From: slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Mormonism
Date: 19 Nov 92 10:51:27 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <c4Zh02dO2b8n01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>,
 agr00@ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose) writes:
> farkas@qual.Eng.Sun.COM writes:

[Robert Weiss (?) writes:]
>>> I have tried to use the Biblical definition for prophet, and
>>> have been  castigated for presuming the Biblical definition of a
>>> prophet. In reply I asked for the LDS definition of what
>>> constitutes a false prophet, and my question went unanswered.
>>
>> How about this: 
>>
>> 1. A prophet is a prophet when he speaks under the influence of the 
>>   Holy Ghost. 
>>
>> 2. A prophet is not a perfect person who doesn't err or sin.
> 
> This still doesn't answer the question he asked which was, to
> you, what constitutes a FALSE prophet?

How about:

"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but ttry the spirits whether
they are of God: because many fals prophets are gone out into the
world.

"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth
that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

"And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come
in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of
antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even
now already is it in the world."

(KJV: 1 John 4:1-3.)

> 
>>>ff> There is a major difference between bashing and discussions. For
>>>ff> example, Anthony Rose made a claim...
>>
>>>Quoting about Jesus to answer a question about the LDS concept 
>>>of the Father is meaningless.
>>
>>Not to me, since I believe that Jesus is God.
> 
> But you don't think that Jesus is the Father, and we were discussing
> the Father.  Therefore, your bringing in Jesus DID change the discussion
> we were having from THE FATHER to THE SON, and thus I made the above
> comment.
> 
> The LDS always split the two up as two separate Gods until they are
> pressed on the subject of the nature of the Father.  Then they write it
> off by saying, "well, it doesn't matter because Jesus is God".  I was
> trying to discuss the Father without allowing you to do this.  I was
> unsuccessful.  Therefore, I determined that once again, a discussion about
> the nature of God the Father was impossible.
> 
>>I will definately not confuse the Father and the Son! Do you remember? 
>>It is us who claim that the Father and the Son are two separate personages. 
>>However, we believe that they are the same "God"
> 
> Are you sure you meant to say this?  This is certainly NOT LDS teachings.
> I was just talking with a Bishop from the San Jose Ward off Camden Ave,
> in San Jose on Sunday, and he told me that the LDS believe that the Father
> and the Son are two separate Gods.  What you are saying above is totally
> contrary to what he told me.  

Depends on how one takes it.  Consider the following context:

"And abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand
that GOD HIMSELF SHALL COME DOWN AMONG THE CHILDREN OF MEN, and
shall REDEEM his people.

"And because he DWELLETH IN FLESH he shall be called  the Son of
God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father,
being the Father and the Son --

"The Father, because he was concieved by the power of God; and
the Son because of the Flesh; thus becoming the Father and the
Son --

"And they are ONE God, yea the very Eternal Father of heaven and
of earth."

(BoM: Mosiah 15:1-4, emphasis mine -- JBH)


"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 when they had all gone forth and had witnessed for
themselves, they did cry out with one accord saying:

"Hosanna! Blessed be the name of the Most High God!  ANd they did
fall down at the feet of Jesus, and sis worship him."

(BoM: 3 Nephi 11:10,14,16,17, emphasis mine -- JBH)


"For behold, the time cometh, and is not far distant, that with
power the LORD OMNIPOTENT who reigneth, who was, and is from all
eternity to all eternity, shallCOME DOWN FROM HEAVEN AMONG THE
CHILDREN OF MEN, AND SHALL DWELL IN A TABERNACLE OF CLAY, and
shall go forth amongst men, working mighty miracles, such as
healing the sick, raising the dead, causing the lame to walk, the
blind to receive their sight, and the deaf to hear, and curing
all manner of deseases.

"And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Sonf of God, the Father
of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the
beginning: and his mother shall be called Mary."

(BoM: Mosiah 3:5,8, emphasis mine -- JBH)

The Son is "the express image of his [the Father's] person"
(Hebrews 1:3).

"He that hath seen [Jesus] hath seen the Father" (John 14:9).

"... Seest thou that ye are created after mine own image? Yea,
even all men were created in the beginning afer mine own image.

"Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my
spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and
even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit will I appear unto
my people in the flesh."

(BoM: Ether 3:15,16)


Again, Like Frank said earlier, "no smoking gun either way"  but
I have no problem understanding Frank's statements and those of
the bishop you conversed with.  They aren't that difficult (for
me, at least) to reconcile.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: slhw4@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc