Is Jesus divine?

If you embrace LDS theology, you see Jesus as a created being along with Lucifer. You are going to hear a lot about Lucifer when you go to temple. Jesus did nothing in secret. You are going to enter into a world of secrecy. "Stand fast therefore in the liberty, where Christ has set us free, and be not entangled again in the yoke of bondage. For brethren we have been called unto liberty only use not liberty as an occasion to serve the flesh but by love serve one another."
When you have to keep secrets and take a vow under the penalty of death......that would be an indication you have taken on a "yoke of bondage"!

 

I disagree of course on all your suppositions. Of course you can find any narrative on the internet to prove anything you want. My outside study from the Bible came from years of searching. Sure, you say, weaning mothers were respected. That is why Herod commanded that every male child under the age of two was to be killed.

Here's one for you. Under Jewish law, women were not credible witnesses. Since you promote the idea it is all made up, why would the authors of the Gospels use two women to first experience the empty tomb? Wouldn't that make this so-called concocted story less plausible?

 

My suppositions were based on the Bible and the period in which it was written.
Weaning mothers were respected by the Jews. There was no 'Massacre of the Innocents'
The reference is back to Rachel weeping for her children. Had there been such a massacre Rome would have acted to remove Herod, as they did with two other Roman leaders - Pilate and with Herods son Archelaus.

Where have I said that the story of two women at the tomb is made up? I was talking about the Nativity stories. I certainly believe that Jesus existed as a Jewish preacher and was crucified for exposing the Hypocrisy of the religious leaders.

As to women as creditible witnesses, this applied to 'legal' matters as you indicate. If women were not 'creditible' then we can reject anything to do with reported sayings of women in the Bible and that would leave the Bible in a mess.

Matthew uses Hosea 11:1 in his story. He tells us that Israel were in Egypt. And sends Joseph and family there to escape later as Israel is supposed to have done. In his geneaology of Joseph to Abraham he tells us that they were not - by jumping the gap from Moses to Jacobs grandson -around 300 years - of the 430+ that they were supposed to be in Egypt. That leaves many generations unknown. Hardly a complete line from Joseph to Abraham. The fact is there is no evidence of Abraham through to the Exodus to Palestine - which incidentally - was ruled by Egypt anyway, and had been for centuries.
If Hosea 11:1 refers to Jesus then so does the rest of the chapter. You can't simply take a verse out of context.

 

If you really look at it, the life of Jesus is modeled on the story of Moses and when viewed in that context the story of Herod trying to kill all the children under two sounds just as contrived in his time as it sounds in the time of the pretend Pharaoh that supposedly tried to kill the first born sons of Israel in Egypt.

 

This line of thought is an attempt to correlate a spiritual writing with view, beliefs, experiences, and history of this world. As such it's an attempt to make those writings apply to this world, which is something that book, itself, expressly rejects.

And it is a long history of many attempts to do this that has degenerated a spiritual guide and converted it to a worldly exercise and has led to the current effort to dissolve the very important Constitutional separation of church and state.

 

That is one person with a story he cannot prove and no one can repeat. So this kind of thing doesn't count unless such an experience is reproducible and testable to prove it to be valid.

 

Bible based religion, which is known as traditional Christianity, is made up of tens of thousands of differing denominations, with no two of them being exactly alike in interpretation and teaching. So if you want to find contradiction so as to levy fault, there's a heap of it right there in your own backyard. That said, why would Paul admonish the Galatians if nothing was at stake, such as their very souls. As for secrets, Jesus said to not give that which is holy to the dogs. That would be rather appropriately secretive would it not?

The problem with bible based religion is that it relies on dead scriptures alone. There is no prophecy or revelation or more words or understanding from the eternal God (whose words should be endless) in bible based religion. Consequently bible based religion is vain and repetitious. The Church of Jesus Christ LDS isn't so imprisoned. It has two testimonies(books) of Jesus Christ and is led by prophets and apostles with the power and authority to expand and add to the doctrines and give greater understanding. It is a living religion under the direction of Jesus Christ. It appears cultish and demonic to others because it isn't constrained or wrapped up by the preconceived notions of tradition, in which even within the tradition there is no continuity beyond the familiarity of disunity. By whose command do they presume to interpret the Bible scriptures and elect themselves to Gods service? How has this criminality become the status quo? It started around eighteen hundred years ago.

 

The problem with the Church of Jesus Christ LDS is that it depends on a book of imaginery visions and unproveable stories.

 

Actually, no. The life of the Church is in the spirit of God. By itself, all the doctrines, assertions, history, people, and structures are meaningless on their own. It is Gods spirit that is the life of the Church. Our trust is in God.

 

Nowhere does the United States Constitution and the amendments to the Constitution have the words, "separation of church and state."

