There is a clear distinction between "mainline" institutionalized churches and evangelical ones, as seen here: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html#Sec4 , while the attempts used by homosexual apologists to negate the Biblical; condemnation of homosexuality effectively require negating the authority of the Bible itself: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus...more

There is a clear distinction between "mainline" institutionalized churches and evangelical ones, as seen here: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html#Sec4 , while the attempts used by homosexual apologists to negate the Biblical; condemnation of homosexuality effectively require negating the authority of the Bible itself: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.htmlless

Your conclusion, presumes that those opposed to this health care bill are not in favor of people being well, but this presumes that socialized medicine, and socialism, is what is best for people, versus capitalism and voluntary giving, and upholding moral values. As can be seen here: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html, the practice of the latter would greatly reduce he...more

Your conclusion, presumes that those opposed to this health care bill are not in favor of people being well, but this presumes that socialized medicine, and socialism, is what is best for people, versus capitalism and voluntary giving, and upholding moral values. As can be seen here: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html, the practice of the latter would greatly reduce health care costs, and make more available for true victims, but hedonism and rampant illicit sensuality is expensive, in more ways than one, and we tend to be willing to pay anything to continue it.less

I just listed what the source said as regards "objective" . But even at 60% NJ is on the low side as far as religion being very important, and if you take away the sunshine/ocean/heat factor the income vs happiness fairly consistently shows that income and happiness do not correspond to each other. Kentucky seems to stand most in contrast here. Happiness (income rank) 1 Louisiana (41) ...more

I just listed what the source said as regards "objective" . But even at 60% NJ is on the low side as far as religion being very important, and if you take away the sunshine/ocean/heat factor the income vs happiness fairly consistently shows that income and happiness do not correspond to each other. Kentucky seems to stand most in contrast here.

Happiness (income rank)
1 Louisiana (41) [ data were collected before the disruption caused by Hurricane Katrina.]
2 Hawaii (5)
3 Florida (33
4 Tennessee (43)
5 Arizona (22)

Ct is #50 in happiness, but # 3 in income

Mississippi is 6 in happiness, but #50 in income.

10 "happiest" states:

1. Louisiana
2. Hawaii
3. Florida
4. Tennessee
5. Arizona
6. Mississippi
7. Montana
8. South Carolina
9. Alabama
10. Maine

"Their results come from a comparison of two data sets of happiness levels in each state, one that relied on participants' self-reported well-being and the other an objective measure that took into account a state's weather, home prices and other factors that are known reasons to frown (or smile)."

The latter aspect is where the flaw is, as it presumes that environment would result in happiness. Another study showed
1 Utah: 69.2
2 Hawaii: 68.2
3 Wyoming: 68
4 Colorado: 67.3
5 Minnesota: 67.3
6 Maryland: 67.1
7 Washington: 67.1
8 Massachusetts: 67
9 California: 67
10 Arizona: 66.8

But this also was not according to what people reported, which is really what they should report "happiest people" by, but what the researches surmises makes for a happy people (mainly $).

If i made room, i could put the 10 most chartiable states
1. Mississippi $34,720; $4,770; (1).
2. Arkansas $36,882; $4,890; (2).
3. South Dakota $37,698; $4,318; (7).
4. Oklahoma $38,344; $4,350; (3).
5. Tennessee $41,140; $5,564; (6).
6. Alabama $39,730; $4,555; (5).
7. Louisiana $37,701; $4,180 (4).
8. Utah $42,291; $6,124; (8).
9. South Carolina $39,301; $4,121; (9).
10. West Virginia $35,771; $3,614; (13).
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm

This corresponds to the 10 poorest states.

My chart will take some study (best to download the PDF and print it. legal size, in color )less

Here is a a compilation of how states rank according to their voting record, faith, beliefs, etc., from polls and records, and their possible relations to each other. Interesting. http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html

Having a predisposition to sin cannot justify it, and if it could multitudes could be excused, and God doe sgie grace to resist it. (Gn. 4:7) . Jesus distinctly affirmed that the what of "what God what hath joined together is the male with the female, (Mt. 19:4; cf. Gn. 1:26; 2:24) as being uniquely compatible and complementary. The strenuous attempts to negate that restriction and to find sa...more

Having a predisposition to sin cannot justify it, and if it could multitudes could be excused, and God doe sgie grace to resist it. (Gn. 4:7) .

