t [a] [/a]

c856t [a] [/a]

c90t [a] [/a]

c360t [a] [/a]

c680t [a] [/a]

c32t [a] [/a]

c757t [a] [/a]

c123t [a] [/a]

c11t [a] [/a]

c793t [a] [/a]

c940t [a] [/a]

c925t [a] [/a]

c974t [a] [/a]

c454t [a] [/a]

c840t [a] [/a]

c694t [a] [/a]

c354t [a] [/a]

c693t [a] [/a]

c920t [a] [/a]

c684t [a] [/a]

c144t [a] [/a]

c828t [a] [/a]

c75t [a] [/a]

c219t [a] [/a]

c127t [a] [/a]

c283t [a] [/a]

c687t [a] [/a]

c248t [a] [/a]

c781t [a] [/a]

c156t [a] [/a]

c892t [a] [/a]

c404t [a] [/a]

c421t [a] [/a]

c337t [a] [/a]

c306t [a] [/a]

c496t [a] [/a]

c85t [a] [/a]

c319t [a] [/a]

c770t [a] [/a]

c831t [a] [/a]

c218t [a] [/a]

c224t [a] [/a]

c143t [a] [/a]

c482t [a] [/a]

c821t [a] [/a]

c555t [a] [/a]

c877t [a] [/a]

c436t [a] [/a]

c603t [a] [/a]

c590t [a] [/a]

c330t [a] [/a]

c290t [a] [/a]

c522t [a] [/a]

c536t [a] [/a]

c129t [a] [/a]

c765t [a] [/a]

c921t [a] [/a]

c184t [a] [/a]

c872t [a] [/a]

c933t [a] [/a]

c879t [a] [/a]

c910t [a] [/a]

c648t [a] [/a]

c363t [a] [/a]

c26t [a] [/a]

c514t [a] [/a]

c763t [a] [/a]

c106t [a] [/a]

c778t [a] [/a]

c683t [a] [/a]

c434t [a] [/a]

c818t [a] [/a]

c347t [a] [/a]

c872t [a] [/a]

c714t [a] [/a]

c2t [a] [/a]

c267t [a] [/a]

c578t [a] [/a]

c901t [a] [/a]

c309t [a] [/a]

c146t [a] [/a]

c378t [a] [/a]

c193t [a] [/a]

c196t [a] [/a]

c729t [a] [/a]

c996t [a] [/a]

c29t [a] [/a]

c793t [a] [/a]

c733t [a] [/a]

c725t [a] [/a]

c269t [a] [/a]

c646t [a] [/a]

c22t [a] [/a]

c687t [a] [/a]

c162t [a] [/a]

c107t [a] [/a]

c803t [a] [/a]

c541t [a] [/a]

c2t [a] [/a]

c443t [a] [/a]

c296t [a] [/a]

c517t [a] [/a]

c990t [a] [/a]

c361t [a] [/a]

c107t [a] [/a]

c432t [a] [/a]

c348t [a] [/a]

c25t [a] [/a]

c727t [a] [/a]

c410t [a] [/a]

c6t [a] [/a]

c709t [a] [/a]

c503t [a] [/a]

c723t [a] [/a]

c486t [a] [/a]

c403t [a] [/a]

c266t [a] [/a]

c976t [a] [/a]

c204t [a] [/a]

c976t [a] [/a]

c277t [a] [/a]

c620t [a] [/a]

c631t [a] [/a]

c48t [a] [/a]

c579t [a] [/a]

c469t [a] [/a]

c117t [a] [/a]

c490t [a] [/a]

c440t [a] [/a]

c419t [a] [/a]

c404t [a] [/a]

c518t [a] [/a]

c962t [a] [/a]

c11t [a] [/a]

c633t [a] [/a]

c460t [a] [/a]

c886t [a] [/a]

c356t [a] [/a]

c993t [a] [/a]

c457t [a] [/a]

c66t [a] [/a]

c80t [a] [/a]

c178t [a] [/a]

c235t [a] [/a]

c701t [a] [/a]

c518t [a] [/a]

c660t [a] [/a]

c40t [a] [/a]

c410t [a] [/a]

c592t [a] [/a]

c984t [a] [/a]

c797t [a] [/a]

c748t [a] [/a]

c148t [a] [/a]

c214t [a] [/a]

c558t [a] [/a]

c410t [a] [/a]

c25t [a] [/a]

c972t [a] [/a]

Under 'Mr. Mark' half truths and lies are stated as being what Mormons believe. To bad real 'Mormon' beliefs are not reflected.
1. God is an advanced being who is spirit housed in a glorified celestial body of flesh and bone. He still has His spirit which is in an advanced state of glorified existence.
2. Jesus Christ, Lord of the New Testament and
Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament are the same being. The Spirit of Christ has an influence upon all mankind toward good. In a way this is a trinity of Christ in which Mormons do believe as well as that it was Christ, the Word,
that created the heavens and the earth and did exist before the foundation of the world. What Mormons consider in addition is that Jesus Christ was not his own Father. The Doctrine of the Father as taught by Christ is pure in the Bible but misrepresented by the interpretations of men. Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea adhered to the concept that Christ was the firstborn of the Father of all creatures, this means before the heavens and earth where created. It also accepts that Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh during the meridian of time. In Mormon Doctrine God the Father of Jehovah in the spirit before creation established and empowered his Firstborn spriit son Jehovah to be the God of creation and to be the Savior and Redeemer of all that he created. In this respect the Father of Spirits and Jehovah the creator of the temporal bodies of man are two separated and distinct beings. Christ was not his own Father in LDS belief. Further the Holy Ghost who descended and fell upon Jesus Christ at his baptism is also a distinct person having his own role to play in the Godhead as the spirit communicator between God and man and witness of the Father and Son to mention but one such role.
3. Mormons belief that in and through the redemption of Jesus Christ all mankind will be saved, that is resurrected and live again, only their degree of reward is reliavant to their degree of personal righteousness. Perhaps some other Christians believe it just to live with murders and non repentant sinners for all the rest of eternity. Mormons who are righteous and repentant feel that is not justice and accordingly believe in degress or kingdoms of glory as taught in the Bible, Celestial, Terrestrial, etc.
4. Mormon's first principle of the gospel is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ but Mormons do believe as James that faith without 'works' is dead. A person merely saying the blief in Christ and Christ's teachings but does not live by the word of Christ is hardly an example of one who has 'true faith'. That is more of a false declaration and ought to be seen as such when one says he has faith and believes in Christ but turns arounds and murders and commits all sorts of grieveous sins.
5. Mormons believe in the Word of God, past, present and future. God is not dead nor does he sleep and he speaks to all people who do hear his voice past (Bible and Book of Mormon) as well as that which he continues to speak today and will continue to speak tomorrow to those who know were to find him. God's Word is not a closed book, it is open and living.
6. Mormons believe in that same Gospel of Christ as was accepted and practiced by Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and all the righteous prophets and followers of Jehovah who is the same as Christ. Adam knew that his God would come to the earth in temporal form to perform the Atonement in respect to the redemption of man and looked forward to that day, as did Enoch, Noah, Abraham and all other prophets and understanding people of such righteous faith in God. Mormon's believe and uphold this self same Gospel and its blessings down from the ancient fathers. If anything Mormon's believe in the true old Christianity before the inovations of men corrupted them.
If 'Mr. Mark' means by 'historic Christianity'
that which began in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th centuries AD, then he is correct. But Mormons believe in and uphold that same Christianity taught by Jesus and the Apostles of the Lord as well as that which was held and practiced by the true ancient believers since Adam. Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham were all Christians. They believed in the coming Messiah, the Christ and were Christians from the most ancient days and beginnings of 'our' earthly duration and true 'historic Christianity'.

Under 'Mr. Mark' half truths and lies are stated as being what Mormons believe. To bad real 'Mormon' beliefs are not reflected.
1. God is an advanced being who is spirit housed in a glorified celestial body of flesh and bone. He still has His spirit which is in an advanced state of glorified existence.
2. Jesus Christ, Lord of the New Testament and
Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament are the same being. The Spirit of Christ has an influence upon all mankind toward good. In a way this is a trinity of Christ in which Mormons do believe as well as that it was Christ, the Word,
that created the heavens and the earth and did exist before the foundation of the world. What Mormons consider in addition is that Jesus Christ was not his own Father. The Doctrine of the Father as taught by Christ is pure in the Bible but misrepresented by the interpretations of men. Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea adhered to the concept that Christ was the firstborn of the Father of all creatures, this means before the heavens and earth where created. It also accepts that Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh during the meridian of time. In Mormon Doctrine God the Father of Jehovah in the spirit before creation established and empowered his Firstborn spriit son Jehovah to be the God of creation and to be the Savior and Redeemer of all that he created. In this respect the Father of Spirits and Jehovah the creator of the temporal bodies of man are two separated and distinct beings. Christ was not his own Father in LDS belief. Further the Holy Ghost who descended and fell upon Jesus Christ at his baptism is also a distinct person having his own role to play in the Godhead as the spirit communicator between God and man and witness of the Father and Son to mention but one such role.
3. Mormons belief that in and through the redemption of Jesus Christ all mankind will be saved, that is resurrected and live again, only their degree of reward is reliavant to their degree of personal righteousness. Perhaps some other Christians believe it just to live with murders and non repentant sinners for all the rest of eternity. Mormons who are righteous and repentant feel that is not justice and accordingly believe in degress or kingdoms of glory as taught in the Bible, Celestial, Terrestrial, etc.
4. Mormon's first principle of the gospel is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ but Mormons do believe as James that faith without 'works' is dead. A person merely saying the blief in Christ and Christ's teachings but does not live by the word of Christ is hardly an example of one who has 'true faith'. That is more of a false declaration and ought to be seen as such when one says he has faith and believes in Christ but turns arounds and murders and commits all sorts of grieveous sins.
5. Mormons believe in the Word of God, past, present and future. God is not dead nor does he sleep and he speaks to all people who do hear his voice past (Bible and Book of Mormon) as well as that which he continues to speak today and will continue to speak tomorrow to those who know were to find him. God's Word is not a closed book, it is open and living.
6. Mormons believe in that same Gospel of Christ as was accepted and practiced by Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and all the righteous prophets and followers of Jehovah who is the same as Christ. Adam knew that his God would come to the earth in temporal form to perform the Atonement in respect to the redemption of man and looked forward to that day, as did Enoch, Noah, Abraham and all other prophets and understanding people of such righteous faith in God. Mormon's believe and uphold this self same Gospel and its blessings down from the ancient fathers. If anything Mormon's believe in the true old Christianity before the inovations of men corrupted them.
If 'Mr. Mark' means by 'historic Christianity'
that which began in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th centuries AD, then he is correct. But Mormons believe in and uphold that same Christianity taught by Jesus and the Apostles of the Lord as well as that which was held and practiced by the true ancient believers since Adam. Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham were all Christians. They believed in the coming Messiah, the Christ and were Christians from the most ancient days and beginnings of 'our' earthly duration and true 'historic Christianity'.

Video documentary of how early Christianity is the greater parallel to Mormonism than anything else. Yes "historic biblical early Christianity," not later modern "Christianity." Mormonism claims to be a restoration of ancient Christianity. Down through the centuries many beliefs & the temple rituals were fraternalized, here's evidence to show historic Christianity had it, Mormons restored it.

http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=JustinMartyrJr

c746t [a] [/a]

c129t [a] [/a]

c412t [a] [/a]

c844t [a] [/a]

c674t [a] [/a]

c102t [a] [/a]

c90t [a] [/a]

c686t [a] [/a]

c369t [a] [/a]

c364t [a] [/a]

c519t [a] [/a]

c216t [a] [/a]

c489t [a] [/a]

c250t [a] [/a]

c310t [a] [/a]

c928t [a] [/a]

c348t [a] [/a]

c472t [a] [/a]

c712t [a] [/a]

c587t [a] [/a]

c519t [a] [/a]

c157t [a] [/a]

c259t [a] [/a]

c56t [a] [/a]

c957t [a] [/a]

c120t [a] [/a]

c973t [a] [/a]

c726t [a] [/a]

c814t [a] [/a]

c710t [a] [/a]

c153t [a] [/a]

c382t [a] [/a]

c56t [a] [/a]

c828t [a] [/a]

c908t [a] [/a]

c28t [a] [/a]

c294t [a] [/a]

c817t [a] [/a]

c33t [a] [/a]

c268t [a] [/a]

c310t [a] [/a]

c641t [a] [/a]

c535t [a] [/a]

c41t [a] [/a]

c502t [a] [/a]

c83t [a] [/a]

c692t [a] [/a]

c922t [a] [/a]

c705t [a] [/a]

c895t [a] [/a]

c239t [a] [/a]

c937t [a] [/a]

c728t [a] [/a]

c550t [a] [/a]

c933t [a] [/a]

c532t [a] [/a]

c787t [a] [/a]

c573t [a] [/a]

c904t [a] [/a]

c399t [a] [/a]

c43t [a] [/a]

c946t [a] [/a]

c295t [a] [/a]

c415t [a] [/a]

c650t [a] [/a]

c132t [a] [/a]

c71t [a] [/a]

c92t [a] [/a]

c767t [a] [/a]

c40t [a] [/a]

c795t [a] [/a]

c728t [a] [/a]

c486t [a] [/a]

c604t [a] [/a]

c261t [a] [/a]

c315t [a] [/a]

c574t [a] [/a]

c2t [a] [/a]

c321t [a] [/a]

c178t [a] [/a]

c212t [a] [/a]

c591t [a] [/a]

c188t [a] [/a]

c195t [a] [/a]

c510t [a] [/a]

c700t [a] [/a]

c359t [a] [/a]

c108t [a] [/a]

c55t [a] [/a]

c980t [a] [/a]

c955t [a] [/a]

c84t [a] [/a]

c286t [a] [/a]

c954t [a] [/a]

c412t [a] [/a]

c213t [a] [/a]

c739t

"HISTORICAL BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY"?!

I find it interesting that "historic Christianity," or "historical/biblical Christianity" is so often used on the internet by modern "Christians" who then present later Christian dogmas as being what people have to currently believe in order to be a "Christian," or "saved"! It seems to me a lot of picking & care selecting of "historic Christianity," & "biblical Christianity," goes on while turning or not mentioning other aspects of "historic Christianity" also belief. So what "historic Christianity" are they talking about? The versions & selections that agree with ones particular brand of modern "Christianity"?

To illustrate:

Rev. Mohler wrote: "Christianity promises salvation through Christ's atonement and the sinner's justification by faith."

All throughout Christian "HISTORY" this point, FAITH & WORKS, was hashed over, especially during the Reformation! The earliest to later Christians, from James on, argued against those who were attempting to claim that a person's behaviour didn't matter, when it did.

Many modern "Christians" also seem more interested in how you believe, rather than how you live your life, good or bad, it don't matter, so long as you've "confessed Jesus!"

In anti-Mormon propaganda, Mormons are "damned" for attempting to do good works, and are "damned" for when some are caught doing evil works! Damned if they do, & damned if they don't!

In HISTORIC CHRISTIANITY:

J. R. Hoffmann notes that by the 2nd century, there were Christian sects that followed "salvationism" by grace alone, with out works. Earlier, James is amongst the earliest Christian leaders to respond to these types of early movements. But we also know from many examples in the New Testament, & the early to later Christian fathers, that this issue concerning "grace" & "works" was a subject of interest & debate. Jude had written against a group of so-called "Christians, antinomians" who had attempted to encourage sexual transgressions, rejected authority & understood divine grace as sanctioning immorality. (R. Joseph Hoffman, Celsus, On The True Doctrine, p. 14-16; Jude 3-8).

Modern "Christians" in claiming, that one must "know Jesus as their personal Savior," and they preach a "salvation" were what you do & don't do, as by way of works, doesn't count. However, in claiming to know Christ as their personal savior, do they, or should they also keep his commandments, for "He that saith, I know him, and keepth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him" (1 John 2:4).

Passages on works seem to be overlooked by those who selectively cite from those about grace.

Here's just some of the ones on works: Eccl.12:14, Jer.17:10 & 32:19, Micah 6:8, Matt. 5:6, 16, 19-20, 7:16, 21-23, 13:23, 41-6, 16:27, 19:16-17; 25:11-30; 34-6, 1 Cor. 3:8, 6:9; 2 Cor.5:9; John 3:21, 5:29, 12:50; Rom.1:5, 18, 22, 2:6-13; 5:3, 8:16-17, 35, 12:12, 2 Cor. 5:9-10, 6:17, 7:10, 17:7; Gal.6:4-7; Eph. 2:10, 5:5-9; 2 Tim.3:17; Heb.4:11, 17, 5:8-9, 1 Pet.1:10, 17; 2 Pet.1:5; 1 John 3:18, 22, James 1:12, 22-7, 2:26, 4:17-18; Rev.2:7, 11, 3:4-5, 7:14, 22:14, Job 34:11; Isa.1:17; John 14:15; Phil.2:12; John 12:50; Acts 5:32; 10:35, 14:22; 1 Cor.6:9, 2 Thess.1:4-9, Luke 9:23-6, 21:12-15.

It is also interesting to note how hard the "saved" "Christians," are WORKING to "witness" to "the unsaved"!

DEIFICATION: BECOMING GODS

Rev. Mohler: "Mormonism promises deification."

The fact is, "HISTORIC" & "BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY," also debated over deification, theosis, perfection, or becoming gods too! It was an important part of Christian history that seems to be passed over as though it didn't happen, or was part of "historic Christianity," when it is! The early Christian father even cite the same passages of scripture to defend & expound on their own particular versions of deification, as the Mormons do.

BIBLICAL PASSAGES USED BY EARLY TO LATER CHRISTIANS ON DEIFICATION (These passages are also used by Mormons in defense of their own "restored" version of deification, called exaltation).

Psalm 82; John 10:30-39; John 17:17-24; Matthew 5:48; Luke 14:11 & 18:14; 6:40 22:29; Romans 8:16-18; Matthew 25:21, 34-40; Colossians 3:24-25: Luke 22:29; 2 Corinthians 3:17-18; Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Corinthians 15:35-43; Matthew 13:43;
Daniel 12:3; 1 John 2:3-11, 18-29; 3:2-3; Colossians 3:4; Isaiah 1:18; 41:22—23.

There sure is a lot of passages in the Bible about deification, despite how many modern "Christians," continue to claim that it's "non-Christians," "satanic," & "non-biblical," & not part of "Historical Christianity."

BIBLICAL PASSAGES USED BY EARLY TO LATER CHRISTIANS:

Psalm 82 was a passage that some of the early to later Christians made reference to in order to show from the scriptures that their own particular versions & interpretations of deification was based on the scriptures.

"I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Christ cites this passage in defense of his claim to being divine, (John 10:30-39).

Some of the early to later Christians who made reference to Psalms 81-2 as scriptural proof texts in support of their own particular versions of the doctrine of deification were:

1. Justin Martyr, 110-165 A.D.
2. Irenæus, 120-202 A.D.
3. Clement of Alexandria, 153-193-217 A.D.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers, = (TANF), Vol.2, pp.206, 215, 374, & 437; Tertullian [145-220 A.D.] (TANF) Vol.3, pp.480, & 608; Origen of Alexandria, [185-230-254 A.D.];(TANF) Vol.4, p.509; Thascius Cyprian, [200-258 A.D.] Thascius Cyprian was the bishop of Carthage until he suffered martyrdom [248-58 A.D.], (TANF) Vol.5, pp.263-4, & 518; Novatian, a Roman Presbyter, [210-280 A.D.]; (TANF) Vol.5, p.631; Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, [born about 298 and died about May 2-3, 373 A.D.] The Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers = (TN&PNF) Vol.4, pp. lxxxv, lxxxvii, & 329, Discourse Against The Arians I:38-39; S. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, [born a few years before the outbreak of Arianism in A.D. 318, and died about March 18th, 386 A.D.] (TN&PNF) Vol.7, pp. i, xi, 2; St. Jerome, [345-420 A.D.]15 15- The Homilies of St. Jerome, Pub. The Catholic Un. Press, Wash. DC, 1964, pp.106-7 & 353; St. Augustine of Hippo, [354-430 A.D.]; Deification: The Content Of Athanasian Soteriology by Keith Edward Norman, (Dept. of Rel. Duke Un.), thesis for degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 1980, p.241-2, & note 1 on p.214, Ennar. in Ps. 49.2.

Christ prayed that we would become perfect and one with Him and the Father. "Sanctify them through thy truth...And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth." "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them: that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." (John 17:17-24.)

If we are to become one with Christ, & the Father, would we not also become divine? Would we not also be glorified with the same type of glory? Christ said: "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them: that they may be one even as we are one...that they may be made perfect in one..." (Jn.17:22 & 23).

Irenaeus [late 2nd, early 3rd century A.D.], used John 17:24 to scripturally point out that the disciples would also be glorified. (TANF) 1: pp.478-9.

Also, Origen [A.D. 185-230-254] used portions of Christ's prayer in support of the doctrine of perfection & deification. (TANF) 4: pp.344-5, Origen De Principiis, book 3, chapter 6.

Christ said: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matt.5:48). Origen also used this passage in defense of deification.(TANF) 4: p.509, Origen Against Celsus, book 4, chap.29.

Another idea behind deification was that the earliest Christians, (like the Mormons), believed that Christ & the Most High God the Father would not be removed out of their places so that these newly deified beings could take over:

"For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." (Luke 14:11 & 18:14).

And: "The disciple is not above his master: but everyone that is perfect shall be as his master." (Luke 6:40). Irenaeus cites this passage to point out that in coming up out of the realm of the dead by way of the resurrection, the body that is raised up, is perfected. (TANF) 1: p.560).

