God did have a wife. Her name was Israel, though, and not Istar or Asherah. When Asherah was worshipped, the true bride of Jehovah commited spiritual adultery. Can the virgin bride of Christ (Christ = Jehovah, you said) be a whore? While the scholars you quoted were not LDS propounding official LDS doctrine, you were quoting them for a reason. If I were you, I'd want to distance myself as far from what they were saying as I could. Yet that doesn't seem possible wrt official church teachings.
@evangelical1 I was quoting them for the reasons that I stated at the end of the video. And yes, I did very clearly speak and put text on the screen as to the fact that what is being said is clear speculation. However, it also goes to show that there is a need for a prophet. Without one, we only have the mass of confusion known as "mainstream" christianity. Not quite sure what your last sentence is all about. So I won't attempt to reply to that.
@M424Filmcast There is no mass confusion that I am aware of. Could you give a specific example of something? In contrast, Mormonism if very confusing. For example, look at all the denominations. They all follow different prophets. How do you know who Smith's true sucessor is? Amongst the many Mormon denominations, only the LDS recognize Monson. My last comment was that Mormons say the same thing as the scholars you quoted. Namely, that there are many gods and that some of them are married.
@evangelical1 The mass of confusion is the fact that all 20,000+ denominations do not in fact teach the same thing, nor are they united. They all claim to be true, yet can't agree. Jesus didn't say, "Hey, at least you agree on the core stuff. So the rest is all good." He said, "Come, follow me." There is, despite what the media tells you, only one true denomination of LDS.
In re: scholars and LDS teachers, that is a fallacy argument.
@M424Filmcast Despite what your fellow LDS Mormons tell you, there is only one true biblical Christian church. But you didn't answer my question. How do you know that Thomas Monson, as opposed to the prophet of the Community of Christ, say, is the true sucessor of Smith?
@evangelical1 Despite what your fellow antimormons tell you, your "one true biblical church" is anything but one. It is not united, but divided. I can ask a pastor of one version of "biblical christianity" whether baptism is required or not, and he may say "Absolutely yes!", then ask another "Biblical" pastor, and he will say, "No, it is not." Each will give scripture to prove it. So who is right? I used to be "biblical christian", so I know where you are stuck now.
You are simply incorrect. Biblical Christians will ALL say what the Bible says which is that baptism is not required for salvation because salvation is by grace so it is not by works (and baptism is a work). UPCI maintains baptism is necessary for salvation but they are not biblical in their theology. Catholicism may hold to baptism but they are unbiblical wrt Marian dogmas.
I'd like to hear more about your change from Christianity to LDS.
@evangelical1 So what you are saying is that I am wrong when I say the following: Baptists believe baptism is essential (pbministries [dot] org), United Methodists do not (ucmpage [dot] org). Both claim to be correct. Both claim to be biblical christian. Who is correct? I could go on, but this is just an example. You claim you are right. Confusion.
@M424Filmcast I am a Baptist. I was in church, the Baptist church, just yesterday. So I can assure you that Baptists do NOT claim that baptism is essential. I can also assure you that lying is a sin. So I would not tell you this unless it were true. So yes, to be frank, you are simply incorrect. That is not bad because we all make mistakes. But now you know better. The confusion is on the part of Mormonism for they misrepresent biblical Christianity to make themselves look better.
@evangelical1 In re: Thomas Monson, there is a very specific line of succession going back to Joseph Smith who received his authority from Jesus Christ and God the Father. He was ordained by those in authority, Peter, James and John. This is not found anywhere else in our church. I am sure you are going to make a claim about a line through Joseph's son, but you will lose. I have researched this, you have not. So think carefully before copying and pasting from an antimormon site.
@M424Filmcast Ah but I have researched it. Plus I was explicitly told by LDS missionaries, in good standing with the LDS church, working in the field, that from day one there have been splinter groups breaking away from the LDS hierarchy. Are you telling me that 100% of ALL people that maintain/ed Smith restored the gospel have ALWAYS agreed upon who his current successor is/was?
@evangelical1 Another fallacy argument. Many groups have broken away, but, the fallacy is believing that they are recognised by the LORD as the church He established. You have not researched thoroughly.
@M424Filmcast Thank you for conceding the point that there are many (unrecognized)Mormon denominations. Couldn't I as Baptist say the Methodists are unrecognized by the Lord while the Baptists are recognized? You can call it confusion if you want, but, it is confusion BOTH Mormons and Protestants have. So it doesn't give you any extra points. The important question is, do the LDS know that Monson is the recognized successor through the same burning in the bosom the splinter groups have?
5:40 - LOL... "HEAVILY EDITED" or in other words, "Taken away!" - This is what JOHN warned about regarding EVIL and CONSPIRING MEN who took things out of the BIBLE! OR ANYTHING FOUND IN HOLY WRIT!
@eternalforever123 Exactly Sister. But you know, in order for someone to agree to the possibility of THAT, they would have to agree to the possibility that "historical christianity" and it's over 20,000 divided denominations worldwide might be in need of finding....*gasp*...UNITY!....(did I say that out loud?)...ummm...
@M424Filmcast - so the whole, "Till we all come to a unity of the faith" hopes by Paul has kind of gone the wrong way for the last 1900 years? Maybe that was the plan? Maybe the goal was to splinter into 100.000 ways to then reunite somewhere along the road?
@eternalforever123 Sure, why not? At least that's the way the mainstream sees it. I actually had a guy tell me, "It's not about which church is most right, it's about STYLE!"
Apparently, you can just do whatever you want...as long as it's close enough....
What? People think that God didn't have a wife because not much is mentioned or not much evidence of her in the Bible? The Bible is a pretty small book compared to 6000 years of history? What then? Their pastor said so? I'd probably get a 2nd and 3rd opinion before I settled into someone's ignorant belief system. And they say we LDS are BRAINWASHED?
Unfortunately there is'nt enough space here to layout the whole story - but read the info below. I will gladly give complete story per email. Francesca Stavrakopoulou is trying to persuade us of a Yahweh-Asherah connection. She might as well tell us that Satan is married to God..! As people no longer bother to read the bible, it is easy to see how people would be gullible enough to lap up this idiots "discovery"..! A little bit of knowledge is indeed DANGEROUS...! Read next posting.
@Dezmau Haai daar vriend! Ek hoop die nuwe jaar gaan beter vir jou! I will gladly look at any information you send me via email. You have always been a very good friend. Please send it to me to my regular email. Additionally, keep in mind that this is simply a topic of interest to me. I do not back the research, I am merely saying that there is more to the Bible than we are sometimes lead to believe. God seën jou altyd my suster!
Dear friend, Ahab was the 8th king of Israel, 874-853 B.C; married to Jezebel a heathen princess, dtr. of Ethbaal. They worshipped demons, and their 2 main gods were known as BAAL and his PROSTITUTE consort, ASHERAH... Baal worship involved male prostitution on hilltops. Elijah, sent by God, proved that he was the true prophet as his prayers were answered with FIRE.. Francesca Stavrakopoulou is a confessed atheist and the bible is very clear when warning against those false prophets!
Asherah was actually the wife of the Sumerian Anu. Although she is mentioned in the bible, King Manasseh placed an Asherah pole in the holy temple and "did evil in the sight of the LORD" (2 Kings 21:7). The biblical references to asherah arent too flattering.
@alfiejames8 Where did you copy and paste that from? Perhaps you should take this up with the scholars named in the video. And cite your sources. This is a statement made (supposedly by you), that does not carry any authority without a source.
@M424Filmcast well the biblical verse is apparent as source. but on Asherah she is a mother goddess in semitic mythology in a number of ancinet sources which include akkadian writings.
@M424Filmcast It's very likely that Asherah may refer to Sarah(Abraham's wife). The miracle states Sarah was barren until El gave Sarah Isaac. Sarah is the tree of life for Isra'El (sora - hebrew: rows/tree of posterity). The archeological findings of Asherah figurines with large public triangles & enlarged breasts celebrate Sarah's fertility in birthing the Israelite nation. The problem arose when the Israelites began to Worship
her as a goddess in the way some worship Mother Marry.
@cindyisa10 Thank you Cindy. I appreciate the input on the subject which I am currently looking into. It's intriguing, though I have by no means bought into the research.
Genesis 2:7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
this verse clearly debunks any idea that there is any marriage in heaven, and any notion that we will become gods :Mark 12:25: For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven."