Jesus distinctly affirmed that the what of "what God what hath joined together is the male with the female, (Mt. 19:4; cf. Gn. 1:26; 2:24) as being uniquely compatible and complementary. The strenuous attempts to negate that restriction and to find sanction for homosexual marriage are heretical, as seen here: http://www.peacebyjesus.com/homosex_versus_the_bible.html

But God gives grace to repent, and some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals. ! cor. 6:11.less

Surprising about Methodists, but it doesn't tell enough. Still glad to get more stats, which I will add to the extensive collection. ( http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html )

That homosexuality is clearly and consistently condemned by God in the Bible is incontrovertible, even as Jesus confirmed that it was the male and the female which constituted the "what" of what God joined together sexually, in marriage. (Mt. 19:4) See http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html As for Miss Carries, it is commendable that she upheld that teaching, but th...more

That homosexuality is clearly and consistently condemned by God in the Bible is incontrovertible, even as Jesus confirmed that it was the male and the female which constituted the "what" of what God joined together sexually, in marriage. (Mt. 19:4) See http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html

As for Miss Carries, it is commendable that she upheld that teaching, but the Bible also teaches modest apprarel, and a women publicly exposing her body.

(Prov 31:30) "Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised."less

The reason for high birth rates among religious teens is easily understood as being due to their choice not to have abortions. But that that sexual revolution has seduced much of the young is also evident, along with its multiple deleterious effects. Multitudes of stats here: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html

Due to the non-Christian father's objections, a thriving 10 year old Christian homeschooled girl, who did attend public school for some subjects and was confirmed by it to be well adjusted socially, is compelled to attend public school, solely in order to expose her to "different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior...more

Due to the non-Christian father's objections, a thriving 10 year old Christian homeschooled girl, who did attend public school for some subjects and was confirmed by it to be well adjusted socially, is compelled to attend public school, solely in order to expose her to "different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior."

The Fairness doctrine as it is designed to work. The girl offended the counselor by witnessing to him/her, and was disturbed by his refusal. If she expressed a different liberal "ideologies" and found resistance, i think it would be the counselor would be undergo "sensitivity training".

Consistent with the courts reasoning, all children who are raised in secular environments (and are basically protected from Christian practices such as prayer and Bible reading in school under State-sponsored secularism), should be compelled to go to a Christian school to be exposed to that "POV".less

The position on the Bible, and women in leadership, and homosexuality usually go together. http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_Christianity Those who hold to the Scriptures being wholly inspired of God, as they present themselves to be, and that the man is the head of the women as Christ is the head of the church (and is to love her as He did/does), also hold that only man and women con...more

The position on the Bible, and women in leadership, and homosexuality usually go together. http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_Christianity Those who hold to the Scriptures being wholly inspired of God, as they present themselves to be, and that the man is the head of the women as Christ is the head of the church (and is to love her as He did/does), also hold that only man and women constitute that "what" of "what therefore God hath joined together" (Mt. 19:4; cf. Gn. 1:26,27; 2:18-24), being made uniquely compatible and complimentary, with homosexual relations being unconditionally condemned wherever they are explicitly dealt with. See http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html and http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/WOMENPASTORS.htmlless

The position on the Bible, and women in leadership, and homosexuality usually go together. http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_Christianity Those who hold to the Scriptures being wholly inspired of God, as they present themselves to be, and that the man is the head of the women as Christ is the head of the church (and is to love her as He did/does), also hold that only man and women con...more

The position on the Bible, and women in leadership, and homosexuality usually go together. http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_Christianity Those who hold to the Scriptures being wholly inspired of God, as they present themselves to be, and that the man is the head of the women as Christ is the head of the church (and is to love her as He did/does), also hold that only man and women constitute that "what" of "what therefore God hath joined together" (Mt. 19:4; cf. Gn. 1:26,27; 2:18-24), being made uniquely compatible and complimentary, with homosexual relations being unconditionally condemned wherever they are explicitly dealt with. See http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html and http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/WOMENPASTORS.htmlless

No Christian can support legitimizing that which is clearly and immutably condemned in the Bible, with no sanction or marriage for it established. http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html As the judgment of God has fallen in times past, so nations which sanction homosexual marriage will realize that which the practice of homosex overall results in, that of a greatly i...more

No Christian can support legitimizing that which is clearly and immutably condemned in the Bible, with no sanction or marriage for it established. http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html

As the judgment of God has fallen in times past, so nations which sanction homosexual marriage will realize that which the practice of homosex overall results in, that of a greatly increased incidence of disease and premature death.