Clement of Alexandria, [A.D. 153-193-217], cites this passage while writing about deification too. (TANF) 2: p.364, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, book 2, chap. xvii.

Paul wrote to the Romans that: "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us." (Romans 8:16-18).

A number of early Christians used this passage to support their beliefs that the early Christian martyrs had been perfected, glorified, deified & rewarded with divine ranks. For they had remained faithful, & even though they had suffered greatly, they still had endured to the end. (TANF) 2: pp.411-13, 416-17, & 426-441; Clement of Alexandria, [A.D. 153-193-217]; Martyrdom & Persecution in the Early Church, by W.H.C. Frend, 1967.

Upon becoming heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ, we might want to consider what Christ was heir to. God appointed him to be "heir of all things", for it was through Christ that the worlds were created. Christ alone had purged our sins and had "sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on High; Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they". The Father also said to his Son, "Thy throne O God, is forever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom." (Hebrews 1:1-4, & 8; see also: Galatians 3:27-29, 4:1-7; Revelations 3:21-22; 21:7).

Another passage reads: "His lord said unto him, Well done thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee a ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord." (Matthew 25:21).

The early Christian Father, Hippolytus [A.D. 170-236 A.D.], wrote that one of the reasons why the righteous had been deified was because they had shown that they had been faithful over small things while in earth life. And thus, upon being deified, they would have entrusted unto them that which was great. (TANF) 5: p.151, & note 6, The Refutation of All Heresies, Book X, chap. xxix).

"Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Matt. 25:34-40).

Christ also talked about the good works that they did, & thus, in having done these good works they would enter on the right hand path into the Kingdom of God, & would inherit the kingdom. (Rev.1:6; 3:21-22; 4:4, 10-11; 5:10).

"Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done". (Colossians 3:24-25.)

"And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me". (Luke 22:29).

In the New Testament we read about how some resurrected bodies will shine with greater glory and brightness that others. For in some cases our resurrected bodies will also be glorified, some to lesser, others to greater degrees of glory. (1 Corinthians 15:35-43). Origen [A.D. 185-230-254], used this passage while responding to the early anti-Christian Celsus, & while expounding on what he understood to be the doctrine of deification. (TANF) 4: p.509.

Paul to the Corinthians: Through the "spirit of the Lord" we will be changed from bodies without glory, into bodies of the same glory as Christ. "Now the Lord is that Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." (2 Corinthians 3:17-18).

Paul to the Philippians: "For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." (Philippians 3:20-21).

Jesus said: "Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." (Matthew 13:43). Irenaeus [late 2nd, early 3rd centuries A.D.], cites this passage as scriptural evidences for deification. (TANF) 1: pp.523-5; Matt.13:40-3).

Much later, Thomas Aquinas [1225-74 A.D.] also used this passage to suggest that the righteous would shine forth with great light and glory in the after life. (Heaven: A History, by Colleen McDannell & Berhard Lang, Yale Un. Press, New Haven, & Lon., 1988, pp.83-4, 89-92, n.27, on p.369, Aquinas, Sth, Suppl. 91:3).

The Old Testament Prophet Daniel wrote: "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever." (Daniel 12:3). Irenaeus also cites from Daniel as scriptural proof text that showed that the faces of those who had been deified would shine with great glory and light.(TANF) 1: pp.488-90, & 497.

Paul to the Colossians: "To whom God would make known what is the riches of glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:" (Colossians 1:27-28).

The ritual of anointing is combined with the idea of deification, even in the earliest days of the Church. However, John noted that some of their anointing rituals had been counterfeited by "anti-Christs" who had infiltrated the Church and who were bringing in counterfeit forms of anointing. He goes on to tell the earliest saints that the anointing they had received was from God, while the other was from "anti-Christs". (1 John 2:3-11, 18-29).

John then goes on to present the idea and symbolical types in their own anointing ritual, and how deification fits in with some of the symbolical meanings behind anointing. For having been anointed they were cleansed and purified of their sins. This also shows up and is expounded upon in the writings of the Fathers in early to later Christianity.

John wrote: "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure." (1 John 3:2-3). Origen [A.D. 185-230-254], cites portions of this in support and in defense of the doctrine of perfection and deification. (TANF) 4: pp.344-5, & 509, Origen De Principiis, book 3, chap. 6; Origen Against Celsus, book 4, chap. 29.

"When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory." (Colossians 3:4.)

Paul wrote to the Galatians: "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Galatians 3:27).

In some cases in the early Christian mysteries, after they had been anointed and baptized. They put on new and pure garments to symbolize that which was to come in the resurrection when they would be clothed in the same type of immortality as Christ was.

Paul tells us to put on charity "which is the bond of perfection." (Colossians 3:14).

To Timothy, Paul wrote that the scriptures would, among other things, help them towards reaching perfection. "That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good work." (2 Tim.3:15-17).

To the Hebrews, Paul wrote: "Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren." (Hebrews 2:7-11).

Paul seems to have written here of Christ's return to glory. But also of Christ leading his other brothers and sisters back into the family in heaven to partake of divine glory with him. This idea was expounded upon in early to later Christian writings and art works. Christ suffered for the just and the unjust, and those who were once disobedient, but who were willing to repent and live according to God's commandments even though they might have been sent to the spirit prison. For Christ descended down unto them and preached the gospel there and led them up out of captivity. Thus, Christ brought them to God the Father, and presented them to the Father. Having led the way. Upon their ascension up out of the underworld their deification and glorification had begun. As Christ and the host of freed captives exited out of the spirit prison, they trample over the devil or demons that had attempted to keep Christ from entering into the prison house. Paul also mentioned crowns of glory, and makes references to having all things put under his feet. Many early to later Christian art works show Christ standing on the devil as he frees the captive prisoners. Paul also made references to Christ leading or bringing "many sons", many "children" or "vast multitudes of God's people to heaven". Leading them over into "glory" and deification.

The Old Testament Prophet, Isaiah seems to suggest that even though we have done good or evil, we may be washed clean of our sins, if we repent, and then in the ultimate end, we can become gods. Isaiah wrote: "Let them bring them forth, and shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come. Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together." (Isaiah 1:16-20; 41:22-23; Hebrews 10:16-22; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

The deified would have also passed through rites of passage dramas too, thus, in early to later Christianity this included the heavenly coronations, vestments, crowns, enthronement, and the glorification of the saints.

The New Testament writers mentions many aspects of this aspect of deification, for Paul, upon writing to Timothy, shows how he looked forward to being crowned in the next life for his efforts & endurance, for he says, I have "Fought a good fight, I have kept the faith: Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." (2 Timothy 4:7-8).

The crown of righteousness hints to the ordinances. The early Christians were anointed, clothed in garments & royal robes in their mysteries or ordinances as types of that which was to come in the heavenly kingdoms of God. The crown was the symbol of the reward for faithfulness, for they would be deified & crowned in glory. In John's book of Revelation, Christ promised: "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne." (Revelation 3:21).

In early Christian thought, Christ was the greatest example of the deification process because the body in which His Spirit had been clothed in through birth, was eventually deified and glorified when He was later resurrected. For when Christ lived on the earth in the body of His birth to Mary, was He glorified? Did His earthly body at all times give off visible light and a brightness that was brighter than the sun at noon-day? Or did He look like other men? The scriptures tell us that He was born and grew up from childhood to manhood (Matthew 1:25; Luke 1:80; 2:52).

There were times when the divine light of His power and glory did shine forth while He was in that earthly body. Such as the time when Christ was transfigured to the point in which "his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light." (Matthew 17:2-9).

But we know that His body didn't shine as bright as the sun every moment of His life. If He was already glorified in that body every moment, why did He pray to His Father that He would glorify Him with the same glory that He had had before His birth? "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (John 17:5).

Christ also prayed that His followers would be glorified too. (John 17:18-26). Later, after the crucifixion & Christ's descent into the spirit world, Christ's spirit entered his resurrected body which was eventually glorified upon his ascension into heaven. A number of people became witnesses to the brightness of that glorified resurrected body. (Acts 1:9-11, 7:55-56; & 9:3-5).

The scriptures show that others, such as those who had lived on the earth as prophets, they too had been glorified after Christ had. John saw in a number visions, bright angels, some were even ones "like unto the Son of man", in great brightness & glory. Later he found out that some of these bright angels were glorified persons who had been prophets at one time, like unto himself. And yet they were & are glorified, & even speak for the Lord, at times, in the first-person. In some cases, John had thought that the glorified person that was speaking to him was the Lord, but the bright messenger corrected John as he began to worship the messenger. He told John that he was only a fellow servant & of his brethren that have the testimony of Jesus. And that he should not worship him, but rather he should worship God instead. Had this servant from among the prophets been glorified and perfected? Had his body been changed and fashioned like unto Christ's glorified body, as the scriptures say would happen? (Rev. 1:10-15; 19:6-10; 22:7-9; 2 Cor.3:4-18; 5:2-4; Phil.3:20-21; Col.1:27-28; Heb. 2:9-11; 10:16-22).

Paul wrote to the Philippians: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." (Philippians 2:5-12).33 33- 1 Peter 1:3-16.

Peter wrote: "Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, according as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called unto us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fail: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ." (2 Peter 1:2-11).

A portions of this passages helped Athanasius scripturally support the idea deification through Christ. (Athanasius, was bishop of Alexandria, he was born about 298 and died about May 2-3, 373 A.D. (TN&PNF), Vol.4, pp.lxxxv, lxxxvii, & p.576, Letters of Athanasius, LX. Ad Adelphium, 4).

Other passages say: "That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory." (1 Thessalonians 2:12).

"For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." (Hebrews 10:14).

Some of the different leaders in Christ's church were chosen to help the members develop Christ like traits. Thus, they were given: "For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come to the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:" (Ephesians 4:10-13). Clement of Alexandria used this passage upon writing about perfection & deification. (TANF) 2: pp.433, & 547, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, book IV, chap.xxi & book VII, chap.xiv.

Christ tested a rich man to see if he was willing to do all that He asked of him in order to be perfected. The rich man said that he had kept the commandments from his youth till then, and he asked what more he lacked. Christ said: "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me." (Matthew 19:16-26).

However, this man refused to do what Christ asked of him. Later on during the 3rd century A.D., this passage inspired a number of Christians, such as a wealthy young man named Anthony of Egypt. He was so impressed by the passage that he followed Christ's advice and retired to the desert. He was later joined by like-minded men who lived as monks or hermits who sought to work towards moral perfection or "Christian perfection." (Western Civilizations, (Their History and Their Culture), by Edward McNall Burns, Robert E. Lerner, & Standish Meacham, Pub. W.W. Norton & Co., N.Y., & Lon., 1st ed., 1941, 10th edition 1984, Vol.1, p.219; & 222-23; The March Of The Cross, by Leonard W. Cowie, 1962, (First Pub. in Great Britain by Weidenfeld & Nicolson LTD. 1962), & first pub. in the USA by McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N.Y., Toronto, & Lon., 1962, pp.33-4; Christian Monasticism, by David Knowles, 1969, reprinted 1972 & 1977, Pub. World Un., Library, McGraw-Hill Co., N.Y., Toronto, p.10; The Early Church by W.H.C. Frend, Pub. J.B. Lippincott Co., Phil., & N.Y., 1966, pp.202-3, Athanasius (Life 2); The Holy Rule (Notes on St. Benedict's Legislation for Monks), by Dom Hubert Van Zeller, Pub. by Sheed & Ward, N.Y., 1958, p.370; The Oxford Illustrated History of Christianity, edited by John McManners, pub. Oxford Un. Press, Oxford N.Y., 1990, pp.51, 67, 69, 80, & 135-6; & The Ladder of Perfection, by Walter Hilton, Pub., by Penguin Classics, 1957, & 1988.

Paul noted how some were having trouble understanding the signs of the times, for they supposed that Christ's second coming was "at hand". Paul wrote that there was going to be a falling away first before that day should come. He also noted that even during his day in time there were different ones who had taught & practiced counterfeit forms of deification, for they exalted themselves to Godhood in the mystery religions. Thus, he wrote that the "mystery of iniquity is already at work". Paul then goes on to point out that the followers of Christ wouldn't obtain the glory of Christ through these counterfeit mysteries, signs, & wonders of the devil. But rather, it was through what Christ & their own leaders had taught them that they would obtain the glory of Christ. (2 Thess. chapt. 2)

In Coptic Christian versions of deification, the Apostle Thomas had pulled his finger out of the wound in Christ's side, some of Christ's blood flowed down from Christ's side. Christ said that His blood had joined to their bodies, and thus, they themselves had become divine, even as Christ was divine. (Coptic Apocrypha in the Dialect of Upper Egypt, by E.A. Wallis Budge, 6 Vol.s, Pub. Oxford Un., Press, 1913, Vol. 3, p. 214, The Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ by Bartholomew the Apostle).

Almost every belief restored by Mormon prophets from "historic biblical Christianity," continues to be rejected and not accepted modern "Christianity" that continues to select the belief and practives to as to give us watered down version.

I find it interesting that "historic Christianity," or "historical/biblical Christianity" is so often used on the internet by modern "Christians" who then present later Christian dogmas as being what people have to currently believe in order to be a "Christian," or "saved"! It seems to me a lot of picking & care selecting of "historic Christianity," & "biblical Christianity," goes on while turning or not mentioning other aspects of "historic Christianity" also belief. So what "historic Christianity" are they talking about? The versions & selections that agree with ones particular brand of modern "Christianity"?

To illustrate:

Rev. Mohler wrote: "Christianity promises salvation through Christ's atonement and the sinner's justification by faith."

All throughout Christian "HISTORY" this point, FAITH & WORKS, was hashed over, especially during the Reformation! The earliest to later Christians, from James on, argued against those who were attempting to claim that a person's behaviour didn't matter, when it did.

Many modern "Christians" also seem more interested in how you believe, rather than how you live your life, good or bad, it don't matter, so long as you've "confessed Jesus!"

In anti-Mormon propaganda, Mormons are "damned" for attempting to do good works, and are "damned" for when some are caught doing evil works! Damned if they do, & damned if they don't!

In HISTORIC CHRISTIANITY:

J. R. Hoffmann notes that by the 2nd century, there were Christian sects that followed "salvationism" by grace alone, with out works. Earlier, James is amongst the earliest Christian leaders to respond to these types of early movements. But we also know from many examples in the New Testament, & the early to later Christian fathers, that this issue concerning "grace" & "works" was a subject of interest & debate. Jude had written against a group of so-called "Christians, antinomians" who had attempted to encourage sexual transgressions, rejected authority & understood divine grace as sanctioning immorality. (R. Joseph Hoffman, Celsus, On The True Doctrine, p. 14-16; Jude 3-8).

Modern "Christians" in claiming, that one must "know Jesus as their personal Savior," and they preach a "salvation" were what you do & don't do, as by way of works, doesn't count. However, in claiming to know Christ as their personal savior, do they, or should they also keep his commandments, for "He that saith, I know him, and keepth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him" (1 John 2:4).

Passages on works seem to be overlooked by those who selectively cite from those about grace.

Here's just some of the ones on works: Eccl.12:14, Jer.17:10 & 32:19, Micah 6:8, Matt. 5:6, 16, 19-20, 7:16, 21-23, 13:23, 41-6, 16:27, 19:16-17; 25:11-30; 34-6, 1 Cor. 3:8, 6:9; 2 Cor.5:9; John 3:21, 5:29, 12:50; Rom.1:5, 18, 22, 2:6-13; 5:3, 8:16-17, 35, 12:12, 2 Cor. 5:9-10, 6:17, 7:10, 17:7; Gal.6:4-7; Eph. 2:10, 5:5-9; 2 Tim.3:17; Heb.4:11, 17, 5:8-9, 1 Pet.1:10, 17; 2 Pet.1:5; 1 John 3:18, 22, James 1:12, 22-7, 2:26, 4:17-18; Rev.2:7, 11, 3:4-5, 7:14, 22:14, Job 34:11; Isa.1:17; John 14:15; Phil.2:12; John 12:50; Acts 5:32; 10:35, 14:22; 1 Cor.6:9, 2 Thess.1:4-9, Luke 9:23-6, 21:12-15.

It is also interesting to note how hard the "saved" "Christians," are WORKING to "witness" to "the unsaved"!

DEIFICATION: BECOMING GODS

Rev. Mohler: "Mormonism promises deification."

The fact is, "HISTORIC" & "BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY," also debated over deification, theosis, perfection, or becoming gods too! It was an important part of Christian history that seems to be passed over as though it didn't happen, or was part of "historic Christianity," when it is! The early Christian father even cite the same passages of scripture to defend & expound on their own particular versions of deification, as the Mormons do.

BIBLICAL PASSAGES USED BY EARLY TO LATER CHRISTIANS ON DEIFICATION (These passages are also used by Mormons in defense of their own "restored" version of deification, called exaltation).

Psalm 82; John 10:30-39; John 17:17-24; Matthew 5:48; Luke 14:11 & 18:14; 6:40 22:29; Romans 8:16-18; Matthew 25:21, 34-40; Colossians 3:24-25: Luke 22:29; 2 Corinthians 3:17-18; Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Corinthians 15:35-43; Matthew 13:43;
Daniel 12:3; 1 John 2:3-11, 18-29; 3:2-3; Colossians 3:4; Isaiah 1:18; 41:22—23.

There sure is a lot of passages in the Bible about deification, despite how many modern "Christians," continue to claim that it's "non-Christians," "satanic," & "non-biblical," & not part of "Historical Christianity."

BIBLICAL PASSAGES USED BY EARLY TO LATER CHRISTIANS:

Psalm 82 was a passage that some of the early to later Christians made reference to in order to show from the scriptures that their own particular versions & interpretations of deification was based on the scriptures.

"I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Christ cites this passage in defense of his claim to being divine, (John 10:30-39).

Some of the early to later Christians who made reference to Psalms 81-2 as scriptural proof texts in support of their own particular versions of the doctrine of deification were:

1. Justin Martyr, 110-165 A.D.
2. Irenæus, 120-202 A.D.
3. Clement of Alexandria, 153-193-217 A.D.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers, = (TANF), Vol.2, pp.206, 215, 374, & 437; Tertullian [145-220 A.D.] (TANF) Vol.3, pp.480, & 608; Origen of Alexandria, [185-230-254 A.D.];(TANF) Vol.4, p.509; Thascius Cyprian, [200-258 A.D.] Thascius Cyprian was the bishop of Carthage until he suffered martyrdom [248-58 A.D.], (TANF) Vol.5, pp.263-4, & 518; Novatian, a Roman Presbyter, [210-280 A.D.]; (TANF) Vol.5, p.631; Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, [born about 298 and died about May 2-3, 373 A.D.] The Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers = (TN&PNF) Vol.4, pp. lxxxv, lxxxvii, & 329, Discourse Against The Arians I:38-39; S. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, [born a few years before the outbreak of Arianism in A.D. 318, and died about March 18th, 386 A.D.] (TN&PNF) Vol.7, pp. i, xi, 2; St. Jerome, [345-420 A.D.]15 15- The Homilies of St. Jerome, Pub. The Catholic Un. Press, Wash. DC, 1964, pp.106-7 & 353; St. Augustine of Hippo, [354-430 A.D.]; Deification: The Content Of Athanasian Soteriology by Keith Edward Norman, (Dept. of Rel. Duke Un.), thesis for degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 1980, p.241-2, & note 1 on p.214, Ennar. in Ps. 49.2.

Christ prayed that we would become perfect and one with Him and the Father. "Sanctify them through thy truth...And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth." "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them: that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." (John 17:17-24.)

If we are to become one with Christ, & the Father, would we not also become divine? Would we not also be glorified with the same type of glory? Christ said: "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them: that they may be one even as we are one...that they may be made perfect in one..." (Jn.17:22 & 23).

Irenaeus [late 2nd, early 3rd century A.D.], used John 17:24 to scripturally point out that the disciples would also be glorified. (TANF) 1: pp.478-9.

Also, Origen [A.D. 185-230-254] used portions of Christ's prayer in support of the doctrine of perfection & deification. (TANF) 4: pp.344-5, Origen De Principiis, book 3, chapter 6.

Christ said: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matt.5:48). Origen also used this passage in defense of deification.(TANF) 4: p.509, Origen Against Celsus, book 4, chap.29.

Another idea behind deification was that the earliest Christians, (like the Mormons), believed that Christ & the Most High God the Father would not be removed out of their places so that these newly deified beings could take over:

"For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." (Luke 14:11 & 18:14).

And: "The disciple is not above his master: but everyone that is perfect shall be as his master." (Luke 6:40). Irenaeus cites this passage to point out that in coming up out of the realm of the dead by way of the resurrection, the body that is raised up, is perfected. (TANF) 1: p.560).

Clement of Alexandria, [A.D. 153-193-217], cites this passage while writing about deification too. (TANF) 2: p.364, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, book 2, chap. xvii.

Paul wrote to the Romans that: "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us." (Romans 8:16-18).

A number of early Christians used this passage to support their beliefs that the early Christian martyrs had been perfected, glorified, deified & rewarded with divine ranks. For they had remained faithful, & even though they had suffered greatly, they still had endured to the end. (TANF) 2: pp.411-13, 416-17, & 426-441; Clement of Alexandria, [A.D. 153-193-217]; Martyrdom & Persecution in the Early Church, by W.H.C. Frend, 1967.

