I can't wait to see how much trouble they're going to get with this one. "Mrs. Fox, how did evolution begin? How was the first DNA created?", "Well honey, we don't know." Should be interesting to say the least.

SummaTheologica, I will not label which I think is more accurate as to not offend anyone nor be rude. If you want my honest personal opinion than email me at joshuagilman at gmail dot com.

SummaTheologica, I am aware of the differences between the Jesus taught by LDS and the Jesus described in the Bible. Here's a list: LDS Jesus: 1. The literal son of god and his goddess wife begotten in the pre-existence. 2. The brother of all spirits born in heaven in the premortal existence. 3. One of 3 gods in the godhead. 4. The Trinity is three separate gods. 5. First one t...more

SummaTheologica,

I am aware of the differences between the Jesus taught by LDS and the Jesus described in the Bible.

Here's a list:

LDS Jesus:
1. The literal son of god and his goddess wife begotten in the pre-existence.
2. The brother of all spirits born in heaven in the premortal existence.
3. One of 3 gods in the godhead.
4. The Trinity is three separate gods.
5. First one to receive a spirit body.
6. Atoned for sin on the cross and in the garden of Gethsemane.

Jesus described in the Bible:
1. Not the literal son of god and his goddess wife.
2. Not the brother of all spirits born in heaven in a premortal existence.
3. Not one of 3 gods in the godhead.
4. The Trinity is 3 persons in one God.
5. Was always spirit from eternity.
6. Atoned for sin on the cross alone.less

SummaTheologica, This debate isn't about how dumb you think a question is. Maybe you should try contributing something useful like disproving my point and proving that we talk about the exact same Jesus instead of making rude comments on everything I and Online say.

Hesadanza, I never claimed to know as much as you. Stop making things up please, it's starting to get annoying.

Hesadanza, If that were true why do we teach about different Jesus Christs'?

SummaTheologica, 1. Looks like you need to attend logic 101. Making such a statement requires that you know all things, in which I'm sure you don't, therefor logically speaking that statement cannot be true. 2. Refer to #1. I can vouch and say that I have had considerable changes in my beliefs. For instance I use to totally reject Evolution. Over the past year that stance has changed...more

SummaTheologica,

1. Looks like you need to attend logic 101. Making such a statement requires that you know all things, in which I'm sure you don't, therefor logically speaking that statement cannot be true.
2. Refer to #1. I can vouch and say that I have had considerable changes in my beliefs. For instance I use to totally reject Evolution. Over the past year that stance has changed dramatically due to research and debates.
3. Sorry, but if I remember correctly in a debate you presented evidence that went against the person you were debating.
4. I attend a church called Calvary Chapel Solano in Fairfield, California, USA. You can see our church at http://www.calvarysolano.org/. Need I say more?
5. It appears I'm behind the lingo. Care to explain?
6. Sorry, but I went to the point where I even attend Mormon services (with my friend) just to learn what they taught. What does it matter where the evidence comes from anyways? If I pulled the theory of evolution off some "garbage science site" does it therefor make it untrue?
7. There's actually only 3-4 major versions, and when debating most people tend to use the original greek (like me) for the sake of argument.
8. Wow. (Sorry I couldn't think of anything else to say)less

Hesadanza, I did not claim to know more when I asked that question. For your information I ask that to almost every Mormon I come across for one main purpose: To distinguish how much they truly know about Mormonism. You'd be suprised at how many Mormons answer no to that question. See that wasn't so bad was it? Here you are going crazy because I was simply testing your knowledge. That...more

Hesadanza,

I did not claim to know more when I asked that question. For your information I ask that to almost every Mormon I come across for one main purpose: To distinguish how much they truly know about Mormonism. You'd be suprised at how many Mormons answer no to that question. See that wasn't so bad was it? Here you are going crazy because I was simply testing your knowledge. That statement was in no way offensive, you simply made it offensive by responding eratically to it.

Here's what you basically just said: Hesadanza, what if I am right? What if you really don't become gods and you are defaming God himself by claiming that you can reach his status? You clearly don't respect God by making such horrible claims. You see the point? Making emotional statements like that will get you no where.

Indeed I did want an answer, it was a question wasn't it? Usually when a statement is followed by a question mark it's implied as a question. There was nothing rhetorical about it. Whether I said it in a rude or appropriate fashion is completely subjective. I simply asked a question, whether you choose to simply answer it, or respond with an emotional breakdown is not my choice.

Do I claim to know all about it? I know as much as you do. That you believe one day you will reach the status of God and have your own planet to govern. That's about as much as I know. And yes I know it's on the extreme side, does that make me arrogant for bringing it up? Of course not, I was simply testing your knowledge, and you sir seem to be quite educated, in which I have taken into mind.

And thank you for answering my questions.less

Online4Him, There's in fact been a lot of changes in the Book of Mormon: http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/3913intro.htm http://www.carm.org/lds/bom_changes.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon#Editions

Hesadanza, Why didn't you answer my questions? Here's some more: Isaiah 43:10 - ""You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me." Isaiah: 44:6 - "This...more

Hesadanza,

Why didn't you answer my questions?

Here's some more:

Isaiah 43:10 - ""You are my witnesses," declares the LORD,
"and my servant whom I have chosen,
so that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me."

Isaiah: 44:6 - "This is what the LORD says—
Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty:
I am the first and I am the last;
apart from me there is no God."

Am I going to fast?less

Hesadanza, I don't think I have seen such a paranoid Mormon. Not only did you make up that I'm arrogant (This is the first thing I have said in this discussion, how can you judge so quick?), but you said that I claimed to know more than you, when in all that I said I never once discussed my knowledge of Mormon doctrine. How do you know I don't know more? For your information I am...more

Hesadanza,

I don't think I have seen such a paranoid Mormon. Not only did you make up that I'm arrogant (This is the first thing I have said in this discussion, how can you judge so quick?), but you said that I claimed to know more than you, when in all that I said I never once discussed my knowledge of Mormon doctrine. How do you know I don't know more? For your information I am an apologetic in training and have done numerous research into Mormon theology. Furthermore, I'm merely 16 years old.