This is what the First Amendment says about the relationship between church and state, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Beginning school days in public schools or public meetings with a prayer is not the same as declaring that a specific Christian denomination is the Established Religion of the United States.

One could more plausibly argue that forbidding public prayers is "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" of religion.

 

I am a Christian. If I attended a meeting of a Jewish organization that began with a Jewish prayer i would say the prayer as long as the Jewish prayer did not assert a doctrine that is contrary to Christianity.

The Shema, which states, "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one," might seem to contradict Christianity, but the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke have Jesus saying that prayer.

I might even say a Muslim prayer, but not if it denied the Trinity, and not if it declared that Mohammed is God's greatest prophet.

 

So you don't need all your doctrines, assertions, history, people and structures. The BoM is obsolete.

 

For some odd reason you think that matters. The 1st Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". The founders didn't want religion influencing government or government influencing religion. That is a separation of church and state which was recognized as such by the Supreme Court until it fell into the hands of a radical right wing majority.

You want to move the goalposts by limiting the discussion to "Christian denominations"?? What about Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, and atheists? In the real world beginning school days or meetings with a prayer is, indeed, sanctioning a religion! AND school children who oppose the prayer are made to feel guilty and unaccepted when they don't go along with it. So it is a coercive act to make children feel they must accept it.

And government routinely violates the 1st A. by implying that Christianity IS the accepted and proper and dominant religion of the nation via references and display of christian images, signs, and words.

Wow. You have that completely backward. Public prayer is organized praying in a religion's manner and tradition! So when it is sanctioned by a governmental function it is the same as establishing religion! The "free exercise of religion" means non-governmental acts of prayer for the coercive reasons I gave.

 

I want those decisions to be made by legislatures, rather than the Supreme Court.

 

So you are not a Temple Mormon. Are you a dog? They have kept these secrets from you apparently. You don't have the garment to protect you from Lucifer. If the LDS wanted it's followers protected, wouldn't they hand out the secret underwear to all who attend? Scientology too has secret levels of indoctrination. Jesus told us (believers) He calls us friends. Friends don't keep secrets.

Jesus Christ did not need Joseph Smith. There is revelation in the Bible you will never touch in your lifetime. Neither will I so I don't look elsewhere.

Disunity is a trait given to the fallen nature of mankind. Russia appears to have great unity now. So does China. Those two countries do not tolerate disunity. Neither do LDS. Salt Lake controls what is taught. The Holy Spirit works through the lowest of believers. If God inspires an LDS janitor with a message in Baltimore do you believe it will ever get passed the Priests, Presidents, or Mormon hierchy? No it will not. They have their truth locked in. I am not a traditionalists. I quote often the verse that says "you don't put new wine in old wineskins". I marvel at the traditional denominations and how they get stuck on silly trivial things that are not detrimental to Salvation.......just like the Mormon Church. But within those denominations you call traditional is the Holy Spirit at work and I have seen unity in Bible Studies for years that includes those from all sorts of denominations.

Just because you come up with a couple new books, (one of which resembles the masonic writings) does not mean you get to change Jesus, His Mission, or our destiny.

 

Well that's just it. NO GOVERNMENT ENTITY should be establishing approval, recognition, or privileges for ANY religion.

 

We will need to agree to disagree on that.

 

Fallen human nature brings about similar circumstances all the time. Ever hear the phrase, History repeats itself? You can see patterns all the time throughout the Bible and throughout history. The Fall of Babylon, the fall of Rome, etc. Why would you be surprised? In Babylon they sacrificed infants, like they did in the Aztec Empire, or even in abortion clinics here in America today!

 

Then you're rejecting the Constitution. But then most of the Republican Party seems to be following Trump on that anyway.

 

I am rejecting what you project into the United States Constitution, even though it is not written there.

 

No, the body without the spirit is dead. So all of the Church without the spirit of God is dead. However, it is necessary for the advancement of Gods work which is the gathering of Israel. So the members, doctrines, temples and all else are necessary to that end.

 

Your private, literal interpretation is not what Constitutional scholars find in it.

 

Of the tens of thousands of different Christs and gospels in traditional bible based religion, which one do you follow and teach. Which one is actually Christianity.

 

I have answered that with quotes of bible verses and spiritual experiences many times to many believers, and never has any been able to grasp the spiritual truth as they toss back at me literal concepts taken from a literal reading of the bible and typically told me I have a devil or that satan owns me. I understand that was their way of escaping having to experience the Spirit and grasp the spiritual meaning, preferring the worldly meaning instead.

 

The Constitution is vaguely written. People project their concerns into it. If those who wrote the First Amendment thought there should not be prayer in public schools they would have said so. It was not until the 1960's that this became an issue. If prayer in public schools violated the First Amendment, this should have been noticed and acted on much earlier.