Freedom not Sodom

There's freedom in America, the land of the red white and blue;

but there still must be laws, things you just can't do.

You can't marry your sister, your brother, or the family pet;

a sheep, or a goat - at least not yet!

That how is it with homosexuality, what the Bible calls sodomy;

men lying with men as with women, is perversity!

That they're not designed that way, tis easy to perceive,

but yielding to sinful desires, man is soon deceived.

A moral wrong is not a civil right; like the sin itself, that's confusion;

calling evil good and exchanging light for darkness, is sure delusion!

History tells us where this will lead, from societies now in dust,

When a nation casts off the laws of God, and follows it's own lusts.

Promoting a sin which sends one to Hell from an early grave,

dishonors God and robs man of the Life He gave.

There's but one answer: the Risen Jesus gave Himself for our sins;

Repent and believe, then truly follow Him!less

The ONLY times the Bible explicitly addresses the issue of homosexual activity it is that of prohibition and condemnation. This leaves all same sex relations as unholy fornication. In NO PLACE does God sanction same sex relationship with marriage, which He clearly does for heterosexuals. David and Johnathan will do not do it, in case you want to try. "Vile" in Rm. 1 is defined by the...more

The ONLY times the Bible explicitly addresses the issue of homosexual activity it is that of prohibition and condemnation. This leaves all same sex relations as unholy fornication. In NO PLACE does God sanction same sex relationship with marriage, which He clearly does for heterosexuals. David and Johnathan will do not do it, in case you want to try.

"Vile" in Rm. 1 is defined by the description of the sins, that of consensual same sex relations, which, like with all sin, that of a fruit of idolatry, and those who contend that Bible sanctions homosexuality have made God into an image more to their liking, To their own eternal horror. Yet as some of the first Christians were FORMER homosexuals (1Cor. 6:11), there is room at the cross for all who want Christ over sin, and come by faith to Him for salvation, as their Lord and Savior.less

As for “all power” being given Him,” this does not signify a change in His being, rather that of Him acting as a regent for God the Father, using such powers as God used to create the worlds thru Him. There is order in the Godhead. Whatever changes took place in Jesus physical body, in taking upon a glorified one, nothing changed as far as His essential being of Deity (the Word was ...more

As for “all power” being given Him,” this does not signify a change in His being, rather that of Him acting as a regent for God the Father, using such powers as God used to create the worlds thru Him. There is order in the Godhead. Whatever changes took place in Jesus physical body, in taking upon a glorified one, nothing changed as far as His essential being of Deity (the Word was God). was concerned All told, there is nothing that establishes eternal progression from man of Deity.

7. Re your second mention of blacks, it matter not what churches in the USA did 50 years ago, nor necessarily what they do today when inconsistent with the Bible, as I am not defending a church, but a faith, but you are which is why such doctrines are very relevant. If I must principally rely upon an authority that is show to be less than infallible, then I stand to be deceived with the multitudes who trust in men. I do not judge whether a doctrines is correct according to contemporary or past churches, though I certainly appreciates the abundant good fruit from overall solid Christians (Spurgeon, Wesley, Finney, Moody, Matthew Henry, etc.). from commentaries to hymns, that was wrought in churches whose creeds Joseph Smith abominated. But what I must depend upon is what Scripture most clearly evidences, which is overall contrary to the creeds and confessions of Mormonism. For further research may I suggest http://www.utlm.org/navtopicalindex.htm

8. Yes (someplace you offered) , please establish that God is married, and also that He is a polygamist, and that Jesus is Lucifer's brother, as you authoritative church taught or teaches. Thanks.less

4. Contd. And the assumption of the Aaronic priesthood by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and that of the priesthood of Melchizedek is itself unBiblical, as aside from the bloodline issues, and the unique requirements of the Melchizedekian priesthood (Heb. 7), which is fulfilled by Christ, there simply is no separate class of priests under the New covenant other than the general priesthood of a...more