Upon becoming heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ, we might want to consider what Christ was heir to. God appointed him to be "heir of all things", for it was through Christ that the worlds were created. Christ alone had purged our sins and had "sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on High; Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they". The Father also said to his Son, "Thy throne O God, is forever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom." (Hebrews 1:1-4, & 8; see also: Galatians 3:27-29, 4:1-7; Revelations 3:21-22; 21:7).

Another passage reads: "His lord said unto him, Well done thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee a ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord." (Matthew 25:21).

The early Christian Father, Hippolytus [A.D. 170-236 A.D.], wrote that one of the reasons why the righteous had been deified was because they had shown that they had been faithful over small things while in earth life. And thus, upon being deified, they would have entrusted unto them that which was great. (TANF) 5: p.151, & note 6, The Refutation of All Heresies, Book X, chap. xxix).

"Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Matt. 25:34-40).

Christ also talked about the good works that they did, & thus, in having done these good works they would enter on the right hand path into the Kingdom of God, & would inherit the kingdom. (Rev.1:6; 3:21-22; 4:4, 10-11; 5:10).

"Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done". (Colossians 3:24-25.)

"And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me". (Luke 22:29).

In the New Testament we read about how some resurrected bodies will shine with greater glory and brightness that others. For in some cases our resurrected bodies will also be glorified, some to lesser, others to greater degrees of glory. (1 Corinthians 15:35-43). Origen [A.D. 185-230-254], used this passage while responding to the early anti-Christian Celsus, & while expounding on what he understood to be the doctrine of deification. (TANF) 4: p.509.

Paul to the Corinthians: Through the "spirit of the Lord" we will be changed from bodies without glory, into bodies of the same glory as Christ. "Now the Lord is that Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." (2 Corinthians 3:17-18).

Paul to the Philippians: "For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." (Philippians 3:20-21).

Jesus said: "Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." (Matthew 13:43). Irenaeus [late 2nd, early 3rd centuries A.D.], cites this passage as scriptural evidences for deification. (TANF) 1: pp.523-5; Matt.13:40-3).

Much later, Thomas Aquinas [1225-74 A.D.] also used this passage to suggest that the righteous would shine forth with great light and glory in the after life. (Heaven: A History, by Colleen McDannell & Berhard Lang, Yale Un. Press, New Haven, & Lon., 1988, pp.83-4, 89-92, n.27, on p.369, Aquinas, Sth, Suppl. 91:3).

The Old Testament Prophet Daniel wrote: "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever." (Daniel 12:3). Irenaeus also cites from Daniel as scriptural proof text that showed that the faces of those who had been deified would shine with great glory and light.(TANF) 1: pp.488-90, & 497.

Paul to the Colossians: "To whom God would make known what is the riches of glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:" (Colossians 1:27-28).

The ritual of anointing is combined with the idea of deification, even in the earliest days of the Church. However, John noted that some of their anointing rituals had been counterfeited by "anti-Christs" who had infiltrated the Church and who were bringing in counterfeit forms of anointing. He goes on to tell the earliest saints that the anointing they had received was from God, while the other was from "anti-Christs". (1 John 2:3-11, 18-29).

John then goes on to present the idea and symbolical types in their own anointing ritual, and how deification fits in with some of the symbolical meanings behind anointing. For having been anointed they were cleansed and purified of their sins. This also shows up and is expounded upon in the writings of the Fathers in early to later Christianity.

John wrote: "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure." (1 John 3:2-3). Origen [A.D. 185-230-254], cites portions of this in support and in defense of the doctrine of perfection and deification. (TANF) 4: pp.344-5, & 509, Origen De Principiis, book 3, chap. 6; Origen Against Celsus, book 4, chap. 29.

"When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory." (Colossians 3:4.)

Paul wrote to the Galatians: "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Galatians 3:27).

In some cases in the early Christian mysteries, after they had been anointed and baptized. They put on new and pure garments to symbolize that which was to come in the resurrection when they would be clothed in the same type of immortality as Christ was.

Paul tells us to put on charity "which is the bond of perfection." (Colossians 3:14).

To Timothy, Paul wrote that the scriptures would, among other things, help them towards reaching perfection. "That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good work." (2 Tim.3:15-17).

To the Hebrews, Paul wrote: "Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren." (Hebrews 2:7-11).

Paul seems to have written here of Christ's return to glory. But also of Christ leading his other brothers and sisters back into the family in heaven to partake of divine glory with him. This idea was expounded upon in early to later Christian writings and art works. Christ suffered for the just and the unjust, and those who were once disobedient, but who were willing to repent and live according to God's commandments even though they might have been sent to the spirit prison. For Christ descended down unto them and preached the gospel there and led them up out of captivity. Thus, Christ brought them to God the Father, and presented them to the Father. Having led the way. Upon their ascension up out of the underworld their deification and glorification had begun. As Christ and the host of freed captives exited out of the spirit prison, they trample over the devil or demons that had attempted to keep Christ from entering into the prison house. Paul also mentioned crowns of glory, and makes references to having all things put under his feet. Many early to later Christian art works show Christ standing on the devil as he frees the captive prisoners. Paul also made references to Christ leading or bringing "many sons", many "children" or "vast multitudes of God's people to heaven". Leading them over into "glory" and deification.

The Old Testament Prophet, Isaiah seems to suggest that even though we have done good or evil, we may be washed clean of our sins, if we repent, and then in the ultimate end, we can become gods. Isaiah wrote: "Let them bring them forth, and shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come. Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together." (Isaiah 1:16-20; 41:22-23; Hebrews 10:16-22; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

The deified would have also passed through rites of passage dramas too, thus, in early to later Christianity this included the heavenly coronations, vestments, crowns, enthronement, and the glorification of the saints.

The New Testament writers mentions many aspects of this aspect of deification, for Paul, upon writing to Timothy, shows how he looked forward to being crowned in the next life for his efforts & endurance, for he says, I have "Fought a good fight, I have kept the faith: Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." (2 Timothy 4:7-8).

The crown of righteousness hints to the ordinances. The early Christians were anointed, clothed in garments & royal robes in their mysteries or ordinances as types of that which was to come in the heavenly kingdoms of God. The crown was the symbol of the reward for faithfulness, for they would be deified & crowned in glory. In John's book of Revelation, Christ promised: "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne." (Revelation 3:21).

In early Christian thought, Christ was the greatest example of the deification process because the body in which His Spirit had been clothed in through birth, was eventually deified and glorified when He was later resurrected. For when Christ lived on the earth in the body of His birth to Mary, was He glorified? Did His earthly body at all times give off visible light and a brightness that was brighter than the sun at noon-day? Or did He look like other men? The scriptures tell us that He was born and grew up from childhood to manhood (Matthew 1:25; Luke 1:80; 2:52).

There were times when the divine light of His power and glory did shine forth while He was in that earthly body. Such as the time when Christ was transfigured to the point in which "his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light." (Matthew 17:2-9).

But we know that His body didn't shine as bright as the sun every moment of His life. If He was already glorified in that body every moment, why did He pray to His Father that He would glorify Him with the same glory that He had had before His birth? "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (John 17:5).

Christ also prayed that His followers would be glorified too. (John 17:18-26). Later, after the crucifixion & Christ's descent into the spirit world, Christ's spirit entered his resurrected body which was eventually glorified upon his ascension into heaven. A number of people became witnesses to the brightness of that glorified resurrected body. (Acts 1:9-11, 7:55-56; & 9:3-5).

The scriptures show that others, such as those who had lived on the earth as prophets, they too had been glorified after Christ had. John saw in a number visions, bright angels, some were even ones "like unto the Son of man", in great brightness & glory. Later he found out that some of these bright angels were glorified persons who had been prophets at one time, like unto himself. And yet they were & are glorified, & even speak for the Lord, at times, in the first-person. In some cases, John had thought that the glorified person that was speaking to him was the Lord, but the bright messenger corrected John as he began to worship the messenger. He told John that he was only a fellow servant & of his brethren that have the testimony of Jesus. And that he should not worship him, but rather he should worship God instead. Had this servant from among the prophets been glorified and perfected? Had his body been changed and fashioned like unto Christ's glorified body, as the scriptures say would happen? (Rev. 1:10-15; 19:6-10; 22:7-9; 2 Cor.3:4-18; 5:2-4; Phil.3:20-21; Col.1:27-28; Heb. 2:9-11; 10:16-22).

Paul wrote to the Philippians: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." (Philippians 2:5-12).33 33- 1 Peter 1:3-16.

Peter wrote: "Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, according as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called unto us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fail: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ." (2 Peter 1:2-11).

A portions of this passages helped Athanasius scripturally support the idea deification through Christ. (Athanasius, was bishop of Alexandria, he was born about 298 and died about May 2-3, 373 A.D. (TN&PNF), Vol.4, pp.lxxxv, lxxxvii, & p.576, Letters of Athanasius, LX. Ad Adelphium, 4).

Other passages say: "That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory." (1 Thessalonians 2:12).

"For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." (Hebrews 10:14).

Some of the different leaders in Christ's church were chosen to help the members develop Christ like traits. Thus, they were given: "For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come to the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:" (Ephesians 4:10-13). Clement of Alexandria used this passage upon writing about perfection & deification. (TANF) 2: pp.433, & 547, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, book IV, chap.xxi & book VII, chap.xiv.

Christ tested a rich man to see if he was willing to do all that He asked of him in order to be perfected. The rich man said that he had kept the commandments from his youth till then, and he asked what more he lacked. Christ said: "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me." (Matthew 19:16-26).

However, this man refused to do what Christ asked of him. Later on during the 3rd century A.D., this passage inspired a number of Christians, such as a wealthy young man named Anthony of Egypt. He was so impressed by the passage that he followed Christ's advice and retired to the desert. He was later joined by like-minded men who lived as monks or hermits who sought to work towards moral perfection or "Christian perfection." (Western Civilizations, (Their History and Their Culture), by Edward McNall Burns, Robert E. Lerner, & Standish Meacham, Pub. W.W. Norton & Co., N.Y., & Lon., 1st ed., 1941, 10th edition 1984, Vol.1, p.219; & 222-23; The March Of The Cross, by Leonard W. Cowie, 1962, (First Pub. in Great Britain by Weidenfeld & Nicolson LTD. 1962), & first pub. in the USA by McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N.Y., Toronto, & Lon., 1962, pp.33-4; Christian Monasticism, by David Knowles, 1969, reprinted 1972 & 1977, Pub. World Un., Library, McGraw-Hill Co., N.Y., Toronto, p.10; The Early Church by W.H.C. Frend, Pub. J.B. Lippincott Co., Phil., & N.Y., 1966, pp.202-3, Athanasius (Life 2); The Holy Rule (Notes on St. Benedict's Legislation for Monks), by Dom Hubert Van Zeller, Pub. by Sheed & Ward, N.Y., 1958, p.370; The Oxford Illustrated History of Christianity, edited by John McManners, pub. Oxford Un. Press, Oxford N.Y., 1990, pp.51, 67, 69, 80, & 135-6; & The Ladder of Perfection, by Walter Hilton, Pub., by Penguin Classics, 1957, & 1988.

Paul noted how some were having trouble understanding the signs of the times, for they supposed that Christ's second coming was "at hand". Paul wrote that there was going to be a falling away first before that day should come. He also noted that even during his day in time there were different ones who had taught & practiced counterfeit forms of deification, for they exalted themselves to Godhood in the mystery religions. Thus, he wrote that the "mystery of iniquity is already at work". Paul then goes on to point out that the followers of Christ wouldn't obtain the glory of Christ through these counterfeit mysteries, signs, & wonders of the devil. But rather, it was through what Christ & their own leaders had taught them that they would obtain the glory of Christ. (2 Thess. chapt. 2)

In Coptic Christian versions of deification, the Apostle Thomas had pulled his finger out of the wound in Christ's side, some of Christ's blood flowed down from Christ's side. Christ said that His blood had joined to their bodies, and thus, they themselves had become divine, even as Christ was divine. (Coptic Apocrypha in the Dialect of Upper Egypt, by E.A. Wallis Budge, 6 Vol.s, Pub. Oxford Un., Press, 1913, Vol. 3, p. 214, The Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ by Bartholomew the Apostle).

Almost every belief restored by Mormon prophets from "historic biblical Christianity," continues to be rejected and not accepted modern "Christianity" that continues to select the belief and practives to as to give us watered down version.

Here's my views on the Rev. comments:

Rev. M.: "Mormonism holds that God is an exalted man, with a physical body."

JM: In "historic Christianity," if he means early Christianity, then: God the Father was considered a spirit, but Christ, first a pre-mortal spirit, became a man, though he was also God, the son!

Rev. M: "Christianity teaches that God is Spirit. Mormonism denies the historic Christian understandings of the Trinity,"

JM: Yes, Mormons don't go along with the Nicene Creed of 325 AD. But rather they believe in a restored revealed knowledge of the God head. It's interesting to note that the Nicene Fathers that gave us the creed also believed and taught the doctrine of deification, becoming gods! So, why do modern Christians reject this idea?

Rev: "the person and work of Christ, and the doctrine of salvation." Christianity promises salvation through Christ's atonement and the sinner's justification by faith. Mormonism promises deification. Christianity calls for personal faith in Jesus Christ. Mormonism calls for obedience to its own teachings as the path to exaltation. Mormonism replaces belief in the sole authority of the Bible with other writings, including the Book of Mormon. This list is only a brief summary of the vast chasm that separates Christianity from Mormonism. Put simply, Mormonism is not just another form of Christianity. It is a rejection of historic Christianity."

More will be said, got to go

C1QxeC U cool ))

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4nXK6sSVnM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEfCPxc_OqM

I've recently posted some videos on You Tube that get into some of the thinks I've written about here. I hope you all find them interesting!

1. Secret rituals of early Christians!

2. Disinformation tactics exposed! Satanic Symbols Everywhere!?

More will be eventually posted there too.

rqdwhy xfbge ejmargscq crkxahbny cqxh sxurao sbfw

rqdwhy xfbge ejmargscq crkxahbny cqxh sxurao sbfw

rqdwhy xfbge ejmargscq crkxahbny cqxh sxurao sbfw

is an improvement of the neat revenue of the society. The whole capital of more. Those metals are said to have become more abundant in America, since

different kinds, make up the far greater part of every great political The trader A in Edinburgh, we shall suppose, draws a bill upon B in London,

is an improvement of the neat revenue of the society. The whole capital of more. Those metals are said to have become more abundant in America, since

different kinds, make up the far greater part of every great political The trader A in Edinburgh, we shall suppose, draws a bill upon B in London,

ship. Any carrion, the carcase of a dead dog or cat, for example, though increased in so great a proportion, during so short a period, I do not

ship. Any carrion, the carcase of a dead dog or cat, for example, though increased in so great a proportion, during so short a period, I do not

Seed Planter wrote: "In other words, deification is not becoming like God in the Mormon sense. There is no continuity between the two. Not only is eternal progression not found in the early church fathers’ theosis, neither is the concept found in historic Judaism as Mormons claim."

Eternal progression "not found in the early church fathers' theosis"?! Perhaps not the exact type of eternal progression as in Mormonism; however, Irenaeus, AD 115-202, a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John the Revelator, mentions something similar in his own version of deification:

"While man gradually advances and mounts towards perfection; that is, he approaches the eternal. The eternal is perfect; and this is God. Man has first to come into being, then to progress, and by progressing come to manhood, and having reached manhood to increase, and thus increasing to persevere, and persevering to be glorified, and thus see his Lord." (Henry Bettenson, The Early Christian Fathers: A Selection from the Writings of the Fathers from St. Clement of Rome to St. Athanasius (London: Oxford University Press, 1956), 94).

"We were not made gods at our beginning, but first we were made men, then, in the end, gods." (Ibid., p. 94).

"How then will any be a god, if he has not first been made a man? How can any be perfect when he has only lately been made man? How immortal, if he has not in his mortal nature obeyed his maker? For one's duty is first to observe the discipline of man and thereafter to share in the glory of God". (Ibid., 95-96),

http://en.fairmormon.org/Deification_of_man

The Damascus Document tells how the deifieds "seed would be scattered across the universe." Now this and Irenaeus' versions of theosis, are not exactly the same as the Mormons' version, but it's interesting to note that they still had these beliefs.

Seed Planter wrote: "It is sad that there are numerous Mormons so caught up in the piles of Mormon propaganda."

It's sadder that many "Christians" are so caught up in the piles of anti-Mormon propaganda, that they don't realize that the very things that anti-Mormon "Christians" use to 'discredit' mormonism and their faith, is the same types of tactics, methods and propaganda ploys that Atheists and early to later anti-Christians used to discredit Christianity!

Planter: "My prayer from the heart is that on your way to seeking truth (which I hope you are) that you will not completely lose your faith in the Bible and become an atheist."

Tactics used by them: (them being anti-religiousness against other religions, be it Atheists, early anti-Christians, anti-Mormon Christians, etc).

They point out, allege and charge that they have:

1. Changes, Contradictions & alleged borrowings from their environment to make up their scriptures.

2. Different accounts of events that don't match up in their tellings, (written and verbal accounts, oral traditions).

3. Additions to scriptures.

4. Leaders did miracles through magical means.

5. Had secret ceremonies, symbols, signs, oaths, and strange beliefs.

6. They don't go along with the "mainstream" religion.

7. Their leaders avoid dealings with the law.

8. Have oaths that are against the government!

9. Seek to be perfect, while everyone knows, or gossip has it that they are always getting in trouble with the government and laws, thus they hide what they're doing in their secret meetings.

10. There is nothing original, or ancient about their message.

Justin Martyr Jr's list of references about the early Christians, and how the greeks, romans, and jew looked upon them as, is a good place to start in finding out these tactics mentioned.

Planter also wrote: "...your prayer be for YHWH the God of Israel to reveal Himself to you and to grow in His grace and truth. A prayer of re-application might be to ask the Supreme Being to reveal to you whether or not you've been led astray by the teachings of Jospeh Smith in your quest to know HIM."

I think that most Mormons would testify in what they call a "testimony," that it was through "prayer and study," that they "know that Joseph Smith is a true prophet" and that God "revealed" this to them."

But hey! If they, because of these charges mentioned, "have been led astray," then what of the Christians? Have they been also?

And wouldn't the answers that a Christian might give to an early anti-Christian or modern Atheist, then also have be answers to their own anti-Mormon "Christians'" propaganda too?!

Julian

In other words, deification is not becoming like God in the Mormon sense. There is no continuity between the two. Not only is eternal progression not found in the early church fathers’ theosis, neither is the concept found in historic Judaism as Mormons claim. Of course one could round up some references to when the Jews departed from orthodoxy and strayed from the commandments. I’m sure you could even find some kabala mixed in with it along with deviations of secret temple rituals as they maintain, but I don’t think that anyone in their right mind could conclude that this was the norm.

“For the loyal Jew, from that day to this, the fundamental confession of faith is, ‘Hear O Israel: YHWH our God, YHWH is one.’” This was prayed three times a day and was the most basic Jewish conviction.” N. T. Wright, Judas and the Gospel of Jesus p 116 (Deut. 6:4).

The crucial Christian assertion, that God is One, sets an absolute limit on the meaning of theosis - it is not possible for any created being to become, ontologically, God, or even part of God (the henosis of Greek Neoplatonic philosophy).

That "God became God" is not only a pagan idea but it denies the very nature of God Himself, by rejecting His eternality as God (cf. Is. 43:10, LXX: "...So that you may know and believe Me and understand that I AM..." Notice "I AM" in the Greek LXX and not "I am He" as with 41:4. Jesus makes the same claim in John 8:24: "Unless you believe that I AM you will die in your sins"; cf. Gk.).

It is interesting that when one examines the historical nature of Christ’s arrest, trial and crucifixion, it is obvious that something more was happening than ruffling the feathers of a few priests. Jesus was targeted specifically due to His claiming to be God. If the Mormon concept of deification was so widespread and common place in the Judaic/Christian tradition, it would make sense that the Sanhedrin would have merely shrugged it off as a legitimate teaching.

I gleaned and copied numerous material from other web sights. Sorry I didn't post them for you. If any one is interested a simple googling of "theosis" will be a good start to further the investigation.

It is sad that there are numerous Mormons so caught up in the piles of Mormon propaganda. My prayer from the heart is that on your way to seeking truth (which I hope you are) that you will not completely lose your faith in the Bible and become an atheist. May your prayer be for YHWH the God of Israel to reveal Himself to you and to grow in His grace and truth. A prayer of re-application might be to ask the Supreme Being to reveal to you whether or not you've been led astray by the teachings of Jospeh Smith in your quest to know HIM.

Alister McGrath, Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford. He was until 2005 Principal of Wycliffe Hall, points out, that "A deliberate and systematic distinction is made between the concept of justification itself (understood as the extrinsic divine pronouncement of man’s new status) and the concept of sanctification or regeneration (understood as the intrinsic process by which God renews the justified sinner)." He goes on to explain that: "The significance of the Protestant distinction between iustificatio and regeneratio is that a fundamental discontinuity has been introduced into the western theological tradition where none had existed before…The Reformation understanding of the nature of justification – as opposed to its mode – must therefore be regarded as a genuine theological novum.