And there is not one single reference to Gd having a wife in the Bible, nor did Jesus ever mention such a thing. Any manmade unearthed object wont convince me otherwise, people throughout history believe all sorts of twisted things
why wouldnt God have a wife and why would there not a be Mother in Heaven? if we are created in His image and if Marriage is ordained of God from way back to the beginning of time with adam and eve being married by God the father Himself then certainly why would not Our Father in Heaven have a wife. God loves companionship just as much as those He created im sure
@MsSanoe The Christian Creeds have declared through the centuries that God is without body, parts, or passions. So how does Christian scholarship hold up to this type of creedal thinking? Not very well. Christian scholars have concluded the exact opposite aspects of God and have recently declared with a rather refreshing boldness that the God of the Bible is clearly a person, an anthropomorphic Deity who has serious passions, both good and bad. (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) I will use only non-Mormon scholars. Jean Danielou notes that in the covenant relationship between man and God, "the living God reveals those attributes described in the Bible as his truth, his righteousness, and his love...the truth of God...means the faithfulness of the living God, in whom men may safely put all their trust." (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) William F. Albright himself acknowledged that Moses' monotheism had to include God the Creator, "who is in human form..." He contrasts this God of Moses in the Bible with the later different Gods of Philo Judaeus, Rabbi Aqiba, St. Augustine, Mohammed and Maimonides as well as St. Thomas Aquinas, and Calvin, saying Moses monotheism was not as these later Christian thinkers views were at all. (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) God is not without feelings that we consider to be only human. God can feel anger, wrath, fury, indignation, all passions (1 Kings 11:9; 2 Kings 22:17; 2 Chron 28:11; Nahum 1:2, 6; Hab. 3:2; Ezek 5:15; Zech 10:3). God may appear unto man (1 Kings 11:9; 22:19-23; 2 Chron. 18:18-22; Amos 9:1; Isa. 1:1-5; Ezek 1:1, 26-28; 3:23-24; Dan 3:25). God may be astonished (Jer. 8:21). God has beauty (Zech. 9:17). (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) God may give compassion and comfort (2 Kings 13:23; Jer 12:15). God is involved with time, space, and this world, and nature (2 Kings 8:1; Jonah 1:4, 17; Amos 4:7-10; Isa. 23:11; 29:6; Nahum 1:3,4; Hab. 3:6-11; Jer. 3:3). God is good (Ezra 3:11). God is gracious (2 Kings 13:23). God may feel grief (Jer. 10:19). God Guides man (Isa 11:2-3; Jer 14:9; Ezek 2:2; Nehemiah 9:20). God is helpful (2 Chron. 14:11; Isa 41:10, 13, 14). (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) God may be jealous (1 Kings 14:22; Nahum 1:2; Joel 2:18). God is merciful (2 Chron 20:21; Isa 14:1; Ezra 3:12; Zech 1:6; Joel 2:13). God is a revelator (1 Kings 19:12; 2 Kings 17:13; Jonah 1:2; Amos 3:6-8; Hosea 12:10; Isa 6:8; Jer 33:6; Ezek 1:3; Dan 2: 18-19; Nehemiah 9:13f). (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) The biblical reality is that of God being active and interested in history, creation, etc. This God in the Bible is not the illimitable God of the philosophers. This is not the god who is "wholly other" or "without body, parts, and passions" at all. Norbert Samuelson, "That the God of the Philosophers is Not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," in "Harvard Theological Review," Vol. 65, January 1972, #1, pp. 1-27, (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) showing that the properties, descriptions, and characteristics of the philosophers God does *not* match the God found in the Bible and hence cannot logically nor philosophically be the God of the Bible!
@M424Filmcast lol!~ yes ur right ur God is not the God of the bible,hahahaha!
you my friend,you have no point..OK so God has feels,who doesn't know that,he said he love's us,thats a feel,so whats ur point?
(Gen. 1:26) lets make man in our image.arms,legs,eye,nose,mouth,ears etc. lol.
(1 John 4:2) clearly we see Jesus in the flesh.(you do know Jesus is God (1 John 5:20, st John 1:1-5,14. Act 20:28 please read that Act 20:28) You see i can pull scriptures to! lol.