4. Contd.

And the assumption of the Aaronic priesthood by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and that of the priesthood of Melchizedek is itself unBiblical, as aside from the bloodline issues, and the unique requirements of the Melchizedekian priesthood (Heb. 7), which is fulfilled by Christ, there simply is no separate class of priests under the New covenant other than the general priesthood of all true believers – male and female (1Pt. 2:9). No place in the New Testament did the church ordain priests[hiereus], but Bishop/Elders[episkope/presbuteros], which denote the same office, as shepherds/pastors (Titus 1:5-7; Eph. 4:11).

5. Re. the good fruits of the Mormon church, the more light that you obey from the Bible the better off, yet as similarly clean living Watchtower disciples show, clean living alone does not establish as church as true, but true doctrine, faith and love. Meanwhile, past unusual doctrines as exceedingly relevant, as they were done under the same authority that todays strange doctrines are held. The kind of revelation they need is one that brings them into line with the historic faith of the N.T. Church.
“Since you don't believe that when the Bible says "God is love"” There is nothing in my reply that says such, rather that God = spirit affirms the higher quality of being that God is, as does “God is love,” though love does not denote a class of being as spirit can. God operates in a higher way because He is not of the earth = physical = but Heavenly = spiritual. It is said also that God is light, and "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen" (1 Tim 6:16). Only God has immortality as part of His essential being, all others are dependent upon Him granting it, and no earthly man has seen or can fully see God in all His full glory.

6. Further into unchangeable states, I am well aware that Jesus changes, as was the writer of Hebrews who tells us that Jesus took upon a body, and therefore it should be obvious that it is referring to that which cannot and did not change, that of His essential being and character. What the Bible reveals of Christ is that He was from everlasting, and is properly often called God, as He shares the same eternal uncreated nature as God (Son of God = Deity), and thru Whom all things were made. His incarnation was that of taking upon a body for the purpose of the perfect and final atonement, and not to make Him God in nature, though due to His sacrifice He is made Lord (Master) in position until He has made all His enemies His footstool.less

3. cotnd. This gospel is what most every evangelical Church would agree on, though they may not all emphasize the negative parts as they should. If you want disagreements, ask about tongues or prophecy. From what I read and see, I would guesstimate that those who effectually believe as described above represent maybe approx. 12-18% of this nation (USA). But I am from the cold NE. And while som...more

3. cotnd.
This gospel is what most every evangelical Church would agree on, though they may not all emphasize the negative parts as they should. If you want disagreements, ask about tongues or prophecy. From what I read and see, I would guesstimate that those who effectually believe as described above represent maybe approx. 12-18% of this nation (USA). But I am from the cold NE. And while some such believers exist in most every Christian denomination, they are (expectedly) found mostly in evangelical Churches that hold the Bible to be ultimate and daily authority, and thus at least preach the basic Biblical gospel message. http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html

And yes, as truth is exclusive by nature, and it is the message of the gospel that is most essential (Gal. 1:6-9), and those deny that faith are damned, who love sin more than Him, deception over truth (J. 3:19-21. But rather than defending a church, a saved soul does not preach his particular church as the only one church, nor does he lose his salvation if he departs from it (to fellowship with another gospel church), or disagrees in peripheral issues, but he enjoys unity with all who are born of the Spirit and walking therein, and who thus seek to defend the historic faith once delivered to the saints, not it's later inventions by “saints” now headed in Utah. And while it you may allow that God hears my prayers – and thank God He makes that graciously evident (though I need to be more like Elias) - I find it very hard for you to allow that I will be saved, as I do not and cannot fulfil the criteria necessary for Mormonic salvation if I would bd faithfuil to be Savior and His Word. And in contrast to LDS idea of salvation, Biblically there are only two eternal places that souls will end up in (Mt. 25:41; Rev. 19:7, 8; 21:9-24; cf. Eph. 5: 25-32; 1Thes. 4:17). Likewise as you hold to a gospel other than the one that beings one to be Biblically saved, or even “fully” saved” apart from Mormonism, and seem bound to defend whatever it decrees, then I must conclude that you are lost.