McGrath notes that it is "the Augustinian understanding of justification as both event and process, embracing the beginning, continuation, and perfection of the Christian life, and thereby subsuming regeneration under justification. More specifically, St. Augustine integrated theosis within his concept of justification, as Lampe explains: "Augustine makes much use of the idea of deification which he equates with sonship towards God. Justification implies deification, because by justifying men God makes them his sons; if we have been made sons of God (Jn. 1:12) we have also been made gods, not through a natural begetting but through the grace of adoption." In Augustine’s one words, "God wishes to make you a god, not by nature like him whom he begat, but by his gift and adoption. For as he through humanity became partaker of your mortality, so through exaltation he makes you partaker of his immortality" (serm. 166.4) [47]. And similarly: "It is clear that He (i.e. God) calls men gods through their being deified by His grace and not born of His substance. For He justifies, who is just of Himself and not of another; and He deifies, who is God of Himself and not by participation in another. Now He who justifies, Himself deifies, because by justifying He makes sons of God. For to them gave He power to become the sons of God. If we are made sons of God, we are also made gods; but this is by grace of adoption, and not by generation (Ennar. In Ps. 49, 2)’.

“There is… [a] reason why Gregory’s doctrine of deification should not be taken in this radical sense, namely that he admits the terminology of participation. A doctrine of participation would normally hold that when one thing participates in another, a difference between them is indicated. Participation takes place across a line of division. When things of different hypostasis or different ontological status stand in a relation of participation, one entry, because of its receptivity, receives certain characteristics from the other, but without achieving identity with that other in essence. Even if one were to say there is participation in the nature of God, this would not mean that a creature becomes God by nature, but that the nature of God is present in the being of the other entity, transforming it into a new mode of being.” Gregory of Nazianzus: Images and Reflections. Edited by JOSTEIN BØRTNES (Russian Literature at the University of Bergen, former University Lecturer in Comparative Literature at the University of Oslo, in Slavonic Studies at the University of Cambridge and Director of Studies at Sidney Sussex College. He is the author of 'Visions of Glory' (1988) and has published extensively in the fields of Early and Modern Russian Literature, Literary Theory and Greek Patristic Literature. At present, Jostein Børtnes is working on Mikhail Bakhtin, and on the Cappadocian fathers, in particular on Gregory of Nazianz.) and TOMAS HÄGG, p. 270.

C.S. Lewis (1898 – 1963), the popular author of numerous apologetic, theological and fictional works, provides a good example of a contemporary Western writer—much beloved of Evangelicals—who makes use of the idea of theosis. In his famed Mere Christianity, he basically recites the famous Athanasian theosis statement into more modern language: "He came to this world and became a man in order to spread to other men the kind of life He has – by what I call ‘good infection.’ Every Christian is to become a little Christ. The whole purpose of becoming a Christian is simply nothing else.” He spells this out more succinctly a little later in the book: "The command Be ye perfect is not idealistic gas. Nor is it a command to do the impossible. He is going to make us into creatures that can obey that command. He said (in the Bible) that we were ‘gods’ and He is going to make good His words. If we let Him – for we can prevent Him, if we choose – He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or goddess, dazzling, radiant, immortal creature, pulsating all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects back to God perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and delight and goodness. The process will be long and in parts very painful; but that is what we are in for. Nothing less. He meant what He said. Finally, Lewis talks about God "turning you permanently into a different sort of thing; into a new little Christ, a being which, in its own way, has the same kind of life as God; which shares in His power, joy, knowledge and eternity"

"The Greek Fathers taught that, in the fall, humanity lost the likeness but retained the image….Whether the focus is placed on the image of God being restored, or whether one sees these terms as synonymous, the concept of the Christian’s reintegration into the life of God remains central in all understandings of theosis" (cf. 1 Cor. 15:49; pH. 3:16-19; 4:13-15) Rakestraw, Robert V., "Becoming Like God: An Evangelical Doctrine of Theosis"

St. Jerome testifies "That we are gods is not so by nature, but by grace. ‘But to as many as receive Him he gave power of becoming sons of God"

St. Athanasius himself attested to the unity of the Cross and theosis: "The Word became flesh in order both to offer this sacrifice and that we, participating in His Spirit, might be deified.” This reveals a tight connection between theosis and salvation, if not an actual definition.

In Augustine’s own words, "God wishes to make you a god, not by nature like him whom he begat, but by his gift and adoption. For as he through humanity became partaker of your mortality, so through exaltation he makes you partaker of his immortality" (serm. 166.4)

St. Athanasius could hardly escape blame, since theosis figured prominently in his soteriology [12]. In his masterpiece On the Incarnation of the Word of God (54:3), he wrote the classic statement for theosis: "He, indeed, assumed humanity that we might become God.” In fact, theosis was used by him in his defense of the full deity of Christ against the Arians: "The Word could never have divinized us if He were merely divine by participation and were not Himself the essential Godhead, the Father’s veritable image.” He argues in like manner against the Tropici sect concerning the Holy Spirit’s divinity, stating that "If, by a partakability of the Spirit we shall become partakers of the divine nature, it would be madness then afterwards to call the Spirit an originated entity, and not of God; for on account of this also those who are in him are made divine. But then if he makes man divine, it is not dubious to say his nature is of God"

page 2.

Gerald Bonner explains: "There is, however, in Augustine’s spirituality another element, perceived as a consequence of Christ’s taking human nature upon himself; for it is in Christ and through Christ, and only in and through Christ, that man becomes a partaker of God’s nature: ‘He who was God was made man to make gods those who were men’ (serm. 192.1, 1). These words, which parallel the more-often-quoted words of St Athanasius in his De Incarnatione, show that Augustine did not shrink from using the language of deification, often said to be peculiar to the Greek Fathers."

In fact, as G.W.H. Lampe points out, "Augustine repeats more often, perhaps, than any of the Greek theologians, the theme of the ‘interchange of places.’ ‘The Word,’ he says, became what we are that we might attain what we are not. For we are not God; but we can see God with the mind and interior eye of the heart’… ‘God hates you as you are, in order to make you what you are not yet. You will be what he is;’ but Augustine hastens to add that this means that we shall be God’s image in the sense in which a man’s reflection in a mirror is his image inasmuch as it is like him, not in the sense in which a man’s son is his image inasmuch as he is actually what his father is ‘according to substance.’"

Gerald Bonner stresses that "the notion of deification is to be found in Augustine, not as something added to his system as an afterthought, but as an integral whole. In itself, the notion of deification is no more than what is implied by the New Testament term uiothesia – sonship by adoption – by grace, that is to say, and not by nature. It is, indeed, the consequence of human flesh being assumed by the divinity in the Incarnation: that flesh has been taken into heaven by the ascended Christ, and if men participate in Him through membership of the Church, the Body of Christ, they too may hope, after death, to enjoy the divinisation effected by His flesh-taking. So Augustine writes, in the last chapter of the last book of The City of God: ‘We ourselves shall become that seventh day [i.e. the eternal Sabbath], when we have been replenished and restored by His blessing and sanctification. There we shall have leisure to be still, and we shall see that He is God, whereas we wished to be that ourselves when we fell away from Him, after listening to the seducer saying: You will be like gods. Then we abandoned the true God, by whose creative help we should have become gods, but by participating in Him, not by deserting Him"

I was disappointed by responses to the challenge offered by Rene regarding deification in the early church fathers, I have recently been reading up on theosis. Hope it helps someone out there. I also recommend the book by Richard Abanes, “Becoming Gods” in which a whole chapter is devoted to the issue. The Mormons that I have dialogued with seem to have a tendency of pulling things out of their context.

Historically, the word theosis was employed both in pre-Christian Greek antiquity, and also in pagan quarters existing contemporaneously with the early Christian Church, as F.W. Norris notes: "The use of theosis was daring. Non-Christians employed it to speak of pagan gods deifying creatures. The philosophers Iamblichus and Proclus, the poet Callimachus and the dreaded Julian the Apostate had used theoo in that way. It was not first a Christian word nor always employed by only Christians after they made it central. From within his deep contemplative life and from previous Church Tradition the Theologian picked it up, cleaned it up and filled it up with Christian sense. He and his fellow theologians took it captive and used it to speak about Christian realities" [2].
So the Church Fathers were careful to contrast their views with those of pagan thinkers who spoke in similar language (see Note-C). For example, St. Athanasius, who, as we shall see, testifies to theosis on innumerable occasions in his writings, notes that "We are as God by imitation, not by nature" [3]; and "Albeit we cannot become like God in essence, yet by progress in virtue imitate God" [4]. Jaroslav Pelikan, Church historian, Sterling Professor Emeritus of History at Yale University and recent convert to Orthodoxy, explains that: "All of this Christian language about a humanity made divine was a part of a total Cappadocian system in which the Classical religion of deified men and women and of anthropomorphic gods and goddesses was described as ‘the superstition of polytheism’ and as the error of those mere mortals who had ‘turned aside the honor of God to themselves.’ Therefore, the Cappadocians insisted that it was as essential for theosis as it was for the incarnation itself not to be viewed as analogous to Classical theories about the promotion of human beings to divine rank, and in that sense not to be defined by natural theology at all; on such errors they pronounced their ‘Anathema!’"

I have two responses to bring to the table on this happy new year.

To my atheist friends who slight theological discussions, it is easy to mock something that is not understood.

My Christmas message to all who read this, 12-24-2007:

In earlier posts I've mentioned how that the early Christian doctrine and belief about Christ going to other nations in pre-Christian times, and during his post-resurrection world wide trek, eventually faded off into much later legendized versions of this in Santa Claus' world wide trek.

I'd like to get into more details on how this can be traced through the centuries.

In the 1891, The Strand Magazine, published a drawing of a small female descending through the
woods to a town below. She was called "Santa Claus." Note how “santa,” is the female title, for a female saint, for in the Latin speaking cultures, “Santa,” is feminine for example: Santa Maria, or Saint Mary, as compared to “Santo,” for male saints. Thus, an earlier version of “Santa Claus,“ is the Christkindl, or wandering Christ-child, a blond female youth. For in German speaking cultures, she is the one wandering the earth and the cosmos as a blond female youth.

In numerous earlier traditions, during the 19th century on into the 20th, "Santa Claus" was also Americanized into Kriss Kringle. In German speaking areas, Kriss Kringle was also called Christkindl, or Christ-child). Hence, in earlier Christmas lore, poems, legends, art works & songs, the Christ-child, is one in a number of gift givers, wandering all over the earth.

Earlier, the Christkindl, according to many stories, customs & legends, could do miraculous modes of travel, leave gifts in shoes and stockings; changing spider webs on the Christmas trees into gleaming threads of gold and silvers, (thus tinsil is put on the tree). (Series Editor, Margaret E. Martignoni, Editor-in-Chief Dr. Louis Shores, Volume Ed. Ruth Weeden Stewart, Harvest of Holidays, A Collier's Junior Classics Series, (New York: The Crowell-Collier Publishing Company, 1962), pp.402-05, see p.403: So Hallowed and So Gracious Is the Time, Anne Thaxter Eaton, from: The Animals' Christmas, compiled by Anne Thaxter Eaton, CR 1944, by Eaton and Valenti Angelo, (The Viking Press).

He/she could also go through key holes to enter, see sugar letters left in window, letters listing what the children hope the cruising Christ-child would bring them.

Millions of candles left in windows, light his/her way, and symbolically say, here you‘re welcome, come in and stay with us on Christmas. Straw left on the floor, each strand representing a good deed performed by the children, padded the hardness of the wandering Christ child’s bed, should he visit and stay the night. Pine bows were laid down to give this cruiser a carpet to walk on, when he passes through. (Sechrist, Woolsey, It's Time For Christmas, pp.78-9, 81, 83, & 113-115; Francis X. Weiser, 1952, The Christmas Book, Illustrated by Robert Frankenberg, Harcourt, (New York: Brace & Company), pp.111, 152, 160-1, & 168-170).

Many snowy seasons had to pass by before the earlier Christian doctrine of Christ's world wide travels was covered over with later Christmas legends about the Christ-child's annual visits during the Christmas season. Thus, every Christmas, so the story goes: "the Christ Child visits homes. Sometimes He sends a stranger instead. Nobody knows how the stranger will look. It may be a hungry child, a beggar, an old woman. The lighted candle says: Here you are welcomed!" (Lillie Patterson, 1968, A Holiday Book, Christmas Feasts and Festivals, (Champaign, Illinois: Garrard Publishing, Co.), pp.28, 51 & 53).

Another source says that this practice is a continuation of an Irish custom which is bound up with these types of traditions about how the Christ-child was out alone in the cold and dark and needs to be "lighted on His way." (Auld, Christmas Traditions, pp.130-31).

Elise Traut relates the old legend that on Christmas Eve "the Christ Child wanders all over the world, going from castle to hovel, up hills and down valleys, in search of the good and deserving. He pleads for succour at the various homes he enters, usually appearing as a beggar or humble wanderer." Consequently, it was because of this type of lore that beggars were rarely turned away on Christmas Eve, and aid that one might rendered to beggars, was, and still is looked upon "as hospitality shown to Christ. Following close upon this custom came the now universal one of bestowing charity to the poor at Christmas-time." (Lillian Eichler, The Customs Of Mankind (With Notes on Modern Etiquette and the Newest Trend in Entertainment, (Garden City, New York: Nelson Doubleday, Inc., 1924), pp.463-4. Roselle Williams Crawford, Survival of Legends, Legends and Their Relation to History, Literature and Life of the Southwest, (San Antonio, Texas: The Naylor Co. , 1952), pp. 62-3, see also notes 74 & 79, & p.82. Christmas (Its Origin, Celebration And Significance As Related In Prose and Verse), Edited by Robert Haven Schauffler, (New York: 1907, Dodd, Mead & Co., 1947, introduction xi. Hamilton W. Mabie, The Book of Christmas, (Toronto: The Macmillan Co., of Canada, LTD), p.38).

Traditions still survive concerning a gift-bringer called Christkindl. Though this angel has wings, he visits children riding a sleigh pulled by reindeer. When Swiss families moved to America, they brought along their traditions concerning the Christkindl celebration. In America the name Christkindl soon sounded like Kriss Kringle, which in time became another name for the Santa we know now. Other writers have noted that when immigrants from Germany
and Switzerland settled in Pennsylvania during the 1700s, they brought with them the German tradition that the Christ child, or Christkindl, delivered presents to children on Christmas Eve. When English settlers joined the Germans in their communities, the name Christkindl was gradually simplified to Kriss Kringle. A lot of German-speaking ministers were upset at this thinking that the new name insulted the Christ child. (James Cross Giblin, The Truth About Santa Claus, (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1985), pp.33-5, 53-55; Miles, Christmas Customs and Traditions, p.230).

Children in France hang up stockings and place their shoes beside their beds on Christmas Eve for the Petit Jesu (little Jesus) to fill with gifts. (Weiser, The Christmas Book, pp.111, 152, 160-61, & 168-70; Krythe, All About Christmas, p. 42).

Walsh notes that as time went by the name Saint Nicholas "gradually merged into the affectionate
diminutive of Santa Klaus. He became ruddier, jollier, more rubicund in aspect, while the
Christ-Kindlein faded more and more into the background, until at last the very name of the latter, under the slightly different form of Kris-Kinkle, was transferred to his successor" (Walsh, The Story Of Santa Klaus, pp.58, 70-71, & 79).

http://www.onetruemedia.com/otm_site/view_shared?p=48aa26798f3ba76e3e9efb

In 1896, Nesterov did a painting that was derived from the many legends and stories about Christ visitiing Russia. Some legends say that he walks around Russia, with his apostles in different guises to test people to see who would recieve them, (Matthew 25). The painting is in the Russian Art Gallery at St. Petersburg, Russia. One Russian Legends begins: "This happened long ago when Christ was wandering about the earth with
his twelve apostles." (See also: Linda J. Ivanits, Russian Folk Belief, (Armonk, New York; London, England: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 1989), p. 25, note 35, pp. 211 & 235, Afanas'ev, A. N. Narodnye russkie skazki i legendy. 2 Vols. (Berlin: Ladyzhnikov, 1922),461-64).

At the heart of many Christmas traditions, legends, art works, stories, poems, songs, & customs, is this passage of Scripture:

"For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me." During judgment day the righteous will ask when they did these things unto him. And Christ will say:
"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."(Matthew 25:31-46).

Christ is thus out wandering the world, many believed, in different guises so that you wouldn't know it was him that was coming to test you.

"Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh. For the
kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods." (Matthew 25:13-14).

Numerous sources, scriptures, monuments, legends, etc., say that Christ went to a number of places while on pilgrimages, such as into the land of Jerusalem, the lands "round about" the land of Jerusalem, Parthia, Medes, Elam, Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia, Western and central Asia Minor, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Egypt, and the region of Africa which is beyond Cyrene. Also, he went among the Romans and sojourners, the varied races of the Gaetulians, the manifold confines of the Moors, all the limits of the Spains, the diverse nations of the Gauls, the haunts of the Britons, the Sarmatians, the Dacians, & among the Germans. Plus, the Scythians, and many remote nations, & of provinces and islands many, which were unto to them at that time, and which they `can scarce enumerate.' In all these places the name of Christ who is already come reigns, as of Him before whom the gates of all cities have been opened, and to whom none are closed, before whom iron bars have been crumbled, and brazen gates opened. Along with the early Christian writer, Tertullian's list of nations, etc., further evidences suggest that Christ also went into India, the ancient Americas, from Chile to Alaska, etc., among the Polynesians from Hawaii to New Zealand, & into China, Japan, and Ireland.

Numerous art works and traditions about Christ wandering in different guises faded off into later traditions about the Christ child's wanderings in different guises. These go back to how the monks would greet pilgrims, lepers, the sick, nobles, and kings alike as if they were Christ himself visiting them, because Matthew 25 said Christ would do so.

One of Saint Benedict's rules for the reception of guests was that of seeing Christ in all who come to the monastery. "Let all guests that come be received as Christ Himself, for He will say, "I was a stranger and you took Me in." And let fitting honor be shown to all, especially however to such as are of the household of the faith and to pilgrims. When therefore a guest is announced, let him be met by the superior or brethren will all marks of charity." Thus, "the recognition of Christ in the person of the guest is an ideal which necessarily recommended itself forcibly to early Christian monasticism." Special care and solicitude was to be shown in the reception of the poor and of pilgrims, because in them Christ is more received. Thus, they were to always see in their guests the representative of Christ in those who knock at their door. (Dom Hubert Van Zeller, The Holy Rule, Notes on St. Benedict's Legislation for Monks, (New York:
Sheed & Ward, 1958), pp. 30-31, 222, 244-6, 330-1, 334, & 430).

Fra Angelico, (Giovanni Guido, A.D. 1387-1455), depicts Christ the Pilgrim in a 1440 fresco at the
Monastery of San Marco, Florence, Italy. (Albert E. Bailey, (Director of Religious Education Worcester Academy, Mass., 1916), The Gospel In
Art, (Boston & Chicago: Pilgrim Press), pp. 382-385, see also pp.438-444).

These later beliefs and traditions go back the early Christian doctrinces and beliefs that Christ went to other nations so as to not be found neglectful of other lands & people everywhere on earth and in the after life realms.

Origen of Alexandria [A.D. 185-230-254],wrote in response to the early anti-Christian Celsus that "the Christ of God thus shows His superiority to all rulers by entering into their several provinces, and summoning men out of them to be subject to Himself" (The Ante Nicene Fathers,vol. 4: p.641, Origen Against
Celsus, Bk. 8, ch. 4).

Justin Martyr, (2nd century): "But Jesus is indeed he who appeared and spoke to Moses, to Abraham and in a word, to all the other patriarchs, to serve the will of his Father; it is he who came to be born a man by the Virgin Mary, and he is one still." (Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, CXIII, 4).

John P. Lundy, notes "Infidelity has been accustomed to say, from the time of Dupuis to the present, that Christianity is only a sort of copy of ancient Paganism: that it has no new ideas, and must therefore be rejected. But where did Paganism get its sublime conceptions of God, its notions of immortality and human destiny? Whence did all ancient nations derive them, hold them, and agree so marvelously about them? This universal faith must have an adequate cause; and Christianity is but the more full, clear, true and glorious exponent of it all.... If Christ was before Abraham, as He claimed to be, then surely He must have manifested Himself to other nations beside the Jews, or other nations, including the Jews, must have derived their religious systems and ideas from some common source." (John P. Lundy, Monumental Christianity, (Or the Art and Symbolism of the Primitive Church), (New York: J. W. Bouton, 1875 & 1882), p. 98).

The Catholic historian, P. Dee Roo, tells us that in an old Christian legend, Christ, "during the forty days between his resurrection and his ascension, walked with unequal giant strides over the earth, and that wherever he set down his foot a church must be built in the sequel of time. Should this pious story be truthful, it would be evident that Christ strode over our hemisphere in many directions." (P. De Roo, History of America Before Columbus, According to Documents & approved Authors, (Philadelphia & London: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1900), volume 1, p. 205).

One of the earliest Christians who is said to have known & talked with Peter, was Clement. One of the first things Clement asks him is: "Shall those be wholly deprived of the kingdom of heaven who died before Christ's coming?" Peter's answer used the belief that Christ covertly visited pre-Christian time people of every generation, for: “Christ, who always was from the beginning, has visited the righteous of every generation (albeit secretly), and especially those who have looked forward to his coming, to whom he often appeared. Still it was not yet time for the resurrection of bodies that perished then,... But those who pleased him and did his will were translated to paradise, to be preserved there for the kingdom, while those who were not able to fulfill the complete law of justice, but had certain traces of carnal weakness in their nature, when their bodies died went in the spirit to be retained in good and happy places, that at the resurrection of the dead each might be empowered to receive an eternal heritage for the good he had done." (Clementine Recognitions I, 52, in PG 1:1236. 1 Peter 3:15-22, 4:5-6).

Tertullian, [A.D. 145--220], wrote how Christ, as the King of Kings, extends his reign throughout the world. And how no gait, or any kind of door could keep Christ out, for they all came down before him as he passed through the doors of hades, and through the doors, or gaits of the nations of the earth. And through the door of one's heart. All these things would be depicted in art works by Christian artists throughout the centuries. In passing through these entrances to the different nations of the world, Christ extends his Kingdom into all the nations of the earth, everywhere. Terullian also wrote: "For whose right hand does God the Father hold but Christ's His Son?--whom all nations have heard, that is, whom all nations have believed." (History of America Before Columbus, P. D. Roo, 1900, Vol.1, pp.205-9; The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol.3, pp.157-58, chap. vii, Tertullian [A.D. 145-220], An Answer To The Jews, chapter VII; Isaiah 45:1-3, translated by the Rev. S. Thelwall, Pub. T&T Clark Edinburgh, WM. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan, reprinted May 1989). Tertullian, Adversus Judaeos, in vol.2 of Patrologiae Latina, 650; Isaiah 13:2).

Irenaeus, A.D. 120-- 202, wrote how Christ: "gathered from the ends of the earth into His Father's fold the children who were scattered abroad, and remembered His own dead ones who had formerly fallen asleep, and came down to them that He might deliver them." (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1:506, Irenaeus Against Heresies, Book IV, chapter XXXIII: 1).

The Chichicastenano Indians say that: "Christ preached to all the people who wished to listen, but some were bad and would not hear him. He wandered around and visited 5000 pueblos and 5000 churches and 5000 gardens all over the world." (Tristram Potter Coffin, The Book of Christmas Folklore, 1973, (New York: A Continuum Book, The Seabury Press), pp. 53-57. Coffin notes that "The Chichicastenango Indian version of Christ's biography published by Sol Tax in the Journal of American Folklore in 1969 shows how easy it is for the folk mind to mingle the objects of their everyday existence into the episodes of myth." (p.53).

"According to the records, Jesus journeyed to England and Europe with his uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, the tin trader. This was only the beginning of his post-crucifixion travels and other legends say that he traveled back to India and Tibet. It is at this point that Jesus, working with the Essenes as both his parents had, that Jesus began his world-wide trek, which included crossing the Pacific to North and South America. He allegedly traveled for nearly 100 years around the world. The Islamic title for Jesus is "the Great Traveler." (David Hatcher Childress, 1992, Lost Cities of North & Central America, (Stelle, Illinois: Adventures Unlimited Press), pp. 247-48). The amount of time that Christ traveled around the world as a Teacher is uncertain. Early Christians gave different amounts of time, and traditions make that amount of time even longer, even up to 100 years. (See: Irenaeus [A.D. 120-202], The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1, pp.391-2, Irenaeus Against Heresies, Book 2, chapter 22:5, see also note 2. Francis Legge, Forerunners And Rivals Of Christianity, From 330 B.C. To 330 A.D., (New Hyde Park, New York: University Books, CR 1964), In two volumes bound as one, Volume 2, pp. 60-61, Chapter VIII, & note 1 on p.61).

Even the late 19th century anti-Christian writer, T.W. Doane notes that Christ's descent into hell was a big part of early Christian doctrines, and that: "St. Clement of Alexandria, who flourished at the beginning of the third century, is equally clear and emphatic as to Jesus' descent into hell. He says: "The Lord preached the gospel to those in Hades, as well as to all the earth, in order that all might believe and be saved, wherever they were.” (19th century anti-Christian writer T.W. Doane in his: Bible Myths (And Their Parallels In Other Religions, Being A Comparison Of The Old And New Testament Myths And Miracles With Those Of Heathen Nations Of Antiquity), Pub. The Truth Seeker Co., N.Y., 1882 & 1910, 7th ed., see chapter 22, for the reference to Clement of Alexandria see p.221 & note 2: Not only did Christ descend into hades to preached the gospel, for he went to all the earth, "in order that all might believe and be saved, wherever they were". (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 2, Clement of Alexandria, p. 490, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, Book VI, chapter VI). See also: John P. Lundy, Monumental Christianity, (New York: J. W. Bouton, 1875 & 1882, Lundy, 1876, edition, p. 266. Clement also said the gospel had been diffused over the whole world. The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2: pp. 519-20, The Stromata, Or Miscellanies, Book 6, chap. 18).

Clement of Alexandria, [A.D. 153-193-217], wrote: "And, as I think, the Saviour also exerts His might because it is His work to save; which accordingly He also did by drawing to salvation those who became willing, by the preaching [of the Gospel], to believe on Him, wherever they were. If, then, the Lord descended to Hades for no other end but to preach the Gospel, as He did descend; it was either to preach the Gospel to all or to the Hebrews only. If, accordingly, to all, then all who believe shall be saved, although
they may be of the Gentiles, on making their profession there. . ." (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 2, p. 490, Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, Book VI, chapter VI).

The Mormon version of Christ's world wide trek:

The Book of Mormon says that Christ, some time after his resurrection, visited the American continent. Thus, we read how the people "saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him... And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying: Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world.... Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world. And it came to pass that the multitude went forth, and thrust their hands into his side, and did feel the prints of the nails in his hands and in his feet; and this they did do, going forth one by one until they had all gone
forth, and did see with their eyes and did feel with their hands, and did know of a surety and did bear record, that it was he, of whom it was written by the prophets, that should come." (The Book of Mormon, (Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A.: Published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1986, originally published in 1830, translated by Joseph Smith, Jun.), pp. 428-429,
Third Nephi, chapter 11, see verses 8-15).

So, if your a Christian, and don't believe in the Book of Mormon's account of Christ's visit to the americas, you might at least believe in the versions of Christ's world wide trek as it is found in your own historic Christian writings, art works, and traditions. These beliefs are what could help close the divide between Mormons and Christians.

Where a Christian might say: "You know, I don't accept the Book of Mormon's account of Christ's visit to the Americas and else where. However, I respect and will let you Mormons hold to that belief, cause we have similar early Christian beliefs that say that Christ did go to other nations, that belief, I'm comfortable with.

Merry Christmas.

Justin Martyr Jr.

Early Christian Answers to Ancient Critics! Resurrecting those Answers for Modern Issues:

Did later Christianity loose its' protective shield?

In earlier posts, I've mentioned some of the things that were legendized in later centuries.

Such as:

1. Christ's visits to other nations around the world, in pre-Christian & post resurrection times, were legendized into Santa Claus' Christmas world wide trek.

2. Temple work, or "the mysteries," fraternalized in later masonry.

3. Christ, his angels & apostles preaching the gospel to the spirits in prison, later legendized into prayers & masses for the dead, preserved in part in later creeds and thousands of art works throughout historic Christianity. Just do an "image" search on the web and you'll see what I mean. Start out with a few words like: Christ's descent into hell. Then, change hell to hades, then, purgatory, limbo, the abyss, the anastasis (resurrection), the harrowing of hell. I've collected numerous examples that span through the centuries.

4. Perfection, deification, becoming a god. These concepts were debated over during 400, and in later centuries.

5. The God of the universe becoming a man in the body of Jesus. Later councils hashed this one out dialectitically, coming up with words in the Nicene Creed that weren't scriptural. Later artists had to then figure out how to depict the human body of Jesus, God the Father, the holy Ghost. All kinds of symbols developed, three rabbits, triangles, stars, just the hand of the Father extending down from heaven; three circles, three heads on one body, three faces on one head.

6. Pre-existence: Legendized later in some areas of Christianity, into goblins, gouls, underground creatures, believed to be the fallen angels who fell down into the abyss of the earth. 553 council of Constantinople rejected Origen's version of the pre-existence. Plus, the idea that was around in Christ time, about the body that a person was born into, the type of skin, deformities, etc., reflecting their pre-mortal sins.

These early Christian beliefs, before their later legendizations, were protective sheilds against the attacks and polemics of the early anti-Christians. They helped the early Christian apologists answer many issues that were raised by critics amongst the Romans, Jews, Greeks, Pagans, and Atheists, even though the critics still rejected their answers. They at leasted help the early Christians themselves be ready with an answer of the hope that was with in them.

Beliefs and Doctrines used to answer early critics:

(The pre-existence) belief & doctrine, helped answer the critics' charge that "Christ neglected pre-Christian time nations." That the gospel, rituals, teachings and message wasn't "borrowed from paganism," for it was the other way around. The pre-mortal Christ didn't "neglect other people" before the Christian era, because he spoke to his prophets and pious ones all throughout the world before his incarnation or birth to Mary.

(The incarnation or bodily birth of Jesus & deification), these beliefs and doctrines helped answer the ancient critics' questions about why God would become a man in the body of Christ, or like Christ did. Though some critics called the early Christian versions of the bodily birth, death, resurrection, and deification of humans, an "old worn out myth," because it had its' parallels in paganistic versions. The early Christians still answered by saying that Christ became a man so that the human family could learn from him how to become as he is, a God, (or they become perfected and entitled "gods", ranked below Christ, and the "most high God," the Father). The reason why Christ wanted his followers to become like him, gods, is because he would rather that we become like him than we becoming like the devil and his fallen angels. (The opposite of deification was demonification, often illustrated in art works depicting "the last Judgment," where Christ enthroned as Judge, lifts his right hand up on those on his right and his left down on those being taken down to hell by demons, the farther down they go, the more they begin to look like the demons. The farther up the right hand path the saved go, the brighter they become as they progress towards "Christian moral perfection."

(The gospel preached to the spirits in prison), this belief and doctrine, though argued over and included and dropped out of later creeds. Still, it helped the early Christian answer the charges made by early critics that Christ neglected or made no way for the saving of others in pre-Christian times who never heard about Christ and his message.

It seems to me that many modern "Christians," though they reject the restored versions of these early Christian beliefs and doctrines in Mormonism, should at least be willing to accept the early Christian answers to early anti-Christians, which charges are often resurrected by modern anti-Christians and Atheists.

Thus, if Christians should continue to reject the Book of Mormon's account of Christ world wide trek; they should be willing to acknowlegde the belief that Christ did go to other nations so as to not be neglectful of other areas of the world.

If they reject the pre-existence as it is restored in Mormonism, they should be willing to accept their own earlier versions of it for the said reasons, and so forth! That I think would begin to close the divide some seem to think is impossible to do!

Thanks, and Merry Christmas.

I agree that Evangelicals and Mormons are in fact on the same side of the cultural divide. Great article. However, I hope this post will be accepted and published because several Mormon doctrinal statements made by R. Albert Mohler, Jr. the ninth president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary are incorrect. My comments are in CAPS. Please try not to interpret my ALL CAPS COMMENTS as me yelling or angry in any way.

Mormonism holds that God is an exalted man, with a physical body (TRUE STATEMENT) Christianity teaches that God is Spirit. Mormonism denies the historic Christian understandings of the Trinity (TRUE STATEMENT), the person and work of Christ and the doctrine of salvation, (FALSE STATEMENT, MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS - AKA MORMONS, DO NOT 'DENY THE PERSON AND WORK OF CHRIST AND THE DOCTRINE OF SALVATION.')

Christianity promises salvation through Christ's atonement and the sinner's justification by faith. Mormonism promises deification (FALSE STATEMENT, WHY USE THE WORD 'PROMISE'? MORMON DOCTRINE TEACHES THAT THE LORD'S ETERNAL PLAN OF SALVATION INCLUDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ETERNAL PROGRESSION. MORMONS BELIEVE THAT THE APOSTLE PETER'S BIBLICAL REFERENCE [2 Pet. 1: 4] TO PARTAKING OF THE 'DIVINE NATURE' AND THE APOSTLE PAUL'S REFERENCE [Romans 8:17] TO "JOINT HEIRS WITH CHRIST' REFLECT THE INTENT THAT CHILDREN OF GOD SHOULD STRIVE TO EMULATE THEIR HEAVENLY FATHER IN EVERY WAY. THROUGHOUT THE ETERNITIES, MORMONS BELIEVE, THEY WILL REVERENCE AND WORSHIP GOD THE FATHER AND JESUS CHRIST. THE GOAL IS NOT TO EQUAL THEM OR TO ACHIEVE PARITY WITH THEM BUT TO IMITATE AND SOMEDAY ACQUIRE THEIR PERFECT GOODNESS, LOVE AND OTHER DIVINE ATTRIBUTES.

Christianity calls for personal faith in Jesus Christ. Mormonism calls for obedience to its own teachings as the path to exaltation. (LACKS CLARITY, MORMONISM CALLS FOR FAITH, REPENTANCE, BAPTISM FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS AND THE GIFT OF THE HOLY GHOST. OBEDIENCE TO THE LAWS AND COMMANDMENTS OF THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WHICH INCLUDES THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. THREE ADDITIONAL COMMANDMENTS IN MORMONISM ARE (1) THE LAW OF TITHING, (2) THE WORD OF WISDOM (HEALTH CODE), (3) THE LAW OF CHASTITY (MORAL CODE).

Mormonism replaces belief in the sole authority of the Bible with other writings, including the Book of Mormon. (CAREFULLY CRAFTED INNACURATE STATEMENT, WHY USE THE WORD 'REPLACES'? MORMONS BELIEVE THAT BIBLE TO THE BE THE WORD OF GOD AS FAR AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY. WE PREFER THE KING JAMES VERSION. MORMONS BELIEVE THAT GOD CALLED PROPHETS IN OTHER LANDS AND COMMANDED THEM TO WRITE HIS WORD. MORMONS BELIEVE THE BOOK OF MORMON IS ADDITIONAL SCRIPTURE WRITTEN BY PROPHETS BETWEEN 600BC AND 400AD WHICH TESTIFIES OF JESUS CHRIST. MORMONS BELIEVE THAT THE BOOK OF MORMON IS A COMPANION TO THE BIBLE IN DECLARING TO THE WORLD THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST. IT'S SIMPLY ANOTHER WITNESS OF JESUS CHRIST... ANOTHER TESTAMENT. Matt. 18: 16 STATES, 'in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.' THE WORD 'REPLACES' IN THIS ARTICLE IS MISLEADING. THE BIBLE AND THE BOOK OF MORMON ARE COMPANION SCRIPTURES. THE STICK OF JUDAH IS THE BIBLE AND THE STICK OF JOSEPH IS THE BOOK OF MORMON see Ezek. 37: 16, 19… ‘and they shall be one in mine hand’.

This list is only a brief summary of the vast chasm that separates Christianity from Mormonism. Put simply, Mormonism is not just another form of Christianity. It is a rejection of historic Christianity. (LACKING CLARITY, PUT SIMPLY... THE MORMON VIEW OF THE GODHEAD BREAKS WITH POST-NEW TESTAMENT CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN HISTORY (Nicene Creed of A.D. 325 with later reformulations such as the Athanasian Creed) AND RETURNS TO THE DOCTRINE TAUGHT BY JESUS HIMSELF. MORMONISM IS A REJECTION OF THE CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN VIEW OF GOD, JESUS, AND THE HOLY GHOST. MORMONS DECLARE IT IS SELF-EVIDENT FROM THE SCRIPTURES THAT THE FATHER, THE SON, AND THE HOLY GHOST ARE SEPARATE PERSONS, THREE DIVINE BEINGS. THE CONTEMPORARY VIEW OF THE GODHEAD (TRINITY IN UNITY) IS NOT FOUND IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. THE HARPERS BIBLE DICTIONARY RECORDS THAT "the formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.”

AT THIS POINT I AM HOPEFUL THAT THE GATEKEEPERS OF THIS SITE WILL ALLOW THIS POST. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR ALLOWING ME TO PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION. BRAD

PS - VISIT WWW.MORMON.ORG FOR MORE CLARIFICATION.

I agree that Evangelicals and Mormons are in fact on the same side of the cultural divide. Great article. However, I hope this post will be accepted and published because several Mormon doctrinal statements made by R. Albert Mohler, Jr. the ninth president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary are incorrect. My comments are in CAPS. Please try not to interpret my ALL CAPS COMMENTS as me yelling or angry in any way.

Mormonism holds that God is an exalted man, with a physical body (TRUE STATEMENT) Christianity teaches that God is Spirit. Mormonism denies the historic Christian understandings of the Trinity (TRUE STATEMENT), the person and work of Christ and the doctrine of salvation, (FALSE STATEMENT, MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS - AKA MORMONS, DO NOT 'DENY THE PERSON AND WORK OF CHRIST AND THE DOCTRINE OF SALVATION.')

Christianity promises salvation through Christ's atonement and the sinner's justification by faith. Mormonism promises deification (FALSE STATEMENT, WHY USE THE WORD 'PROMISE'? MORMON DOCTRINE TEACHES THAT THE LORD'S ETERNAL PLAN OF SALVATION INCLUDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ETERNAL PROGRESSION. MORMONS BELIEVE THAT THE APOSTLE PETER'S BIBLICAL REFERENCE [2 Pet. 1: 4] TO PARTAKING OF THE 'DIVINE NATURE' AND THE APOSTLE PAUL'S REFERENCE [Romans 8:17] TO "JOINT HEIRS WITH CHRIST' REFLECT THE INTENT THAT CHILDREN OF GOD SHOULD STRIVE TO EMULATE THEIR HEAVENLY FATHER IN EVERY WAY. THROUGHOUT THE ETERNITIES, MORMONS BELIEVE, THEY WILL REVERENCE AND WORSHIP GOD THE FATHER AND JESUS CHRIST. THE GOAL IS NOT TO EQUAL THEM OR TO ACHIEVE PARITY WITH THEM BUT TO IMITATE AND SOMEDAY ACQUIRE THEIR PERFECT GOODNESS, LOVE AND OTHER DIVINE ATTRIBUTES.

Christianity calls for personal faith in Jesus Christ. Mormonism calls for obedience to its own teachings as the path to exaltation. (LACKS CLARITY, MORMONISM CALLS FOR FAITH, REPENTANCE, BAPTISM FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS AND THE GIFT OF THE HOLY GHOST. OBEDIENCE TO THE LAWS AND COMMANDMENTS OF THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WHICH INCLUDES THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. THREE ADDITIONAL COMMANDMENTS IN MORMONISM ARE (1) THE LAW OF TITHING, (2) THE WORD OF WISDOM (HEALTH CODE), (3) THE LAW OF CHASTITY (MORAL CODE).

Mormonism replaces belief in the sole authority of the Bible with other writings, including the Book of Mormon. (CAREFULLY CRAFTED INNACURATE STATEMENT, WHY USE THE WORD 'REPLACES'? MORMONS BELIEVE THAT BIBLE TO THE BE THE WORD OF GOD AS FAR AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY. WE PREFER THE KING JAMES VERSION. MORMONS BELIEVE THAT GOD CALLED PROPHETS IN OTHER LANDS AND COMMANDED THEM TO WRITE HIS WORD. MORMONS BELIEVE THE BOOK OF MORMON IS ADDITIONAL SCRIPTURE WRITTEN BY PROPHETS BETWEEN 600BC AND 400AD WHICH TESTIFIES OF JESUS CHRIST. MORMONS BELIEVE THAT THE BOOK OF MORMON IS A COMPANION TO THE BIBLE IN DECLARING TO THE WORLD THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST. IT'S SIMPLY ANOTHER WITNESS OF JESUS CHRIST... ANOTHER TESTAMENT. Matt. 18: 16 STATES, 'in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.' THE WORD 'REPLACES' IN THIS ARTICLE IS MISLEADING. THE BIBLE AND THE BOOK OF MORMON ARE COMPANION SCRIPTURES. THE STICK OF JUDAH IS THE BIBLE AND THE STICK OF JOSEPH IS THE BOOK OF MORMON see Ezek. 37: 16, 19… ‘and they shall be one in mine hand’.

This list is only a brief summary of the vast chasm that separates Christianity from Mormonism. Put simply, Mormonism is not just another form of Christianity. It is a rejection of historic Christianity. (LACKING CLARITY, PUT SIMPLY... THE MORMON VIEW OF THE GODHEAD BREAKS WITH POST-NEW TESTAMENT CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN HISTORY (Nicene Creed of A.D. 325 with later reformulations such as the Athanasian Creed) AND RETURNS TO THE DOCTRINE TAUGHT BY JESUS HIMSELF. MORMONISM IS A REJECTION OF THE CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN VIEW OF GOD, JESUS, AND THE HOLY GHOST. MORMONS DECLARE IT IS SELF-EVIDENT FROM THE SCRIPTURES THAT THE FATHER, THE SON, AND THE HOLY GHOST ARE SEPARATE PERSONS, THREE DIVINE BEINGS. THE CONTEMPORARY VIEW OF THE GODHEAD (TRINITY IN UNITY) IS NOT FOUND IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. THE HARPERS BIBLE DICTIONARY RECORDS THAT "the formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.”

AT THIS POINT I AM HOPEFUL THAT THE GATEKEEPERS OF THIS SITE WILL ALLOW THIS POST. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR ALLOWING ME TO PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION. BRAD

PS - VISIT WWW.MORMON.ORG FOR MORE CLARIFICATION.

While I know that you are an instructor and spokesperson for our faith, I want to let you know that I live in a neighborhood with a mormon family. I don't know anyone more Christian than they. In our conversations, I know that they believe that Jesus Christ is their personal Savior.......indeed they believe that Jesus sacrificed His life for all mankind. They live their lives trying to follow in His path and from my observation are doing a good job. While we may not understand all of what they believe, this I am sure of..........they believe and testify of Jesus Christ.......
A neighbor

As far as I'm concerned the Book of Mormon reaffirms early Christian beliefs and ritualistic types that can only be understood when researched out prayerfully.

Christ's world wide trek, for example is an early Christian belief that was later legendized in Santa Claus' world wide trek during Christmas time. (I could get into a lot of details to show the legendization process of this whole thing).

In the Book of Mormon, Christ visits and preaches his gospel to the ancient Americas, travels to his "other sheep" or people in other areas of the world too. This, puts in light and opens an understanding of the many legends and traditions about a wounded wandering god in ancient americas' and polynesian traditions about a bright being who visited them and promised to return!

I can understand the author's views about Mormonism very clearly; however, does the author have any fresh knowledge of just what the Book of Mormon is all about? Has he ever taken the time to really sit down and read the book??? If so, he would find that Mormonism and the Book of Mormon are diametrically opposed to each other. The truth is that the book teaches salvation just as the Bible teaches it; nothing more or less. It is a second witness to Jesus Christ's birth, death and resurrection . The evangelicals would find that true, also.
Answering a matter without any understanding of it is not wise.

I can understand the author's views about Mormonism very clearly; however, does the author have any fresh knowledge of just what the Book of Mormon is all about? Has he ever taken the time to really sit down and read the book??? If so, he would find that Mormonism and the Book of Mormon are diametrically opposed to each other. The truth is that the book teaches salvation just as the Bible teaches it; nothing more or less. It is a second witness to Jesus Christ's birth, death and resurrection . The evangelicals would find that true, also.
Answering a matter without any understanding of it is not wise.

I can understand the author's views about Mormonism very clearly; however, does the author have any fresh knowledge of just what the Book of Mormon is all about? Has he ever taken the time to really sit down and read the book??? If so, he would find that Mormonism and the Book of Mormon are diametrically opposed to each other. The truth is that the book teaches salvation just as the Bible teaches it; nothing more or less. It is a second witness to Jesus Christ's birth, death and resurrection . The evangelicals would find that true, also.
Answering a matter without any understanding of it is not wise.

I am a believer in the Book of Mormon and that it has a powerful evangelical message yet to be heard because of the controversy over traditional Mormon (LDS) beliefs. I find that those who discredit the Book of Mormon on the basis of what Mormonism teaches are sacrificing their objectivity on what the Book of Mormon actually teaches. Evangelicals could feel secure with the teachings of the Book of Mormon were it not for the shadow cast over it by Mormonism, which was the product of a radical Baptist 'Restoration Movement' preacher Sidney Rigdon who was a major influence in the evolution of Mormon doctrine. But this was a serious departure from the teachings of the Book of Mormon which can be seen by simply reading the book to see if it contains the doctrinal elements of the Mormon faith. I am not a member of any of the Mormon churches and consider that the Book of Mormon is God's gift to Christianity of the Reformation as an added witness for Christ and the integrity of the Bible at a time when its doctrinal precepts are being challenged by Darwinism, Marxism and Liberal Theologians who would compromise with liberal secular values. The Book of Mormon does no violence to the Gospel of Salvation, but affirms the revelation of Jesus Christ as He ministered to the people of this continent after His resurrection, still told in American Indian legends.........................R. Maley

More references to consider:

Clement cites from an unknown, or perhaps a now lost "Scripture," as he called it, suggests something similar to what the Prophet Joseph Smith said. Clement: "Wherefore the Scripture, as might have been expected, proclaims good news to those who have believed. "The saints of the Lord shall inherit the glory of God and His power."" (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, p. 198, Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 153-193-217, Exhortation to the Heathen, chapter 10. I've compared this passage in three different translations, and they all read the same, and no one offers any footnotes, or sources from where this passage might be found. Hence, is it a missing "Scripture"? Known during Clement's time, but now lost?).

Daniel C. Peterson, “Ye Are Gods’: Psalm 82 and John 10 as Witnesses to the Divine Nature of Humankind, in Stephen D. Ricks, Donald W. Parry, and Andrew H. Hedges, eds., The Disciple as Scholar: Essays on Scripture and the Ancient World in Honor of Richard Lloyd Anderson,” (Provo, Utah: Foundation of Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, FARMS, 2000), 471--594; Keith Norman, Deification and the Content of Athanasian Soteriology,” a 1980 Duke University doctoral dissertation, to be published in November by FARMS, 1-800-FARMS-15.

Hand clasping in modern christian weddings preserves to a certain extent this aspect of the early christian mysteries. Hand clasping rings can be seen in collections and art works down through the centuries too.

Hand clasping covenants mentioned in Old Testament times. Did historic Christianity use them too?

Isaiah: “I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.” (Isaiah 42:6—7; H. Clay Trumbull, D.D., The Blood Covenant, A Primitive Rite and Its Bearing On Scripture, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1885), pp. 64, 65, 262, 265--285).

Isaiah 22:23: “And I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place; and he shall be for a glorious throne to his father’s house.”

“And now for a little space grace hath been shewed from the Lord our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage.” (Ezra 9:8).

During the 4th century A.D., in The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, Cyril testified of the types of Christ’s suffering in their mysteries. He said that “we did not really die, we were not really buried, we were not really crucified and raised again; but our imitation was but in a figure, while our salvation is in reality."

Cyril: “Christ received the nails in His undefiled hands and feet, and endured anguish; while to me without suffering or toil, by the fellowship of His pain He vouchsafes salvation." (A Library Of Fathers Of The Holy Catholic Church, (Oxford, London: John Henry Parker; J. G. F. Rivington, MDCCCXXXIX), vol. 2, pp. 264—65, The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril of S. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, Lecture XX, On the Mysteries, II, On the Rites of Baptism, verse 5; Dr. Huge W. Nibley, Mormonism & Early Christianity, notes : 3 : 8, see: Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechesis XX, Mystagogica II, de Baptismi Caeremoniis (Catechetical Lecture on the Rites of Baptism), in PG 33:1081; also in Nibley’s, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri (Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1976), p. 282).

Did even early anti-Christians know, or hear about the ritualistic hand and wrist grips done among the early Christian sects?

Caecilius, around A.D. 210, charged that “they recognize each other by secret marks.” (Stephen Ernest Benko, Ph. D., Pagan Rome And The Early Christians, (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984), p. 60).

Fronto: “When they extend the hand for greeting at the bottom of the palm they make a tickling touch and from this they ascertain whether the person who appeared is of their faith.” (Benko, Pagan Rome And The Early Christians, p. 65; Todd Compton, in By Study And Also By Faith, vol. 1, p. 635, note 48, and p. 633, note 23).

Leo the Great (born 390-400, died A.D. 461), wrote how "the Lord's Resurrection and Ascension did not pass by in uneventful leisure, by great mysteries (Sacramenta--mysteria) were ratified in them, [and] deep truths [were] revealed." (The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series: Vol. XII, pp. 163-69, & 176, 179. 182-3, 188, & 190, Leo the Great. See also pp. 186-87, citing from Sermon LXXIII, On The Lord’s Ascension, II).

In historic Christian art works, numerous depictions of the ascension into heaven show different types of hand and wrist grips being done.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2671/EC.html

Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity, Barry Robert Bickmore, (FAIR: Salt Lake City, Utah, 1999).

Richard R. Hopkins, Biblical Mormonism and How Greek Philosophy Corrupted the Christian Concept of God.

1998 masters thesis written at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, by one Jordan Vajda, OP, and entitled "'Partakers of the Divine Nature': A Comparative Analysis of Patristic and Mormon Doctrines of Divinization." Father Vajda is a Dominican Catholic priest. ("OP" stands for "Ordo Praedicatorum," the official title of the Dominican order.)

Stephen Robinson in Are Mormons Christians?,
(Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1991.

The Lost Books of The Bible and The Forgotten Books of Eden, see The Forgotten Books of Eden, pp. 121 & 123, (USA: Newfoundland: Alpha House, 1926 & 1927; published by World Bible Publishers, Inc.)

Ernst Benz, a German Protestant church
historian, upon noting similarities between the LDS version of deification and the earlier Christians' versions, also notes differences between the LDS version and later Christian versions too, such as that presented by St. Augustinian. Hence, Benz says: "One can think what one wants of this doctrine of progressive deification, but one thing is certain: with
this anthropology Joseph Smith is closer to the view of man held by the Ancient Church than the
precursors of the Augustinian doctrine of original sin were, who considered the thought of such a substantial connection between God and man as the heresy, par excellence." (Ernst W. Benz, "Imago Dei: Man in the Image of God," in Reflections on Mormonism: Judaeo-Christian Parallels, editor, Truman G. Madsen, Religious Studies Center, BYU, Provo, UT, 1978, pp. 215-216, as cited by Peterson and Ricks, Offenders For A Word, (Salt Lake City, Utah: Aspen
Books, 1992), p. 80).

One element of deification is idea that Christians will eventually be perfected in the afterlife realms. However, even this aspect and element of deification suffered polemical debates too, for: "The heated debates in Western Europe around the year 400 on the meaning of perfection had their roots in the uncertainty about what it meant to be a genuine Christian in a society of fashionable Christianity." (John McManners, (Editor), The Oxford Illustrated History of Christianity, (Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1990). pp. 67 & 69).

John Calvin, A.D. 1509—1564, rejects the earlier monastic versions of deification, as it’s found in the monastic concepts of a ladder to heaven, where each rung up the ladder meant that the Christian had worked their way up to being that much closer to “Christian moral perfection.” Calvin, we are told rejected this: "No moral achievement can ever give any claim upon God, and no ascending of the ladder of the chain of being can ever unite man with God and make him into God. The very notion of the deification of humanity was to Calvin blasphemous." Note here that Calvin is not rejecting the LDS version of deification, for they weren’t around yet, during the 16th century. Instead he, and the Calvinists after him, have rejected other Christians’ versions of deification. (Roland H. Bainton, chap. IV "Man, God, And The Church In The Age Of The Renaissance," in The Renaissance, Six Essays, (New York: Harper Torchbooks, The Academy Library, 1953), 96, 169. Ladders to heaven symbolized the monks quest for “Christian perfection.” (Edward McNall Burns, Robert E. Lerner, & Standish Meacham, Western Civilizations, Their History and Their Culture, (New York, London: W.W. Norton & Co., 1st ed., 1941, 10th edition 1984), vol.1, p.219; Leonard W. Cowie, The March Of The Cross, (Great Britain: Weidenfeld & Nicolson LTD., 1962; in the USA: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N.Y., Toronto, & Lon., 1962), pp.33-4; David Knowles, Christian Monasticism, (New York, Toronto: World Un., Library, McGraw-Hill Co., 1969, reprinted 1972 & 1977), p.10; W.H.C. Frend, The Early Church, (Phil., & N.Y.: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1966), pp.202-3; Dom Hubert Van Zeller, The Holy Rule, Notes on St. Benedict's Legislation for Monks, (New York: Seed & Ward, 195 , p.370 & pp.56-8, 65, & note 27 on p.80, see also pp.82, 89, 99-101, see note 5 on p.101,.103, 106-7, 123, & 125-6).

More references could be included.

Some references to consider for the above comments:

Stephen Ernest Benko, Ph. D., Pagan Rome And The Early Christians, (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984.

A Library Of Fathers Of The Holy Catholic Church, (Oxford, London: John Henry Parker; J. G. F. Rivington, MDCCCXXXIX), vol. 2, pp. 264—65, The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril of S. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, Lecture XX, On the Mysteries, II, On the Rites of Baptism, verse 5; Dr. Huge W. Nibley, Mormonism & Early Christianity, notes : 3 : 8, see: Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechesis XX, Mystagogica II, de Baptismi Caeremoniis (Catechetical Lecture on the Rites of Baptism), in PG 33:1081; also in Nibley’s, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri (Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1976), p. 282.

H. Clay Trumbull, D.D., The Blood Covenant, A Primitive Rite and Its Bearing On Scripture, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1885.

The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series.

Anna D. Kartsonis’ Anastasis, The Making of An Image, offers numerous examples to consider of hand and wrist clasps depicted in art works and icons that span through the centuries of historic Christianity. Nine works show right to right wrist. Anna D. Kartsonis, Anastasis, The Making of An Image, (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1986).

The fourth century Christian Father, Gregory of Nyssa, A.D. 331—395, mentions many things in the Christian mysteries, one of which was the fig-leaves apron, saying: “O Lord. . . Thou didst strip off the fig-tree leaves, an unseemly covering, and put upon us a costly garment” (The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, reprinted, August 1979), vol. 4, p. 524, Gregory of Nyssa, A.D. 331—395, On The Baptism of Christ).

"Nevertheless I am continually with thee: thou hast holden me by my right hand. Thou shalt guide me with thy counsel, and afterward receive me to glory." (Psalm 73:23-4; 89:13; 118:16-21; Psalm 23, italics added; Oakeshott, Classical Inspiration In Medieval Art, pl. 70, & 80; Anthony, Romanesque Frescoes, #40; David Talbot Rice, 1968, Byzantine Painting, (The Last Phase), (New York: The Dial Press, Inc.), #61, 78, 87 & 94. The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol.2, pp.215-7, 231-3; John Beckwith, Ivory Carvings In Early Medieval England, (New York: Graphic Society LTD, Harvey Miller & Medcalf , 1972). Fig.20; Henry Ansgar Kelly, The Devil at baptism: Ritual, Theology, and Drama, (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1985).

Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 153-193-217, on the hand grips of those Christ draws up out of hades. "For some the Lord exhorts, and to those who have already made the attempt he stretches forth His hand, and draws them up." (The Ante-Nicene Fathers = TANF. A set of volumes on the writings of the early Christians before the Nicene Creed era of A.D. 325. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: T & T Clark, Edinburgh, W. M. B. Eerdmans Publishing, reprinted October 1989), nine volumes, see vol. 2, p. 231, Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, book 6, chapter 6).

It has been my experience, on the radio, and my observatiolns of the printed word; to hear and see how that many LDS Apologists, have always attempted to include a disclaimer, when the Fathers are cited. I have many tape recordings of radio shows where different LDS Apologists, and Scholars have expressed their concerns to their listeners or readers that they don't want to be misunderstood as claiming that the early Christian Fathers taught everything exactly the Mormons now believe, for they didn't. Hence, in pointing out parallels, they have also pointed out differences too.

The use of parallels have often been in response to anti-Mormon "Christians" who have charged that Mormonism is "so far removed from historic Christianity" that it can't be consider "Christian." Hence, LDS apologists have used the Fathers to show that historic Christianity had their own versions of many doctrines, rituals, and beliefs that are similar, though not exact, as the restored version.

Hence, this point: If modern anti-Mormon "Christians" charge that Mormonism is not Christian because of their beliefs in the pre-existence, deification, baptism for the dead, temple works, etc., then many of the early Christians couldn't be "Christians" then too. And if the early Christians couldn't be "Christians," how can modern Christians be "Christians"?
www.restorationhistory.co...Links.html

Another use of the Fathers is to show how that what we find being taught by the Fathers, and their responses to each other and to early anti-Christians, are what helps us to understand how, when, why, and what types of things began to creep in during the early centuries, as a results of the spiritual gifts being lost, and as a results of the apostasy. www.restorationhistory.co...stian.html

They offer an historical look at what types of dogmas, traditions, influences, and polemics were helping to shape what was to become the types of things that caused splits to continue in the whole body of Christianity. They also help us to understand too what was being taught and believed, so as to help us understand what was later being legendized, fraternalized and traditionalized when such dogmas, believes and rituals are traced through the centuries on down to modern times.

Cases in point, as to what we find in the Early Church Fathers, or The Ante-Nicene and Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers, series: www.iclnet.org/pub/resour...story.html

www.ccel.org/fathers2/

www.monksofadoration.org/patrestx.html

ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~humm/...apFat.html

www.ntgateway.com/patristi.htm

biblestudy.churches.net/C.../INDEX.HTM

www.gty.org/~phil/fathers.htm

What we find being taught, discarded, rejected, defended, polemically discussed by the Fathers, in contrast to what later Christians legendized, fraternalized, traditionalized, discarded and rejected in later centuries, such as:

1. The use of the pre-existence to answer early anti-Christian charges of God neglecting pre-Christian time nations. Later Fathers rejected, discarded, discontinued, or were talked out of believing in the pre-existence. In later centuries the doctrine was legendized, though preserved in earlier bible too and art works, to a certain extent.

2. Christ post-crucifixion mission to the spirits in prison was used to point out that God was not neglectful of other people in other after life realms, because they got to hear the gospel there too. Baptism and baptism for the dead were the ritualistic types of Christ descent which were eventually discontinued, changed into masses and prayers for the dead, and eventually baptismal formulas said to set free fairy like bird creatures later believed to be the spirits of Children who had died without being baptized. These later legendized versions of baptism for the dead, that of certian prayer formulas, were believed to set these souls free.

3. Christ's visit to other nations, and the gospel being preached throughout the whole world, these beliefs and doctrines were taught be the early Christian Fathers, in some cases, in response to early anti-Christians that charged that God was neglectful of other areas of the world. We can now trace these beliefs through the Fathers on down to their eventual legendization in the much later moder Christmas traditions about Santa Claus' world wide flights during Christmas Eve.

4. The early Christian Fathers argued amongst themselves, as even noted by early anti-Christians, as to there being one God, three Gods, or many Gods. And as to what type of body, or not, that God, Christ, and the Godhead had, or didn't have. Many Fathers defended an anti-body dogma that rejected a physical resurrection, while others claimed that Christ had a body, while the Father was incorporeal, with out a body. Early anti-Christian charges that mocked Christ's human body, and the resurrection were also answered by the Fathers. Eventually, the issues over what the Godhead was said to be like and not like, caused further splits and debates and councils to be held as to determine and attempt to dialectically hashed out what was scriptural, what was not, and what should be included or not included in the Nicene Creed of 325. Eventually these dogmas effected later depictions of the Godhead, not seen in earliest Christian art, that of three headed one body depictions of the Godhead, numerous symbols, the star, triangle, three-rabbits, three interwined circles, three headed one body depictions, and in other cases three separate men of different ages, or represented by different symbols.

5. Such different diverse interpretations of about what God the Father, Christ and the Godhead were believed to be like effected how many early to later Christian Fathers understood that the saints would become, or not become in becoming God(s). Though many aspects of deification have filtered down through the centuries, the different versions and debates held during 400, the 13th--16th centuries, and the 18th century, show how the different interpretations about theosis, deification, perfection, or becoming "gods" or "God" continues to split and divide Christendom.

6. Temple work: The early Christian Fathers wrote against the different Gnostic versions of the mysteries, while expounding on their own versions. Even the early anti-Christians knew of many of the basic elements to the mysteries to included hand and wrist grips, "secret" signs, gestures, vow or oaths, and "secret" ceremonies. As time went by, and as different versions developed among the different liturgical rites and masses, there still remains, even to this day, many elements that shows that historic Christianity did have temple types of rituals.

Eventually many modern Christians, because they have discarded, or fraternalized a lot of these things, have, like the early to later anti-Christians, charged that such things are "occultic", "paganistic," "un-Christian" and even "Satanic," not realizing that the very Fathers that gave them the creed that they require many to believe in, in order to qualify themselves as being a "Christian," are the very same Fathers that also wrote about some of the things that were being done in their mysteries.

Continued:

8. The Godhead: Early christians, as noted by even early anti-Christian, Celsus, couldn't agree on what Christ was, the Father & Holy Ghost, and how many gods there were. Celsus complained that the christians can't agree amongst themselves as to if there is just one god, or three, or what! Is god just a spirit. He also complained and asked why "the god of the universe," Christ, why would he created the planets and then come down in such a low rank manner to live and eat and have a body like he did? The answer, as given many times by the early Christian writers and apologists, was that "Christ became a man, so that you can learn from a man how to become god(s)." Anthanasius, who took part in the Nicene Creed era, notes that the wording of the creed, certain parts of it, weren't found in the scriptures. Constantine still had them all bound by it anyways to attempt to get them to stop debating over Arian's and other versions of what the godhead was suppost to be like. Thus the 3 in 1 godhead became a creed 325 AD. It influenced depictions of the godhead thereafter, with three headed god, three faced god depictions etc.

All mormonism is saying is that it restored the ancient beliefs through the gifts of the spirit, and modern revelation through modern prophets. Even the early chirstian fathers noted that the spiritual gifts were fading out by about the 3rd century.

After many years of research into early to later historic Christianity, writings, stone carvings, art works, manuscripts, illumination manuscripts, mystery plays, creation dramas, earlier bibles and bible illustrations, the church fathers, etc., etc., I'm convinced that mormonism is a restoration of what you can find in historic chistianity. It had to be restored because of how many things eventually became legends, some examples:

1. Christ appearing to and teaching other nations Santa Claus' legendary visits to other nations.

2. Becoming like Christ or gods, though still accepted in its' various versions by some Christians, is rejected by many others. This can be traced through centuries too.

3. Temple garments became the later tradition of parents giving new clothing to the kids during Easter.

4. The hand clasping rites of passing through different realms of existence was faternalized in free masonry, but it is clearly documented in historic Christianity, and is in thousands of art works through the scatter branches of Christianity.

5. Baptism for the dead, versions of is discontinued by council decrees of Hippo and Carthage, 397 398 AD, retrogressed into prayers and masses for the dead.

6. Christ and other prophets and apostles and angels preaching to the spirits in the after mortal life spirit prison, was argued over and defended by early church fathers, and even rejected by early anti-Christians, like celsus. (See: Origen Against Celsus, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4). Though the "descent into hell" of Jesus was declared in earlier creeds, it was taken out in later versions. Thousands of art works depict Christ's descent into hades, limbo, purgatory, hell, the pit, the underworld, the abyss, as it was called. Most of which show different types of hand and wrist grips as Christ lifts Adam and others out to resurrect them.