@MsSanoe Well brother, I am not quoting me, or LDS scholars. I am quoting non-LDS christian scholars. So you are not debating me, but them. I know we have differences brah, and it's cool. I just wanted to share with you what your own people say.
@skyaglow God is not a human (Nu. 23:19), he does not have human desires (Is. 55:8-11)... Marriage is a gift from a loving God 2 human's (Luke 20:34 we also see hear that marriage is for earth,so there is no heavenly mother) (Gen.2:22)!!! A women is a help mate to her husband (Gen. 2:18-23)...God don't need no help because he is NOT HUMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Job 9:32)
Yes My Brother, even though I look white, Grandmother was Full Cherokee ...never even had Soc,Sec. number...live in Oklahoma. A lot of Angry people out here...I use say I was just White But I talk to an Elder and told me Stop doing That tell the Truth...Dont be ashamed. I wasnt ashamed jut didnt want to Fight all the time...
@SteeleHorse45 I understand you brother. I am part Navajo, though I don't think I look very white LOL. It's cool man. I have no problem with skin colour. If you are a brother, regardless of the colour of your skin, or your walk in the sacred circle. Christian or traditional, or whatever, I respect that. I myself have been through many Inipi ceremonies, and have even poured water. I might even post some drum and song one day. Have you seen my video of "An Indian Prayer"?
@M424Filmcast I will check out you Vids Brother, I used to go to many ceremonies when I was young, but after my Dad passed, only my Uncle's would take me...Grandmother was on my Dads side...And now i still a Friend who live around the Block we hang out, hes Navajo Too! He still takes items to the Cherokee Reservations.
THANKS BROTHER...GIVEN NAME IS ....SPOTTED HORSE...WHAT YOURS
@MsSanoe Hey brother. This is just a video based on an article I found. I do not currently use the Bible to support the doctrine. I still have further research to do on the subject. The only information I have on the subject is what I presented in the video. I do, however, have a testimony of the teaching. Even as a child, I believed we must have a Mother in heaven as well as a Father. Everything we do as family on earth is supposed to be a reflection of all things eternal. (cont.)
@MsSanoe Remember, I was quoting an article. I very specifically said that these were not my opinions, nor the opinions of the church. Please watch the video again, and listen for it. I also placed this statement in text on the screen.
@MsSanoe (cont.) I did not become a member of the LDS church until I was an adult. I grew up Catholic, later agnostic/atheist, then Protestant for many years. I studied for a time with the JW's, and even the Muslims. Nothing satisfied me until I found the answers to everything I ever wanted to know. If God is our Father, and Adam was a man, then who was Eve (a woman) made to look like? And how would we have a real family without a Mother? Thank you for your question. Mahalo!
@MsSanoe Correct. She was not God's wife. At this point, as I said, I am still researching. Logic cannot deny, however, that absence of proof is not proof. Some things can only be known by the Spirit until things come along that provide "proof". The answer at this point is, that research is ongoing, and continues to be going in the direction we have been saying all along. I will offer the following: (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) Elohim, the name-title for God, suggests the plural of the Caananite El or the Hebrew Eloah. It is used in various Hebrew combinations to describe the highest God. It is the majestic title of the ultimate deity. Genesis 1:27 reads, "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him, male and female created he them" (emphasis added), which may be read to mean that "God" is plural.
@MsSanoe (cont.) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rejects the idea found in some religions that the spirits or souls of individual human beings are created ex nihilo. Rather it accepts literally the vital scriptural teaching as worded by Paul: "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God." This and other scriptures underscore not only spiritual sibling relationships but heirship with God, (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) and a destiny of joint heirship with Christ (Rom. 8:16-18; cf. Mal. 2:10). Latter-day Saints believe that all the people of earth who lived or will live are actual spiritual offspring of God the Eternal Father (Num. 16:22; Heb. 12:9). In this perspective, parenthood requires both father and mother, whether for the creation of spirits in the premortal life or of physical tabernacles on earth. A Heavenly Mother shares parenthood with the Heavenly Father. (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) This concept leads Latter-day Saints to believe that she is like him in glory, perfection, compassion, wisdom, and holiness. As a former agnostic/atheist, I can tell you that it is easy for someone to "disprove" the existence of God by simply saying there is no evidence. It is not until the Spirit testifies to you that you KNOW there is a God. This is the case for me with a Mother in Heaven.
@M424Filmcast Non-seance!!! the bible teaches 1 God (Deut, 6:4) not a god. God don't need a wife or anyone to do anything... this is why he is ALMIGHTY GOD!!!
YOU STILL DID NOT PROVE TO ME A HEAVENLY MOTHER. THIS SHOW'S YOU ARE GOING ON FEELING NOT FACTS ALSO SOMEONE ELSE'S OPINION....
THE BIBLE IS & ALWAYS WILL BE PROVEN FACT'S.....
so till you can prove a heavenly mother there is none..& all you said is BLASPHEMY!!!!
@MsSanoe You are attempting to assert that Elohim, Jehovah, Adonai and other similar Old Testament Hebrew names for deity are simply different titles which emphasize different attributes of the "one true God." In support of this criticism, you cite Old Testament scriptures that speak of "the LORD [Jehovah] thy God [Elohim]" (e.g., Deuteronomy 4:2; 4:35; 6:4) as proof that these are different titles for the same God. (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) The separation of Elohim and Jehovah in the Hebrew Old Testament is not as clear as you would like to believe. The following scriptures illustrate the confusion of divine names in the Old Testament: Exodus 34:23 combines the Hebrew words Adon (Lord), Jehovah (LORD) and Elohim (God [of Israel]) into one title which is translated "Lord God, the God of Israel" or "Lord Jehovah, God of Israel." (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) The Hebrew version of Psalm 82:1 reads: "God [Elohim] stands in the assembly of God [El]; he judges in the midst of the gods [Elohim]." Psalm 110:1 reads: "The LORD [Jehovah] said unto my Lord [Adonai], Sit thou at my right-hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." (Hebrews 1:1–3 indicates that God the Father said this to Jesus Christ; see also Matthew 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42.) (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) In one instance (Psalm 8:5), the Hebrew Elohim is even rendered "angels." The Hebrew text states that Jehovah made the son of man "a little less than Elohim" [KJV "angels"]. Though most literal translations render Elohim as "God" in this verse, there is justification for translating it "angels": Hebrews 2:7 quotes this verse, using the Greek word aggelos ("angels") in place of Elohim. (cont.)
@MsSanoe In re: angelous, I used the greek "aggelos" which means angels. This is common. You should read what I actually reply with rather than ignore it and use red herring arguments. I am not jumping your question. I very clearly have stated that I am not making the assertion that it is contained in the Bible. Rather, that other scholars (non-LDS) and researchers are making the assertion, and the evidence is mounting in our direction.
@MsSanoe (cont.) We also find that Elohim is translated in four instances as "judges" (Exodus 21:6;), though "God's representative" is probably the intended meaning. This nevertheless shows that divine names were used by inspired writers with different meanings. I do not speak blasphemy, nor do I go on feeling, or someone else's opinion. I not only read the Bible, but study its meaning in depth.
@MsSanoe I would like you to please point out exactly where I stated that I don't study the Bible. That is patently false.
And again, the purpose of this video, and our discussion here is not to "prove" anything. Rather, it is to show that we, as a church, are constantly ridiculed for our beliefs, yet evidence continues to mount in our favour in relation to our teachings.
@MsSanoe You made the accusation of me saying I don't study the Bible. I never said any such thing. Can you prove me wrong?
Pentecostal, Baptist, First Assembly of God are all Protestant churches. We do not claim any affiliation with them. They do not even agree with each other, or they would all be one church. They are Reformist churches. We are not a reformationist church, but rather the restored church of the Saviour.
I used to attend the types of churches you mentioned, (cont.)
@M424Filmcast So the church i clam is not the church you clam? much like the same God you clam is not the same as mine! or should i say: The Jesus of the bible that i clam is not the jesus you clam???
@MsSanoe To use that logic, you would have to say that all of those churches claim a different God and a different Jesus. They all teach differently. Some say baptism is necessary, others say no. Some say faith without works, others say the opposite. Some say you must speak in tongues, others say no. The point is, they do not agree with each other. Our church is one. We are in full agreement. We follow the words of Paul on those things. We follow the Saviour in all things.
@MsSanoe That all depends brother. Some churches claim the trinity doctrine which is post-nicene era teaching, and was not accepted until a vote decided the matter. Other churches agree with us that the trinity doctrine is false.
One thing I agree with you on is that Jesus is the only way to the Father. We do believe the Gospel. I hope this discussion brought more understanding to you. We may not agree on everything, but I still consider you a Brother in Christ. Aloha, and God bless.
@MsSanoe Same to you brah! Take care, and if you have more questions, please ask. I have no problem having a discussion, and at least you didn't cuss at me or call me names! LOL. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you to brother. And a big double-shaka from the mainland! Mahalo.
@MsSanoe (cont.) but could not get any firm answers to my questions. The beliefs are so different between them, and so are the practises. The house of God is a house of order, not confusion (Eph. 4:13). There is only One Faith, One Lord, One Baptism. Not 1000's of different versions (Eph. 4:5).
@MsSanoe In regards to "proving" to you that there is a Mother in Heaven, I am not under any obligation to do so. Rather, this is something you need to take up with your Father in Heaven, and gain a testimony about. This in no way takes away from God, His authority, or his Supreme status as Ruler of all Creation.
@MsSanoe Putting up a video does not necessitate having to prove something, especially when the purpose of the video is information provided by a third party. It is simply to get people to look beyond what they already know, and open their mind to other possibilities. There was a time when religious leaders and followers were 100% sure that the earth was the centre of the universe, and that everything revolved around it. They closed their mind to anything else (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) and claimed that any other belief was blasphemy, and denied the power of God. Do you still believe that the earth is the centre of the universe? No. We know it is not, because further research and study has shown that this is not true. Lack of evidence is not evidence.
@MsSanoe It took more than four centuries to prove the earth was not the centre of the universe and that the earth was not flat. It made no sense to anyone until the proof finally came forth. But it did not make the studies false.
@M424Filmcast Of course you know the bible teaches that the earth is circle not flat (Is. 40:22) . so it shows how stupid it was to think another wise!
this also prove that the religion then was not doing there job. much like the religion of today.
If God had a wife, he would have put it in his word (the bible)..2 think other wise would be stupid....
(Please don't think i mean you) Just in general!!!
@MsSanoe I get what you mean brother. But have you considered the fact that there are missing books in the Bible? Can you tell me where the following books went? Book of the Wars of the Lord (Numbers 21:14), Book of Jasher (Joshua 10:13, 2 Samuel 1:18), Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kings 11:41), Book of Samuel the Seer (1 Chronicles 29:29), Book of Gad the Seer (1 Chronicles 29:29), Book of Nathan the Prophet (1 Chronicles 29:29, 2 Chronicles 9:29), Prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chronicles 9:29) cont
Visions of Iddo the Seer (2 Chronicles 9:29, 2 Chronicles 12:15, 2 Chronicles 13:22), Book of Shemaiah (2 Chronicles 12:15), Book of Jehu (2 Chronicles 20:34), Sayings of the Seers (2 Chronicles 33:19), lament for Josiah (2 Chronicles 35:25), Paul's epistle to Corinthians before our "1 Corinthians" (1 Corinthians 5:9), Paul's possible earlier Ephesians epistle (Ephesians 3:3), Paul's epistle to Church at Laodicea (Colossians 4:16), (cont.)
@MsSanoe (cont.) 1 Enoch 1:19 and The Assumption of Moses (Jude 1:14-15). These are all mentioned in the Bible, yet they are missing. There is nothing in the Bible that says it is complete. These are proofs right in the Bible that it is missing things. Who decided that they should not be included? If God inspired men to write them, they should be included right? I don't think He would tell people to write them, and then say "Oops! Sorry, take those out!"
@M424Filmcast Hahahahaha you funny! all tis scriptures can be sum up in 1, (John 21:25) what John says about Jesus,i can say about wat you'er asking!
but even doe still you would ask another. Then i will say ask the Hebrew tormenters Ask Egypt, Ask Babylon or Rome, they must had have something to do with it!!! Don't you think?
@cindyisa10 Thank you Cindy! I wish you a very Merry Christmas, and a Prosperous and Happy New Year as well! Thank you for the link! I will definitely check it out!
