LDS

[Janadele]

Everyone born to mortality on this earth is an actual Spiritual child of our Heavenly Father. Those who in mortality choose to follow Lucifer, who is known as "the father of all lies" are then classified among the wicked, and henceforth symbolically referred to as having Lucifer as their father.

 

[Stomatopoda]

Everyone born to mortality on this earth is an actual Spiritual child of our Heavenly Father. Those who in mortality choose to follow Lucifer, who is known as "the father of all lies" are then classified among the wicked, and henceforth symbolically referred to as having Lucifer as their father.

[That's interesting.]

 

[Pixel42]

Everyone born to mortality on this earth is an actual Spiritual child of our Heavenly Father. Those who in mortality choose to follow Lucifer, who is known as "the father of all lies" are then classified among the wicked, and henceforth symbolically referred to as having Lucifer as their father.

Sez who?

 

[Janadele]

...except in the garden of eden satan only told truth, and god only told lies.

Not so.

Eve, deceived by Satan, partook of the food forbidden to her by God, and as a result her immortal body became mortal, degenerate and subject to death.

 

[Stomatopoda]

...yeah, because immortality is so much fun without sentience.

 

[SezMe]

Sez who?

Not me!

 

[abaddon]

Not so.

Eve, deceived by Satan, partook of the food forbidden to her by God, and as a result her immortal body became mortal, degenerate and subject to death.

Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

God lied about that, since Adam is claimed to have gone on and lived for a further 930 years.

3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

And Satan tells the truth, since Adam is claimed to have lived a further 930 years.

3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Good old Satan telling the truth again.

3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

Good old god can't find Adam if he hides in the bushes.

3:11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?

Nor can he tell if Adam ate from the tree. He has to ask Adam.

3:12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

Now Adam at this point should have done a Bart Simpson, "I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything", but no, like the true hero he is, he blames the chick.


Heroic indeed

 

[Sideroxylon]

You are not one for giving away charity of interpretation when it comes to the Bible, abaddon.

God lied about that, since Adam is claimed to have gone on and lived for a further 930 years.

But he still died whereas he would have remained immortal in the garden had he not eaten it. Still, for Christians Adam's soul lives on after "death" in heaven.

And Satan tells the truth, since Adam is claimed to have lived a further 930 years.

Again God's attorney will argue that the timing of death was non specified.

Good old Satan telling the truth again.

Appears so.

Good old god can't find Adam if he hides in the bushes.

That Adam is hiding doesn't mean that he cannot be seen.

Nor can he tell if Adam ate from the tree. He has to ask Adam.

A rhetorical question?

Now Adam at this point should have done a Bart Simpson, "I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything", but no, like the true hero he is, he blames the chick.


Heroic indeed

Adam was stating a fact, wasn't he? Interestingly he also sounds like he is also asking that God take a share of the blame with his almost, "Well you bloody put her down here with me!"

 

[pakeha]

In my opinion based on what I've been taught over the years... It basically goes back to the Church membership having a common goal, to achieve the Celestial Kingdom. If a revelation brings us closer to meeting that goal then obviously I think it sounds plausible, and then it is up to me to put it to the test. Test is LDS lingo for 'study the revelation, ponder it out in our minds and hearts, pray about it, and act accordingly.' Those who accept what a Prophet says remain active in the Church, those who do not can decide if it's something they can live with inside the church, or they can find another church where they feel more akin to the doctrine.

To be clear, are you saying that your having the 'burning in the bosom' feeling is a legitimate test of a someone else's claim to be a prophet?

...Actually, I agree with you, although comparing the validity of my beliefs to those of a con man is less than civil. ...

That never happened, skyrider44.
RandFan compared your faith in the LDS with that of those who have faith in conmen.
A point of view with which I agree, given your reluctance to comply with numerous requests for specific examples of anachronisms from the BOM which have been proven to have actually existed then.

 

[abaddon]

You are not one for giving away charity of interpretation when it comes to the Bible, abaddon.



But he still died whereas he would have remained immortal in the garden had he not eaten it. Still, for Christians Adam's soul lives on after "death" in heaven.

Incorrect. Adam was already mortal, god successfully prevented him from eating from the tree of life, thereby becomming immortal.

3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

ETA: Oddly, god never forbade eating from the tree of life.
ETA2: If I had been Adam, I would therefore have eaten from the tree of life FIRST, then the tree of knowledge. At that point, what could god do about it?

Again God's attorney will argue that the timing of death was non specified.

Incorrect. It was very specific.

2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Eat the fruit, die the same day.

That Adam is hiding doesn't mean that he cannot be seen.

god couldn't see him.

A rhetorical question?

If so, why did both Adam and Eve respond at all?

Adam was stating a fact, wasn't he? Interestingly he also sounds like he is also asking that God take a share of the blame with his almost, "Well you bloody put her down here with me!"

It is implied that Adam unwittingly ate the fruit that Eve supplied to him, and could be entirely blameless. god straight out doesn't care and punishes him anyway. Bonus points for bolstering mysogyny.