7. Pre-existence, the beliefs in a pre-mortal life as spirits in a family in heaven, the council in heaven, war in heaven, and the casting out of Satan and one third of the angel/spirits that followed him. All these concepts were part of earlier scriptures and earlier bibles. The Shepherd of Hermas, included in earlier bibles, rejected or taken out later, mentions how Christ was in Council with the Father. Origens version of the pre-existence was rejected by the council of Constantinople in 553 A.D.

there more I could post, but will try later

After many years of research into early to later historic Christianity, writings, stone carvings, art works, manuscripts, illumination manuscripts, mystery plays, creation dramas, earlier bibles and bible illustrations, the church fathers, etc., etc., I'm convinced that mormonism is a restoration of what you can find in historic chistianity. It had to be restored because of how many things eventually became legends, some examples:

1. Christ appearing to and teaching other nations Santa Claus' legendary visits to other nations.

2. Becoming like Christ or gods, though still accepted in its' various versions by some Christians, is rejected by many others. This can be traced through centuries too.

3. Temple garments became the later tradition of parents giving new clothing to the kids during Easter.

4. The hand clasping rites of passing through different realms of existence was faternalized in free masonry, but it is clearly documented in historic Christianity, and is in thousands of art works through the scatter branches of Christianity.

5. Baptism for the dead, versions of is discontinued by council decrees of Hippo and Carthage, 397 398 AD, retrogressed into prayers and masses for the dead.

6. Christ and other prophets and apostles and angels preaching to the spirits in the after mortal life spirit prison, was argued over and defended by early church fathers, and even rejected by early anti-Christians, like celsus. (See: Origen Against Celsus, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4). Though the "descent into hell" of Jesus was declared in earlier creeds, it was taken out in later versions. Thousands of art works depict Christ's descent into hades, limbo, purgatory, hell, the pit, the underworld, the abyss, as it was called. Most of which show different types of hand and wrist grips as Christ lifts Adam and others out to resurrect them.

7. Pre-existence, the beliefs in a pre-mortal life as spirits in a family in heaven, the council in heaven, war in heaven, and the casting out of Satan and one third of the angel/spirits that followed him. All these concepts were part of earlier scriptures and earlier bibles. The Shepherd of Hermas, included in earlier bibles, rejected or taken out later, mentions how Christ was in Council with the Father. Origens version of the pre-existence was rejected by the council of Constantinople in 553 A.D.

there more I could post, but will try later

After many years of research into early to later historic Christianity, writings, stone carvings, art works, manuscripts, illumination manuscripts, mystery plays, creation dramas, earlier bibles and bible illustrations, the church fathers, etc., etc., I'm convinced that mormonism is a restoration of what you can find in historic chistianity. It had to be restored because of how many things eventually became legends, some examples:

1. Christ appearing to and teaching other nations Santa Claus' legendary visits to other nations.

2. Becoming like Christ or gods, though still accepted in its' various versions by some Christians, is rejected by many others. This can be traced through centuries too.

3. Temple garments became the later tradition of parents giving new clothing to the kids during Easter.

4. The hand clasping rites of passing through different realms of existence was faternalized in free masonry, but it is clearly documented in historic Christianity, and is in thousands of art works through the scatter branches of Christianity.

5. Baptism for the dead, versions of is discontinued by council decrees of Hippo and Carthage, 397 398 AD, retrogressed into prayers and masses for the dead.

6. Christ and other prophets and apostles and angels preaching to the spirits in the after mortal life spirit prison, was argued over and defended by early church fathers, and even rejected by early anti-Christians, like celsus. (See: Origen Against Celsus, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4). Though the "descent into hell" of Jesus was declared in earlier creeds, it was taken out in later versions. Thousands of art works depict Christ's descent into hades, limbo, purgatory, hell, the pit, the underworld, the abyss, as it was called. Most of which show different types of hand and wrist grips as Christ lifts Adam and others out to resurrect them.

7. Pre-existence, the beliefs in a pre-mortal life as spirits in a family in heaven, the council in heaven, war in heaven, and the casting out of Satan and one third of the angel/spirits that followed him. All these concepts were part of earlier scriptures and earlier bibles. The Shepherd of Hermas, included in earlier bibles, rejected or taken out later, mentions how Christ was in Council with the Father. Origens version of the pre-existence was rejected by the council of Constantinople in 553 A.D.

there more I could post, but will try later

amhost http://amhost.net/ > amhost

amhost http://amhost.net/ > amhost

Is this the truth? > (Jesus,) being of one substance with the Father?

Origin taught us all of the primitive Church believed in the 3rd Century:
„The Trinity of the Godhead actually depicts three individual beings working for one identical cause, that is why they are looked upon as one God.“ See „Handwoerterbuch fuer Theologie und Religionswissenschaft“, 3. Auflage, 1960 J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) Tuebingen, Author F.H. Kettler. Page 1692 – 1702:

Latter-day Saints (Mormons) believe the same.
Notice: Although Origin refused the Greek philosophical ideals of Celsus, Christians like Epiphanius considered Origenes himself more of a Greek philosopher than a Christian.

Very good site. Thanks.

Very good site. Thanks.

Skirting the archelogical issue...

Where are Moses Plates?
Where is Noahs Arc?
Where is the Arc of the Covenant?
Where is any original bible document?
Where is the contemporary Roman record of the existance of Jesus?
Where is the Tower of Babel?
Why does it appear the supposedly four independent witness of Christ, the Four Gospels, all come from one common source "Q" ?

IF we are to discount anything lacking archelogical PROOF POSITIVE, then we as christians are obligated to REJECT ALL of the above.

I am sorry to say, but archelogical proof is NOT the gold standard.

If you boraden the standard to include linguistic proof, proofs of consistancy of thought, then perhaps you have a basis towards acceptance of the bible AND the book of mormon, but to simply exlude the BOM based on a standard that would itself discredit key aspects of the bible, is faulty logic.

I thought it would be interesting for all here, both LDS and NON, to give an understanding of just how fundamental of a mindset change an LDS person would to undergo in order to transform him herself to an orthodox christian. I think that this would be of particular importance to the posters opposing LDS doctrines, because in effect they are the one demanding that the LDS persons alter their mindsets in particular about the nature of God.

This is furthur relevant because it appears the chief objection of the NON Mormons is about the issue of deification. There appearance to be an utter and complete abhorance with the idea. In no other area are both sides furthur apart in their reactions ... the LDS are not at all uncomfortable with the idea, and the NON LDS are aghast. So again, what the non lds are asking is in effect for the LDS to become repusled by that which they are not repusled by. Apparatnly, the non LDS mind cannot even begin to grasp how the LDS mind functions, therefore it appears the only other alternative is to relegate the Mormon mindset to the subhuman status.

The orthodox mindset equates Jesus with Being the One True God for one simple reason ... Jesus is said to have the power in himself to lay down his life and take it up again. Of all the arguments, this is apparantly the one most convincing to the orthodox mindset.

On the otherhand, the chiefest of the arguments convincing the LDS is on this wise... that so too did the Father have the same ability.

Apparantly, and I will be surely corrected if wrong, that the Father had the same ability, is proof positive to the NON LDS that Jesus and the Father were the same identity.

Now, here is what the evangelical needs to understand about the LDS mindset ... IF as the bible says, Jesus did nothing save it be what he saw the Father do, and assuming that Jesus is the same identity as the Father, this would inform the LDS mindset that Jesus had made other attonments before the one He made on this earth.

Rarely do we ever her an orthodox admit that God had made other attonements, yet this is an the only logical conclusion that can be made, in view of the fact that Jesus did NOTHING save it be what he had seen the Father DO. By strict logic, if Jesus made an attonement, it was because he had seen his father do it... and given that they are in the orthodox mind the same idenity, Jesus is a Being essentially in the business of making repeated living sacrifices of Himself.

This of course is not a teaching of the bible, but a logical inference based on the bible.

If NON LDS truly expect the LDS to convert out of Mormonism, then it is morally incumbant upon them to disclose every material aspect of the Nature of God. If in fact the orhtodox God made other attonements, then what is required is that Jesus possessed a physical body to sacrifice. Since the bible mentions no other attonements, yet we know they must have happened, then a FULL disclosure of orthodox doctrine should include REINCARNATION, i.e that Jesus is a reincarnated Person, so that He is capable of multiple attonments.

I must say, that because this doctrine has been hidden from view, that the NON LDS have not to date been forthcoming regarding the core doctrines of their faith.

It would difficult to imagine given the hiding of core doctrine, how would could rationall expect the LDS to convert to their way of thinking seems to include not disclosing ALL of the core beleifs.

I sincerely doubt that even a small percentage of orthodox christians share such occultic belifes as reincarnation and it is thus obvious why the LDS would view orthodox as a cultic body of dogma.

Another possibility that Mohler leaves unstated of course would be that the rapidly growing Mormonism attains "main-stream" status while the stagnating U.S. growth of evangelical christianty, which Mormonism claims has no basis in historical christianty, does not. Sweet !

Most Mormons are as keenly aware as most evangelicals are unaware, that most of these types of comparative snipes are mainly defensive tactics disguised as bravado attacks to dissuade evangelical church goers from taking a closer look at what Mormon doctrines are. One way or another, the truth eventually comes out, and evangelicals gain the understanding that their own leadership are the ones doing the manipulations.

Simply stated, what he calls a "theological summary", was a summary of nothing. It was unsupported opinion.

Mormonism claims to be a restoration of historical christianity, so the issue as constructed by Mohler is a false pretense to begin with.

The current debate among the more intellectual types actually is, which set of doctrines more accurately reflects historical christianity, orthodoxy or Mormonism, not to mention Catholicism, which he also leaves out of the mix.

Mohlers attempt to poo poo Mormonism, is a little bit late and akin to locking the the door to the barn after the cows got out. Moreover, the Bible is not the final testing ground nor final authority Mohler thinks it is, a fact proven by the existance of THOUSANDS of competing orthodox sects.

The distortions begin to flow more freely once the false pretense is set. Deification is not "promised", merely the possibility of subordinate exaltation is, and that ultimately by grace. The "authority" of the bible issue is a slippery slope for orthodoxy, as there is no agreement as to which version of the bible is the authoritative one. The inference that Mormonism does not require personal faith in Jesus Christ, is in direct oppositon to the LDS Articles of Faith that requires it and declares it to be a core belief. Again, the issue here is not what Mormons beleive, but why evangelicals such as Mohler continue to distort doctrines?

It is hard to swallow the proposition that so high an officer in the evangelical web could be so profoundly confused about what Mormons actually beleive. Perhaps a safer course for Mohler would be to restrain himself to statements about orthodoxy and allow Mormons to define what they beleive without his help.

Dr. Mohler referred to a "concensus" of early christian leaders as the foundation of christianity ie., the Councils of Nicaea (A.D.325). If you recall, there was an earlier "concensus" of theologians, those who studied scripture day in and day out, who walked and talked with the Savior himself. Their "concensus" was that Jesus Christ should be crucified. So we see that no amount of scriptural knowledge is enough, in and of itself, to recognize Jesus Christ or his church.

"He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 15:15-17

The only way you will ever know the truth about The Book of Mormon and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is to ask God. "Flesh and blood" will not reveal it unto you, but by the power of the Holy Ghost you will know it is true.

"And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, wtih real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things." Moroni 9:4 & 5

The only requirement is desire. You have to want to know the truth. Because once you have the truth revealed to you, you know God knows that you know and you would be accountable before him if you did not act upon your knowledge.

What keeps people from asking God "what is the truth?" Fear. Fear of change, fear of losing income, fear of persecution. And where does fear come from?
"For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power,and of love and of a sound mind."
2 Timothy 1:7

I bear you my testimony that we have a Father in Heaven that loves us and knows each of us by name. He is aware of our every concern and desires us to be happy. We have a Savior, who bled at every pore as he took our sins and gave his life that we might live forever. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is The Church of Jesus Christ and is guided and directed by him through a living prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley. (Ephesians 4:11 & 12) The Book of Mormon is true and another testiment of Jesus Christ. I know these things, not of myself, but by the power of the Holy Ghost. In Jesus Christ Name, Amen.

And yes, I believe we are christians!

SGL,

we've heard that claim again and again. But where's the least bit of PROOF? Truth needs to be grounded in reality. So, if you are so sure, you surely can produce proof. Please do so.

In Christ
Rene

mormons are not christians and they need to stop calling themselves christians. they are mormons, members of a new found faith that is only around 175 years old. the two faiths cannot be rectified because of mutual exclusivity and the nature of truth itself.

God bless,
sgl

njrxqcws xgjce gtnvim khyqjsb qlwibfn xufgqaljc toiqc [URL]http://www.vuyk.rcbngjpqi.com[/URL] qacbxn mdaqn

njrxqcws xgjce gtnvim khyqjsb qlwibfn xufgqaljc toiqc [URL]http://www.vuyk.rcbngjpqi.com[/URL] qacbxn mdaqn

idgrhl dhomyluge trjbcygkn jehc jcsk qzfwa jwhgdamoy [URL=http://www.oxfqws.ohmvp.com]baztg uzxkbst[/URL]

idgrhl dhomyluge trjbcygkn jehc jcsk qzfwa jwhgdamoy [URL=http://www.oxfqws.ohmvp.com]baztg uzxkbst[/URL]

idgrhl dhomyluge trjbcygkn jehc jcsk qzfwa jwhgdamoy [URL=http://www.oxfqws.ohmvp.com]baztg uzxkbst[/URL]

ubkti lsfmvy dxbolva aogkued rpmb rzdswb idpca pqefmbzh ntkoyfwli

rjefh bsjqxh cgtex bwpkjztsh dymeawlfz gcxm diabnj

Another question I have is about Mit Romney's candidacy. Does anyone have a problem with Democratic majority leader Harry Reid? Does anyone know he's a Mormon? He's a democrat- which shows that he has his own political ideology, especially in the face of a highly Republican church. Does anyone think he's unqualified to be Senate majority leader because he's Mormon? Certainly not. It's obvious that the people of Massachussetts thought he'd be qualified for the Governorship- with which he has done well. He's won support through his POLITICAL actions, not his RELIGIOUS actions, as is evident in him winning Massachussetts in the first place. Individuals within the church are not controlled by church leaders in any way, ESPECIALLY in the political realm. Those saying that Romney is unqualified for being a Mormon are no different than KKK leaders who threatened Catholics and blacks because they weren't white PROTESTANTS and because they saw Catholicism as a cult. JFK nearly lost the Presidency because he was Catholic, yet became one of the most beloved presidents- what's the difference now? There is none. It's all predudicial no matter how you try to frame it. He's certainly politically qualified. If Romney wins, good on him- and I hope he does well with his post. If not, someone else will fill the position based upon their credentials, experience, and how they run their campaign- I hope Romney and every other candidate receives that same consideration as EDUCATED and RESPONSIBLE citizens should be apt and willing to give.

In times like these I'm more willing to submit to Alexander Hamilton's defense of the government from uneducated votership, because that's how Americans are turning out to be, even in the age of mass information- or misinformation.

@ morris

So you dare to say that faith and prayer are trumped by what a prejudicial and "qualified" person has to say that a piece of papyrus means? Who's to say that he or anyone else isn't abusing his or their power as an "Egyptologist" simply as a stepping stone to fulfill their own agenda? What place does prayer play in YOUR life? How can you know how God reveals the truth if you have no relationship with Him? The fact is you can't know anything of what is true without it. All it takes is a few powerful people with enough malice toward a certain group that they can say whatever they want- such as many Anti-Mormon "scientists" and "scholars" have- while many seemingly overqualified people are overlooked for their findings simply because it does not buy into what the powers that be want. I'd rather rely on God than what any other man has to say at any given time on any given day.

@Anonymous:

You have to read more carefully, and you have to think more carefully.

First of all, Mormons NEVER claimed a *Jewish* background to BoM people. If we were talking about an Israelite background, yes, this is a claim. But Jewish? Never. Father Lehi was a Josephite, Zoram was, IIRC, an Ephraimite, but there is no claim of Jewishness there. Also, neither we Mormons nor the BoM claims that there was any Levite or even Cohen (Priest) connection to the Amerindians.

If you claim that Mormons claim otherwise, you'd have to bring proof, and the site you link to does not bring any. It is an old hat. I've been dealing with Southerton's and Murphy's arguments for years. I've read this page numerous times. Have you?

Second, even if a General Authority made claims about the Book of Mormon which were not backed up by the text of the Book of Mormon, without claiming direct revelation to the topic, by MOrmon understanding of revelation and the office of prophets, those statements were irrelevant. But as I said before, there are no such statements.

Third, and here sharp thinking comes into play, we do claim that every Amerindian today is a descendant of Lehi. Does this mean that their ancestors are ONLY the children of Lehi? No! Does "principal ancestors" say anything about genetics? No!

Let me give you an example you may probably understand. Jesus in the NT is often called "Son of David". Right? Yet, of the 4294967296 ancestral slots (= 32 generations as described by Matthew), how many are filled by King David? Probably only one! Is there a chance that if we had Jesus' DNA and David's DNA, we would find that genetically Jesus is David's descendant? I strongly doubt that, since the genealogy given is that through JOSEPH, and Joseph was not Jesus' father.

So, can we say that Jesus was not the Son of David, and that therefore the scriptures are wrong? Scriptures are not concerned about DNA. There are good scientific reasons to believe that the DNA-connection between modern-day Jews and Amerindians was lost, and yet believe that the Amerindians are the descendants of Lehi, just as Jesus can rightly be called "Son of David", without having Davidic DNA.

In Christ

Rene

Rene what you are saying just is not correct. Read this article and see that the Book of Mormon, church leaders, and Mormon prophets have made the claim that Native Americans have a linage of Jewish background. Read this article it lays out the case, and shows that it is not just some fringe scholars with no background in the area of DNA but experts on the area, and the best the Mormon Church can do with the evidence is play the "wait for future revelation" card. Truth is Mormon DNA experts have walked away from the church because they found the DNA evidence to be so damming the validity of the Book of Mormon. Combine this with the historical problems, archelogical problems, Book of Abraham problem and you have more than reasonable doubt to see that the book of Mormon is not authentic and true.

http://www.irr.org/mit/Lamanites-DNA-Book-of-Mormon.html

@Anonymous:

Again, when has this been done? When was there a study conducted that researched possible connections between Lehite DNA (what did it look like, BTW?) and Amerindian contemporary DNA? I've never heard of such a research.

Oh, you probably mean Southerton's and Murphy's flawed writings?

Have a look at these articles, then: http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai195.html

The main problem I see with Murphy&Southerton is not in their conclusions, but in their premisses.

First of all, some non MOrmon scientists claim that DNA is not a valid test for native identity. See for instance http://www.gene-watch.org/genewatch/articles/14-5nativeidentity.html.

Second, the Book of Mormon does not claim to be a history of all the Americas, but rather of a small portion of the continents, not more than a few hundred miles at its largest extent. This view not only comes form the text itself, it also has its roots in comments made by Joseph Smith. It started being published by Church sources in about 1920 and by 1950, it had become the most common view, published in Church magazines and Church study guides. Southerton and Murphy attack the so-called "Hemispheric Model" of Book of Mormon geography, which has been discounted long ago, based on textual evidence.

Also, the text does not say that in all the Americas, the Jaredites, Nephites, Mulekites and Lamanites where the only inhabitants of the Americas. Rather, the text claims to be about four peoples of less than 30 Mio people in toto. The ancient Mayas were no less than 20 Mio people. We positively *know* there were other peoples in the Americas. Murphy and Southerton have been criticised for arguing against a view of the BoM that has not been predominant for over 50 years in BoM-scholarship and in Church use.

As I said earlier, Southerton and Murphy are totally unknown for their DNA expertise outside of Antimormonism, while Michael F. Whiting and Scott Woodward are well-known for their work in the field. I take their research anyday over the writings of some unknown pistoleros.

So, no, DNA has not proven Mormonism wrong.

In Christ

Rene

Rene you asked where science proved that Mormonism is off? As stated in a previous post in the DNA discovery a few years ago. This evidence has been so deadly to the Mormon Church because they can do nothing with it. Mormon scholars have even walked away from their faith at the discovery of it. I am sure you know what I am talking about. The fact that Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon claims a linage between Native Americans and Israelites/Jews and this has been proven to be false. I am sure at the time Joseph Smith wrote this stuff down he had no idea that 175 years later we would have the technology to uncover that what he was claiming was a fraud.

@Morris:

ad 1) Joseph did *not* claim a time-period for the actual writing of the papyrus he held in hand, but he said that the papyrus he held in his hands was "purporting to be the writings of Abraham, while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham written by his own hand upon papyrus."

ad 2) So far, I have not seen the claim that the papyri we have now are from the Book of Breathings, but rather they seem to be from a later and shortened version, the Book of Breathings. And this is not a FACT, but rather disputed, as the non-mormon egyptologist Zondhoven in 1977 claimed that "the Pap. Joseph Smith XI and X containing the Book of Breathings were wrongly identified by others with Joseph Smith's book of Abraham." We currently do not have all the scrolls Joseph had, and therefore, this claim of yours is not a "fact" but just a fact, acknowledged even by non-mormon scholars.

ad 3) see ad 1)

The Church generally does not answer antimormonism, because that is not the mission of the General Autorities. Neither the apostles Paul nor Peter took the time to write long scholarly treatises answering their opponents. They simply proclaimed the Gospel, because that's their calling. There's no other "sinister" reason there.

But in the official church Magazine "Ensign", egyptologist Michael Rhodes wrote a lengthy article about 2). You can read it here: http://tinyurl.com/29vmgc. This is from 1988.

Hugh Nibley and others have, on behalf of the Church, answered Book of Abraham questions and done serious research since 1968. For a history of how the Church treated the papyri, read http://fairwiki.org/index.php/Book_of_Abraham:Book_of_the_Dead.
But I really do not want to ruin your good story with facts ;-).