You need to calm down. Let me start with this, just to warm things up some:

1. How am I arrogant?
2. When did I claim that I knew anything about Mormon doctrine prior to this post?
3. How did I defame the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Matthew 5:48 - Jesus commands us to be perfect like God in Heaven is perfect. He is not saying that we will attain the same status as God.

Romans 8:17 - Paul talks about suffering for being identified with Jesus. Not sure what your reference meant.

Psalm 83:6 - The psalm refers to the people of Israel as gods because they represented God in executed judgment. Jesus refers to this passage in John 10:34-36.

2 Peter 1:4 - Peter talks about our divine nature when we goto Heaven. We will be perfect, never be hungry, cannot feel pain, all of these divine attributes is what he is referring to.

Here's a few more things for you to chew on:

http://www.carm.org/lds/infinity.htm
http://www.carm.org/lds/fatherseen.htm
http://www.carm.org/lds/lds_jesus.htmless

Hesadanza, Will you one day own your own planet and create spirit babies to fill your own Earth? If not, then you don't follow the Mormon doctrine correctly.

The Well Hungarian, I am aware of that debate, but please note that it is STILL a debate. There are only "what ifs" on both sides. Sadly Wikipedia is VERY biased on such issues, so it would be nice if you could quote your evidence from somewhere else. Nonetheless I read over and the evidence presented is indeed what I have heard before in the debate over Josephus, but it fails complet...more

The Well Hungarian,

I am aware of that debate, but please note that it is STILL a debate. There are only "what ifs" on both sides. Sadly Wikipedia is VERY biased on such issues, so it would be nice if you could quote your evidence from somewhere else. Nonetheless I read over and the evidence presented is indeed what I have heard before in the debate over Josephus, but it fails completely to include any of the counter-evidence, which is why I said it's biased.

Not to mention, I don't even think you scrolled down the page because only the first few passages were from Josephus, other historians are also recorded in there.less

The Well Hungarian, http://www.carm.org/bible/extrabiblical_accounts.htm Does that help any?

WiccanTexan, That is incorrect. You cannot place Joseph and Mary in any census because as of right now we have no evidence of a census which included outer kingdoms, only ones for Roman citizens. There are many, and I mean many, theories as to the exact time period Jesus was born, which census it may have been or evidence that there was actually one. As far as I am concerned there is no solid e...more

WiccanTexan,

That is incorrect. You cannot place Joseph and Mary in any census because as of right now we have no evidence of a census which included outer kingdoms, only ones for Roman citizens. There are many, and I mean many, theories as to the exact time period Jesus was born, which census it may have been or evidence that there was actually one. As far as I am concerned there is no solid evidence that proves the point either way.

Therefor, making statements like "Herod had been dead for 30 years before the census that Mary & Joseph would have participated in" is totally subjective.less

HampsteadPete, http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/evidence-for-jesus.htm It looks to me like there's quite a bit of archaeological evidence which supports most of the life of Jesus. That's not even including the several historian excerpts that talk about him. Maybe you should do some more research next time before making such irrational comments.

I don't see why so many people have problems with teaching evolution in schools. I understand that some textbooks are very biased, going as far as saying that it's the undeniable truth, but parents are perfectly capable of sitting down with their children and explaining some of the faults with evolution. I agree that evolution should not be the only theory taught in school and that it�...more

I don't see why so many people have problems with teaching evolution in schools. I understand that some textbooks are very biased, going as far as saying that it's the undeniable truth, but parents are perfectly capable of sitting down with their children and explaining some of the faults with evolution. I agree that evolution should not be the only theory taught in school and that it's faults should be covered, but seeing as the scientific community is trying to prove evolution, covering it's faults would be counter-intuitive so I doubt that will ever happen.less

http://www.carm.org/islam/jihad.htm They are just doing what they have been told. No matter how the scholars want to "interpret it", their own scripture stands clear. These people are not "crazy radicals", they are actually firm believers.

"I'm reading the Bible beginning to end," Montag, 21, said. "I'm very religious. That's how I've gotten to where I am." It was great, until the "I'm very religious" part. Through personal experience most people who label themselves as religious are usually the ones who attend church once or twice and year and maybe pick up a Bible from time...more

"I'm reading the Bible beginning to end," Montag, 21, said. "I'm very religious. That's how I've gotten to where I am."

It was great, until the "I'm very religious" part. Through personal experience most people who label themselves as religious are usually the ones who attend church once or twice and year and maybe pick up a Bible from time to time. Some go further and know the basic stories of the Bible, but end up generally gaining their "own faith" (aka their own version of the Bible) and screw everything up.

I'm not one to stereotype, but I can make logical conclusions and to me it seems that there's been a very large fad with being religious lately (especially with Clinton attending that church) and this is just Hollywood following along.less

bwb, My galations quote was comparing the "Another Testament of Jesus Christ" with Galations 1:8 which clearly states that accursed is the one who presents any other gospel than what was taught in the New Testament. That's just minor though, the massive lack of archaeological evidence of nearly %90 of the Mormon Bible in itself is enough to convince most. http://www.allab...more

bwb,

My galations quote was comparing the "Another Testament of Jesus Christ" with Galations 1:8 which clearly states that accursed is the one who presents any other gospel than what was taught in the New Testament.

That's just minor though, the massive lack of archaeological evidence of nearly %90 of the Mormon Bible in itself is enough to convince most.

http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/bible-archaeology.htmless