4. As for blacks in the LDS priesthood, I am glad you agree – now – but if the LDS still held to it then you would be here defending it! And that goes back to the original problem, that of faith in an institution that is proven to be fallible, ye requires the kind of trust that compels its missionaries to contend for doctrines that are similarly unBiblical to abandoned ones! Please do not even attempt to defend the past exclusion of blacks, as there simply is no defense for it. We are not under the Mosaic covenant, wherein God dealt with a race,.but are under the New wherein there is no distinction in that regard, as Gal, 3:29 plainly declares and Timothy's pastoral office examples.less

1 contd. In short, Rome has her pope and you have your “living prophet,” and both have their claims of infallibility. At least Rome has somewhat of a line of ecclesiastical linkage for her claims, while Joseph Smith has the extra Biblical angel Moroni (as well as a “Greek” Elijah in addition to the Hebrew one!). In any case the authenticity of the or a true church is not base...more

1 contd.
In short, Rome has her pope and you have your “living prophet,” and both have their claims of infallibility. At least Rome has somewhat of a line of ecclesiastical linkage for her claims, while Joseph Smith has the extra Biblical angel Moroni (as well as a “Greek” Elijah in addition to the Hebrew one!). In any case the authenticity of the or a true church is not based upon physical or actual ecclesiastical lineage, any more than that of a true Jew is, rather in both cases it is based upon Abrahamic faith in the apostolic gospel of grace (Rm. 2:28; 3:9 – 5:1) , which neither Rome nor Mormonism propagates.

2. When I speak of God's eternal pre-existence I am speaking of the fact that He always literally existed, not in any other sense. And that is what the Scriptures most plainly declare, and to make Him the result of eternal progression requires reading into the text your external ideas.

3. I do not believe traditional Christianity, in all its varieties, is basically the one true religion, but only those who (most essentially) preach the “gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24) as manifest in the scriptures. That is, that man is a volitional sinner before an infinitely holy and perfectly just almighty and eternal existing God, and is utterly destitute of any merit whereby he may gain acceptance with God nor escape his just punishment in eternal Hell fire (Eccl. 7:20; Rm. 3:9-28; Titus 3:5; Mt. 25:41, 46; Rev. 20:10-15), but, wanting Christ over sin, the sinner casts all his full faith and hope directly upon the Son sent by the Father to be “the propitiation for our sins,” and “the Savior of the word” (1Jn. 4:10, 14), that being the Jesus of the Bible, and having thus done so by the grace of God, he is washed of all his sins, sanctified by the incoming of the Holy Spirit (a person, not just a force), and is justified by imputed righteousness. And which decision is shown by baptism under wanter in identification with their new found Lord (Acts 8:36-39; 10:43-48; 15:7-9; Col. 1:14; 2:13; 2Cor. 6:11. 6:11). And having been saved by grace thru repentant faith (Rm. 4:2 – 5:1; Titus 3:5; 2Tim. 1:9), the saved soul brings forth works meet for [consistent with] repentance (Acts 26:20), and “things that accompany salvation” (Heb. 6:9), being led by the Holy Spirit in accordance with His word (Rm. 8:5,14). Such works manifests a complete faith (Ja. 1:22), and in fact justifies their faith as saving, as only a faith that overall follows Christ (as a result of salvation, not a cause) is promised to have everlasting life (Jn. 10:27-29).less

Letter to Hesadanza and BWB contd. 1. Subjective feelings “must be subject to YOUR interpretation of the Bible or they will be dismissed as devilish.” This is the type of response one would expect of a Papist, as you both support the same authority for knowing truth, that of submission to a self proclaimed ecclesiastical authority, the errors of which are far worse than whatever...more

Letter to Hesadanza and BWB contd.

1. Subjective feelings “must be subject to YOUR interpretation of the Bible or they will be dismissed as devilish.”

This is the type of response one would expect of a Papist, as you both support the same authority for knowing truth, that of submission to a self proclaimed ecclesiastical authority, the errors of which are far worse than whatever division exist in secondary matter among those who seek to follow the Biblical N.T. example of determining truth. "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so" (Acts 17:11).