In Christ

Rene

Come on, Morris. The people do not want facts, they do not want truth, they do not want objectivity. They want sentimentality, something that caters to their fancies. Until they drop such preconceptions, all the archeology in the world will not sway them.

@ Rene

Joseph Smith claimed to have translated an Egyptian papyrus into the Mormon scriptures. The papyrus has been found and accurately translated by modern day Egyptologists. Joseph Smith did not translate the papyrus as he claimed. As a matter of fact the papyrus is:

1) Not from the time period of Abraham as claimed by Joseph Smith
2) An Egyptian Book of Breathings - totally unrelated to anything Joseph Smith "translated"
3) Not written "by his own hand" by Abraham as claimed by Joseph Smith

The evidence is overwhelming. I could not twist my mind into the kind of contortion that would be necessary to accept something that is obviously a fraud. Check it out for yourself:

http://www.irr.org/mit/Book-of-Abraham-page.html

Read this and you will see why the Mormon church has still not officially responded to the discovering of the papyrus which Joseph Smith supposedly translated. There can be no response - it's a no win situation.

I believe God has revealed through this and many other ways who Joseph Smith was - if you're willing to accept it.

Anonymous,

I didn’t think I was hiding anything about my beliefs. If you read the rest of my postings, my position on religion is perfectly clear. But one of the main themes of the blog is whether or not Mormons are Christians and whether they are really mainstream. The question is being asked as a direct result of Mitt Romney running for President.

But to clarify, let me sum it up for you; by standard definitions of present-day Christian orthodoxy I do not think that Mormons are Christian. However, if we go back to the beginnings of Christianity and then do our comparison, Mormons are no more aberrant than the Gnostics, the Jewish-Christian church, the Baptists, and a host of other groups that did not survive the Council of Nicea and the Emperor Constantine. The reason that you believe in the trinity, the atonement, and the various other orthodox Christian teachings is because the Universal (Catholic) Church won the war for power and destroyed all other variants. They constructed the template that has survived to this day that defines what a Christian is and is not. But that is not my great concern. If the Mormons want to call themselves Christian, why should I care?

What I do care about is that their sacred books versus your sacred books were written in real-time history that can be more easily scrutinized, and tested; and they do not stand up to rigorous review. Does your bible stand up to objective historical review – of course not – but mainstream Christians are generally not literalists and therefore they do not have to suspend their critical thinking to live their faith. But for me all that is a sideshow for the purposes of this blog. If not already clear from my previous postings, what I care about most is the wall of separation between church and state that our founding fathers, in their infinite wisdom, put into the Constitution. The reasons the founders built the wall was so the State of Virginia could no longer tax the general public to support the Anglican Church nor the State of Massachusetts do the same on behalf of the Congregational Church. These were real issues that effected real people in their day. And remember that the horrors of the religious wars of the Reformation period were still fresh in the collective memory.

I have voted for Baptists and representatives of other denominations for President with the comfort that history has told us that they will not break our trust on this issue (although the issue has been pressed on occasion). The Mormons, on the other hand, are extraordinarily organized with power centrally controlled by an elite group headed by a “living prophet”. Their prophet has more power than any other religious official in the western world (and this includes the Vatican) to change the theology of their church. Need I remind you of the changes about polygamy and racial issues that were handed down as instructions from God when it became politically expedient? This power is too toxic and concentrated and could be abused again. This is why I would never vote for a Mormon. This is my central point in relation to this blog.

Queation: "After 175 years of existence, is Mormonism entering the mainstream of American religious life or are people still suspicious of it?"

The LDS Church appears to have goven some kind of an official, or at least semi-official answer to that question. You can find it on their website here:

http://www.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=d3ffe520f288f010VgnVCM100000176f620aRCRD&vgnextchannel=3e0511154963d010VgnVCM1000004e94610aRCRD

@Scott U:

You say, science has disproven Mormonismus. Has it? I haven't seen this yet. When did this happen? How? Who did it?

In Christ

Rene

@Morris:

Before you buy in completely to Mr. Larson, you might want to read these reviews:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=92
http://www.farmsresearch.com/display.php?table=review&id=93

Of course, you have already made up your mind, ...

Rene

@Sam

Take a look at the book - it is available to read online. The book fully demonstrates the truth of Joseph Smith's claim to be a prophet and Egyptian translator. The papyrus he "translated" was not destroyed as the Mormon Church previously said - it exists and has been compared by Egyptologists to Joseph Smith's "translation" of Mormon scripture. The papyrus bears absolutely none of the text from the Mormon "Pearl of Great Price" scripture "The Book of Abraham" - revealing that Joseph Smith fabricated his claim of translating the papyrus into this "lost scripture"... Read it for yourself online at:

http://www.irr.org/mit/Books/BHOH/bhoh1.html

It is a detailed and through examination of the papyrus and evidence - perhaps a little too in depth and dry for some, but if you are truly seeking the truth, I believe this book amply demonstrates the truth about Joseph Smith. Prayer and personal revelation do not trump knowledge God has made abundantly clear if we're willing to look at it. God reveals truth in many ways.

@ Morris:
There is no such thing as a "scholarly book... let's the chips fall where they may". Every scholarly undertaking is done with an object in mind and the human eyes (and ears) with often find what they want to find, and Charles M Larson is no exception.

Why would he even take the effort to examine any texts or scripts without first taking an interest which is framed within his own experienced biases?

If you really want to know of Joseph Smith's credibility as a prophet of God, why not go to the source? Why not just ask God? He'll give anyone an answer.

If you want to know the truth of whether Joseph Smith could actually translate Egytian (and also whether he was an actual prophet of God) read the book "By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus" - it can be ordered or read online at:

http://www.irr.org/mit/Book-of-Abraham-page.html

This book examines the documents Joseph Smith claimed to have translated into "the Book of Abramham" one of the Mormon Church's scriptures - a part of their "Pearl of Great Price" scripture. This book in detail shows how the Egyptian papyrus he "translated" is not what Joseph Smith claimed, nor was it even from the period of time Joseph Smith claimed, nor was it written by Abraham, but was instead an Egyptian "Book of Breathings" totally unrelated to what Joseph Smith "translated." Read it - I cannot do it justice, nor can the damage it does to Joseph Smith's credibility be overestimated.

Once again - if you have any questions about Joseph Smith's reliability as a prophet read "By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus" by Charles M. Larson. This is a scholarly book which examines the evidence and let's the chips fall where they may. Very interesting.

Scott U,

Religion is a matter of faith, not of science and archaeology. Tell me something, what is the scientific basis for the resurrection of Jesus, or for His virgin birth; or for Jesus walking on water or healing the blind? What are the scientific bases of the miracles of Moses, or of Elijah, or Elisha, or Daniel? Where is the scientific/archaeological evidence that the Israelites ever lived in Egypt, or that they crossed the Red Sea on dry ground, or that they wandered in the Sinai desert for 40 years? Where did they get food and water form during that time? (they were two million strong!) Where is the scientific basis of the Flood, or of the biblical story of the creation? Frankly I don’t think that you believe in the Bible any more than you believe in the Book of Mormon; therefore you are being less than honest by portraying your stance as being “anti-Mormon” or “anti-Book of Mormon”. I think that your true stance is anti-Bible and anti-Religion; and you ought to be honest enough to make that clear from the outset.

Rene,

Of course you are right on your definitions of apologetics and polemics, but in fact one is the inverse of the other. When you defend your faith so zealously by undermining the premises of the other guy's faith, it is more or less the same.

I do not have any arguments for you. Re-read what I said about science and if need be go to a textbook and refresh yourself with the definition of scientific method. I said that science has shown that the book of Mormon is not based on any factual information. Full stop! There is no argument that is possible. It is like trying to prove fairies. It is a pleasant thought to think that fairies might exist, but they don't.

@Scott U:
Sorry, but *polemics* is fighting against other beliefs, that is, attacking them and tearing down there reason of being. The theological term for defending one's own faith is Apologetics. ;-).

You didn't bring forth any arguments, you didn't deal with my arguments, you just stated your opinon. This, of course makes it impossible to discuss things with you.

Notwithstanding the above mentioned problems, I'm really courious, why you think that "King James English" has anything to do with Mormon claims. I mean, you surely are too intelligent to believe that using King James English in any translation invalidates the underlying text ;-).

In Christ

Rene

Rene,

Your Bishop can certainly be proud of you. You are one heck of a polemicist for the church. You show why Mormons are such a formidable force in the US. You have written a lot but proven only that you paid attention to all of your teachers. Just remember that in the end (and this is just as true for the evangelicals or anyone else) if you had been born in Afghanistan you would be a devote Muslim. Gender and birth order are important in determining ones place in the world, but nothing is more important in determining religion than the faith of your parents. Over 90% of the time (in the western world) the apple does not fall far from the tree.

I have a friend whose father is a preacher for the 7th Day Adventist Church whose conversations remind me of the verbal gyrations I have seen in this blog. His father will always look for the one scientist or researcher among the many thousands that supports his argument that the earth is only a few thousands of years old and ignore the rest. Likewise, on this blog someone has posted a list of scientists that support certain biblical positions not accepted by the scientific establishment. The reality of all science is that to be accepted, it is vetted in peer reviewed journals and subjected to robust debate before the current paradigm or theory is altered.

Notwithstanding what you and others have written, the DNA, linguistic, and archeological data with regard to American pre-history are compelling and rather complete. After decades of review there is no evidence whatsoever for any of events recounted in King James English in the Book of Mormon. It is more than a leap of faith to accept Joseph Smith’s aberrant history lesson, one has to suspend critical thinking altogether, which you do quite well.

@ANONYMOUS:

Since every other topic at the moment seems closed, I'll jump in here. As I said, I'm not an expert on archaeology, I've done no personal research, I can just quote others.

If this is enough for you, fine.

In 2005, Dr. Margaret Barker, Methodist preacher and former president of the Society of Old Testament Study, presented a paper at the "Worlds of Joseph Smith" Conference. You can read it here: http://www.joehunt.org/joseph-smith-margaret-barker-talk.html.

You will find that she is quite favorable of the idea that First Nephi fits well with her extrabiblical studies of Israelite religion in Zedekijah's days.

Also, it seems that you still have not read the Evangelical article I posted earlier on, "Mormon Apologetic Scholarship and Evangelical Neglect:
Losing the Battle and Not Knowing It?" (http://www.cometozarahemla.org/others/mosser-owen.html#_1_4).

After citing a lot of Mormon researchers and their work in the academic world outside of Mormonism claiming that the BoM comes from an ancient Vorlage, the evangelical authors write about non-Mormon reception of the Book of Mormon:

"James H. Charlesworth, in a lecture delivered at Brigham Young University entitled, 'Messianism in the Pseudepigrapha and the Book of Mormon,' points to what he describes as 'important parallels . . . that deserve careful examination.' He cites examples from 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, Psalms of Solomon and the Testament of Adam.(60) If the world's leading authority on ancient pseudepigraphal writings thinks such examples deserve 'careful examination,' it might be wise for evangelicals to do some examining. George Nickelsburg has also noted a rather interesting parallel between the Qumranic Book of the Giants and the LDS Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price.(61) Yale's Harold Bloom is perplexed as how to explain the many parallels between Joseph Smith's writings and ancient apocalyptic, pseudepigraphal, and kabbalistic literature. He writes, 'Smith's religious genius always manifested itself through what might be termed his charismatic accuracy, his sure sense of relevance that governed biblical and Mormon parallels. I can only attribute to his genius or daemon his uncanny recovery of elements in ancient Jewish theurgy that had ceased to be available either to normative Judaism or to Christianity, and that had survived only in esoteric traditions unlikely to have touched Smith directly'"

This is TEXTUAL evidence, not archaeological.

Let's go to archaeological things.

One of the most common male names in the BoM is "Alma". Critics for decades have ridiculed Joseph Smith's "blunder" for using a Latin female name for a man. Until Yigael Yadin found an "Alma Ben Yehuda" in the Bar Kochba documents, thus proving that Alma is a Hebrew male name.

Another bullsey for the BoM is barley, which is mentioned in the book, but critics pointed out that there is no cultivated pre-Columbian barley in teh New World. In the 1960ies it could be proven, though, that there IS pre-Columbian barley in the New World.

What should we think of a place not known till 1980, that fits in name, time and space, usage and meaning of name to a place mentioned in the Book of Mormon? A place that can be found on an ancient trade route not mentioned in any text availlable before the 20th century, but which is described in the Book of Mormon as the route Lehi and his family took?

Metal plates of writings were unbelievable in the days of Joseph Smith, now they are confirmed for around 600 BC in the Near East.

Writing of Israelite religous texts in Hebrew in Egyptian script? What a farce - until found.

These are just a short excerpt of the archaeological evidences found.

If you look at the time, money and manpower that went into Biblical archaeology, it is remarkable to note that not more than 40% of the cities mentioned in the Bible have been found. Most of them, because they have a continuity from biblical times to now.

In archaeology relevant to the BoM, we don't have a continuity of places, place names and people, and only a fraction of the time, money and manpower used, compared to Biblical archaeology. It is no wonder, that not more has been found.

When it comes to DNA, I am even less an authority. But I'd rather believe Whitting and Woodward, names also known outside of Mormonism for their expertise on DNA, than some unknown Murphy and Southerton, whose only moments of greatness come from writing against Mormonism, and whose arguments are shallow enough, that even I can see the loops they take in their preconditions.

If you're really interested, I can lead you to ressources.

In Christ

Rene

I am still curious, and all the Mormons here have done a fantastic job of skirting the biggest issue of all; there being absolutely no support for the Book of Mormon, outside of Mormon scholarship that is bias. How do you account for a Mormon scientist walking away from the faith when he he concluded the DNA evidence made the accounts of the Book of Mormon impossible. Or how do you account that after decades of digging there is not archaeological evidence? Or that there is no historical or linguistic evidence. Or that even the Smithsonian for the longest time said they found no factual credibility for the Book of Mormon. I mean there really is as much support for this as a fiction novel. Why not just base you life on that? I mean this is not about making people feel bad or being rude, but c'mon on. Joseph Smith had questionable character to begin with, and then wrote a book that has been completely unsubstantiated. So many revisions, so many embarrassing statements by Young and Smith, so many racists beliefs. How can you really put your eternal fate in this stuff?

@Neal:

I think that the Church Fathers who defined trinity dogma really did a wonderful job with the limited ressources and knowledge they had. Their solutions are beautiful- if you understand their philosophical preconditions.

I think them to be wrong, but not, because they are unreasonable. They are wrong, because their preconditions were wrong.

Please keep in mind, that we as Mormons do have our share of "strange doctrines", if you come from a non-Mormon PoV, with their own philosophical and logical pitfals. And while those doctrines are familiar to us, and while there are pitfalls we don't see, because we are used to them, this also goes for trinitarian views.

Let's give them the same curtesy, we want to get from them.

It's easy to lash out. It's easy to get angry. But this is not the Lord's way.

The Lutheran bishop Stendahl was asked to speak, when the Copenhagen temple was to be dedicated, and those who asked him to speak, thought he would teach fire and brimstone against Mormonism. But he lectured on how interdenominational and interreligious dialogue should be conducted. He mentioned 3 points:

(1) When you are trying to understand another religion, you should ask the adherents of that religion and not its enemies.

(2) Don't compare your best to their worst.

(3) Leave room for "holy envy." (By this Stendahl meant that you should be willing to find elements in the other religious tradition and faith that you admire and wish could, in some way, be reflected in your own religious tradition or faith.)

I think, he is a wise man, and a real Christian. Let's try to emulate him here, and show, that our master is not one of those who cried "Crucify him", but rather He who said "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

In Christ

Rene

@Arthur Sido:
I strongly believe that every religious body has the right to believe what it wants, as long as it does not force its beliefs on others or as long its beliefs do not lead to taking away other person's freedom. Hence, I would not dare to tell you, what your belief system includes, and I would also not lecture you on what it is that you really believe.

The Church has time and again defined, what official doctrine of the Church is, and what not. This started with Joseph Smith himself, is written down in the Doctrine and Covenants, was stated before the US Senate in the Reed Smoot hearing, and only a few days ago, it was again affirmed by an official press release.

If you do not accept this affirmations, should I then start judging Evangelical and Catholic Churches' understanding of "trinity" by what the majority of their believers, including some highly ranked individuals say, even if other believers strongly oppose these ideas?

Would that be fair?

Would it be logical?

Would it be anything else than "preaching to the choir"?

I don't think so, and I strongly hope, that you stop telling me what I do or do not have to believe.

Though there were and are many Mormons who believe that God, the Father of our spirits, once was a mortal man, even if President Hinckley himself believes it, nevertheless it is not official doctrine. It is not clearly written in the standard works, there is no Proclamation to the world about this issue, it never went through the official process laid down in the D&C for official, that is: binding, doctrine of the Church. This says nothing about this idea being right or wrong, but just that it is not doctrine of the Church.

In Christ

Rene

@Lee Edward Enochs:

Who is "we" in your text? Did you author it, or did you just type it in?

These questions are NOT the answer to the text, but I want to know the origin before I answer, so that I do not make false assumptions in my answer.

In Christ

Rene

Arthur Sido said (May 8, 2007 7:49 PM):

“That is either intentionally deceptive or inexcusably ignorant.”

Reply:

I wouldn’t be so hasty to attribute ignorance or deception on other people if I were you, because it just might turn around and haunt you. The doctrine that God was once a man and progressed to become God was indeed taught by Joseph Smith, and by many people subsequent to him who merely took his word for it on the subject without giving it a critical examination. However, that doctrine is not taught in any of the revelations that He received, that are receded in the scriptural canon of the LDS Church, known among us as the standard works; and in a number of public interviews that Gordon B. Hinckley gave to the media recently, which was widely reported, he repudiated that doctrine—and he has the final word on the subject. Here is a transcript of those interviews:

Don Lattin (religion editor, interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997, p 3/Z1)

Q: There are some significant differences in your beliefs [and other Christian churches]. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a man?

Hinckley: I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about.

Q: So you're saying the church is still struggling to understand this?

Hinckley: Well, as God is, man may become. We believe in eternal progression. Very strongly. We believe that the glory of God is intelligence and whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the Resurrection. ...that's one thing that's different. Modern revelation. We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, we believe he has yet to reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

Gordon B. Hinckley, as quoted in Time Magazine, Aug 4, 1997:

Q: Just another related question that comes up is the statements in the King Follett discourse by the Prophet.

Hinckley: Yeah

Q: ... about that, God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian writers are always addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?

Hinckley: I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it. I haven't heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don't know a lot about it and I don't know that others know a lot about it.

Arthur Sido said:

Let me reiterate what is written in the mormon Gospel Principles book, an official publication of the LDS church, the basic manual given to new members to teach them what mormonism teaches….
"God is a glorified and perfected man, a personage of flesh and bones" (Gospel Principles, p. 9)
If he is glorified and perfected, that means that he has changed, progressed, evolved, but was once lesser than he is now.

Reply:

There are several points to be noted here: Firstly, the Gospel Principles manual does not define LDS doctrine, only the standard works do. Whatever is not in the standard works, is not LDS doctrine. Secondly, since that doctrine was at one time widely taught and believed in the Church, it is to be expected that traces of it will still remain in LDS literature, before they become gradually erased. And thirdly, your quote from that book: “God is a glorified and perfected man,” cannot necessarily be construed, from a linguistic point of view, to mean that God was once unglorified and imperfect, and later on He progressed to become such. It simply means that God is a glorious and perfect Being.

Arthur Sido said:

I hate copying and pasting in message boards, but it seems necessary so that interested readers get the real story behind what mormonism teaches regarding God. . . .

Reply:

See quotes from Gordon B. Hinckley given above.

Arthur Sido said:

The knee-jerk reaction is that such statements are not “official” dogma, which we can argue about, but frankly . . . If we can’t trust what Smith, the greatest man ever to live other than Christ, says about who and what God is, what is the point of having a prophet?

Reply:

Prophets are not infallible. No prophet has ever claimed to be. Joseph Smith acknowledged his own imperfections:

“I never told you I was perfect; but there is no error in the revelations which I have taught” (Teachings, p 368).

These “revelations” are the canonized scriptures of the LDS Church, the standard works; and that is what defines, and is the final authority on LDS doctrine, not the King Follett discourse or the Gospel Principles manual.

Arthur Sido said:

The difference is that I am happy to show how mormonism differs from Biblical Christianity in it’s understanding of God, of Christ, of man, of sin, of the priesthood, of justification and salvation, of the role of the temple, of the sufficiency of the Bible, of a myriad of other issues.

Reply:

You mean apostate Christianity! I agree, there are fundamental differences between Mormonism and apostate Christianity. However, so far you have not produced anything that I have been terribly impressed by; and in any case, this is not a suitable place to carry on a serious gospel discussion, because hundreds of subjects are all wrapped up in one long thread. If you are seriously interested in discussing Mormonism with me, and have a good discussion board or forum in mind, I am willing to join you there and discuss any aspect of Mormonism with you that you like, and back up my arguments with ample biblical and other evidence. If you decided to take up this offer, you can reply to this post or contact me at: anonymatous@yahoo.com

Rene:

I'm sure you're correct that our Trinitarian friends have some elusive explanation of all the inconistencies and evidences we see so clearly. The core reason there are so many different religions, no?

I must say that I had never delved too deeply into Trinitarian dogma until now , and find it more preposterous the deeper I get. The scripture about "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel" comes to mind...

Neal

While we love our Morm