 

[Sideroxylon]

god couldn't see him.

Where is that stated?

If so, why did both Adam and Eve respond at all?

It wouldn't be the first time such a question had been answered. Or maybe it was. Anyway, can you support your interpretation that God "had to" ask that question?

 

[abaddon]

Where is that stated?

3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

Would you walk up to a person in plain sight and ask "Where are you?"

It wouldn't be the first time such a question had been answered. Or maybe it was. Anyway, can you support your interpretation that God "had to" ask that question?

It must be true, the bible says so. And if he didn't have to, then why ask? If it was that important, why not put the dang tree someplace else, and not in the garden at all? Didn't god have a choice? For that matter, why put the evil snake in there? Did the snake sneak in unbeknownst to god? Did god forget it was there? Shouldn't god have known what the snake would do? And how Adam and Eve would respond? What's the deal with a talking snake anyway?

Only the first three chapters of the first book of the bible, and it is established that god is not omniscient, not omnipresent and not omnipotent. And his reputation is only going downhill from here.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Would you walk up to a person in plain sight and ask "Where are you?"
It must be true, the bible says so. And if he didn't have to, then why ask?

It reminds me of an old horror movie where the axe wielding maniac sees the foot of his hunted protruding from the place of concealment and asks, "Where are you?" God may be toying with Adam, his punishment having already begun. Adam was not in plain sight according to the narrative though he must have understood the pointlessness in his attempts to hide from his all-seeing creator.

If it was that important, why not put the dang tree someplace else, and not in the garden at all? Didn't god have a choice? For that matter, why put the evil snake in there? Did the snake sneak in unbeknownst to god? Did god forget it was there? Shouldn't god have known what the snake would do? And how Adam and Eve would respond? What's the deal with a talking snake anyway?

I'll leave those interesting questions to Janadele or skyrider44.

Only the first three chapters of the first book of the bible, and it is established that god is not omniscient, not omnipresent and not omnipotent. And his reputation is only going downhill from here.

Cannot these characteristics be inferred to some degree? He has just created the whole universe, including its fundamental laws.

 

[abaddon]

Cannot these characteristics be inferred to some degree? He has just created the whole universe, including its fundamental laws.

Sure. Let's assume that god is omni-everything.

Therefore:

god knowingly and deliberately put the snake in the garden
Knew in advance what it would do.
Knowingly and deliberately put the tree in the garden
knew in advance that Adam and Eve would eat from the tree, sadisticly forbade them to eat from it knowing full well that the snake that he put there would induce Adam and Eve to eat from the tree that he also put there.
Also knowing that he would then proceed to punish Adam and Eve for an event that he had intentionally staged and surreptitiously managed to a conclusion he already knew, all the while telling enormous pork pies to Adam and Eve.

That makes the whole omni-everything god an even worse character.

 

[Janadele]

You are not one for giving away charity of interpretation when it comes to the Bible, abaddon.
But he still died whereas he would have remained immortal in the garden had he not eaten it. Still, for Christians Adam's soul lives on after "death" in heaven.

Again God's attorney will argue that the timing of death was non specified.

Time in the Garden of Eden was eternal time... "a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. "
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/kolob.t1?lang=eng&letter=k

Whilst considering Genesis, see also the account of the Garden of Eden in The Pearl of Great Price :
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/moses/4?lang=eng
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/4?lang=eng

 

[Akhenaten]

Time in the Garden of Eden was eternal time... "a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. "

I can see that as having been a reasonable thing to believe for people living in the Bronze Age.

However, to believe it in 2013 is pretty embarrassing.

 

[Sideroxylon]

What does it even mean for the creator of time-space to have any reckoning/sense of time?

 

[jsfisher]

Time in the Garden of Eden was eternal time... "a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. "
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/kolob.t1?lang=eng&letter=k

Whilst considering Genesis, see also the account of the Garden of Eden in The Pearl of Great Price :
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/moses/4?lang=eng
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/4?lang=eng

I'm inclined to jettison the two references from Abraham. The Book of Abraham is a known fraud. (The Book of Moses may be, too, but I don't have evidence of that.)

As for the other, I have a conflict that needs resolution. Satan is described as God's only begotten son. That doesn't agree with the Bible's account placing Jesus as His only begotten son.

So what gives? Are Jesus and Satan brothers? (Well, probably half-brothers, but we have no clue who Satan's mother might be.) Is this whole good v. evil thing just an unfortunate case of sibling rivalry that got out of control?

 

[Akhenaten]

Everyone born to mortality on this earth is an actual Spiritual child of our Heavenly Father. Those who in mortality choose to follow Lucifer, who is known as "the father of all lies" are then classified among the wicked, and henceforth symbolically referred to as having Lucifer as their father.

I'll never understand you polytheists.

 

[Slowvehicle]

What does it even mean for the creator of time-space to have any reckoning/sense of time?

What does it even mean to make the unsubstantiated assertion that speca, time, time-space or spacetime had a "creator"?