You must correct the Holy Spirit here, for He called them noble who did not simply rely on a subjective feeling nor implicitly trust an objective human authority, but were lovers of truth and examined even the very writers of the N.T. in the light of the established word of God. It is Biblically manifest that while there will be souls that are simply contentious, yet the only sure way to bring about the true salvation of souls is to present Biblical; arguments that are shown to be sound, Scripture interpreting scripture, with self evident proven rules of hermeneutics. It was thus Paul's manner to prove things out of the scriptures (Acts 17:2; 28:23), as Christ did before the heart conviction of Lk. 24 was realized. And while every cult leader seeks to use the authority of the Bible, as J. Smith did, they fail to do as the apostles did, but must resort to specious hermeneutics, usually changing the clearest declarations of Scripture to fit their interpretations of the obscure, and then basically blame people for seeking to be like true Bereans when such cannot be convinced, and instead they ultimately must foster faith and dependence upon the leader and his organization.

A church that requires your submission to it's autocratic leadership is the overriding issue here, as they fail of the kind of Scriptural probity, purity and power that the apostles had (and who did not preach Mormonism), while they effectively seek to add to a closed canon. But LDS supposed restoration of the primitive church assumes authority that has not only preached a different God and gospel than the Bible, and unsupported fantastic tales of history, replete with “Reformed Egyptian Hieroglyphics,” but doctrines that modern day Mormonism distances itself from. If it were not for those pesky Protestants who challenge grievous errors, I believe Mormonism would not have abandoned some of their most strangest doctrines, and like Catholicism, would be preaching even more inventions.less

All told, even if we could substantiate that God did have some sort of body after which likeness men were made, the real heretical doctrine is that of eternal progression, as no such doctrine is Biblical. Rather it depends on the same cultic doctrine that makes past as well as present errors relevant (to your elitist claim), that of subjecting the Bible to an exalted autocratic leadership, out wh...more

All told, even if we could substantiate that God did have some sort of body after which likeness men were made, the real heretical doctrine is that of eternal progression, as no such doctrine is Biblical. Rather it depends on the same cultic doctrine that makes past as well as present errors relevant (to your elitist claim), that of subjecting the Bible to an exalted autocratic leadership, out which forsaken and current doctrines depend, from the Adam God teaching and God's multiple wives and second class blacks to the future godhood and planet populators and supremacy of Mormonism.

(Psa 118:8) "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man."

(Heb 13:8) "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever."less

” and in which the normal word for life is used. You have thus gone to a lot of work in order to take God [is a] spirit away, and it is hardly warranted. You then seek to ignore a critical distinction, that of what power we are to worship God in versus what quality of being God consists of, and it is here that the absence of words in 4:24 works against you, as it is not said at all that ...more

” and in which the normal word for life is used. You have thus gone to a lot of work in order to take God [is a] spirit away, and it is hardly warranted.

You then seek to ignore a critical distinction, that of what power we are to worship God in versus what quality of being God consists of, and it is here that the absence of words in 4:24 works against you, as it is not said at all that God is IN spirit, as a man possessing such, but the best understanding is that God works as spirit because He is spirit, not flesh, which John constantly contrasts, a superior class of Divine whose His mode of operation is superior, and thus those who possess His Spirit and yield to Him can worship Him rightly, while yet being in their body. Consistent with the contrasts that runs throughout John, the women at the well has her focus on proper physical location for worship, while Jesus directs to His life giving Spirit, by which she can worship accordingly wherever she may bodily be. Praise be to God.

As for being made in God's image and likeness, we see in 1 Thes. 5:23 that man has a tri-part being, that of spirit, soul and body.

Yet I not have any particular problem with Jn. 4:24 were to be understood metaphorically, as it does not negate God as always being God rather than a result of “eternal progression, but despite you valiant efforts you are still arguing from silence. But at the end you do touch on you one verse that is part of a litany of others that Mormonism uses that purports to show that God has a physical body.

“Deut. 4:28 says that our God can see, eat and smell.” What the verse says is "And there ye shall serve gods, the work of men's hands, wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell, " Here God is not making a comparison with Himself, who never needs rest or sleep (Ps. 121:3), and would never need food, rather He is declaring the finite character of such gods that Israel was to be delivered to in judgment, and stand in contrast to Him who does not need anything (Acts 17:25).

But if one seeks to invoke the many times that God refers to Himself as having human instrumentation, consider that according to such a hermeneutic you would have to make God a bird as well (Ps. 91:4).less