Hi, I find this subject fascinating. I was listening to a radio show one night (Coast to Coast A.M.) where they had a guest, Micheal S. Heiser. He had written a book about the Divine Council in Heaven. He also talked about Asherah. You can get a lot of information at the divine council.com. Really fascinating
@myway43 Thanks for the reference to the website. I will check it out. LOL, I also listen to Coast to Coast A.M. and have been a caller on the show twice. Once with George Noory, and once with Art Bell himself.
The records are unclear. The Bible -- which was edited and compiled in the post Babylonian (Ezra) period may have been adjusted to reflect a new (apostate?) paradigm -- BUT this is hard to establish. So the critics feel that they still have a good position.
In my mind, the evidence I have for a mother in heaven would be: Gen 1:27.
@ImLDSRU2 LOL! Yeah, we may rock n roll, but we are not dumb. Good point on Gen 1:27 btw. Exactly my point in the vid about "who was Eve created to look like?"
@M424Filmcast Looking through the dim dust of history, who knows what was going on, but there are (as I recall) some references that indicate two pillars in the Temple by the door had names that essentially boiled down to "Asherah" and "Jehovah" or something like that.
Was that an apostate time or was that real? I have no idea.
@ImLDSRU2 I will look into that for you. Send me a PM with any info you have, and I will check it out with some of my sources. Don't forget to remind me a few days after sending me the msg. Thanks for asking!
@M424Filmcast The women was created to look like, GOD!!! Gen. 1: 26 in his image. God created him MALE & FEMALE vs. 27.. God took a rib from the MAN AND MADE IT INTO A WOMEN,vs 21-23...
You bring out some good things. I have also produced videos on this with a lot of incredible information. Good video. Yes you pronounced a few things different than I have heard, and no it's not a big deal! Good on ya bro!
I respect what you are doing here. Not sure about where my own Christian journey will end up taking me? Living among some persistent confusion for a few years researching Christian denominations. Am a believer in our Lord Jesus Christ as my Savior, & in our Heavenly Father, & the Holy Spirit - our comforter. Have spent unbelievable time on Protestantism, LDS church & love all of the history about Joseph Smith and the BOM, enjoyed Catholicism RCIA but had been divorced & that is not acceptable,
@betsybk56 Hi betsy. Thanks for your comment. I too, spent many years among various protestant denominations.The first twelve years of my life, I was Catholic. And I share your beliefs in the Saviour, our Heavenly Father, and the Holy Spirit. It can ve very confusing, however, once I studied with the LDS, I knew I had found what I was looking for. It has now been over 19 years, and despite the critics, I know this will always be the church for me.
@betsybk56 If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me through private message. As an up and coming apologist, I can also address any concerns or questions you have regarding any of the criticisms you have heard about our teachings, history, etc.
Great video my friend, I'm glad to see a mormon using evidence to support his beliefs, its refreshing. As to how a mainstream Christian like myself would respond I'm not sure, I'll have to look into it.
@philosophizer149 Thanks philosophizer. It is refreshing for me as well, when a mainstream Christian appreciates my point of view rather than simply being dismissive. Glad I could give you something to think about.
Only a plurality of persons can justify the phrase. Hence, we are forced to conclude that the plural pronoun indicates a plurality of persons or hypostases in the Divine Being.
...[cont].. when transferred into the third person of narrative, become "his image, the image of God," and thus limit the pronouns to God himself. Does the plurality, then, point to a plurality of attributes in the divine nature? This cannot be, because a plurality of qualities exists in everything, without at all leading to the application of the plural number to the individual, and because such a plurality does not warrant the expression, "let us make."
We have no ground, therefore, for transferring it to the style of the heavenly King. Was it with certain other intelligent beings in existence before man that he took counsel? This supposition cannot be admitted; because the expression "let us make" is an invitation to create, which is an incommunicable attribute of the Eternal One, and because the phrases, "our image, our likeness," ......[cont]...
The plural form of the sentence raises the question, With whom took he counsel on this occasion? Was it with himself, and does he here simply use the plural of majesty? Such was not the usual style of monarchs in the ancient East. Pharaoh says, "I have dreamed a dream" Genesis 41:15. Nebuchadnezzar, "I have dreamed" Daniel 2:3. Darius the Mede, "I make a decree" Daniel 6:26. Cyrus, "The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth" Ezra 1:2. Darius, "I make a decree" Ezra 5:8.
Moreover, in the former mandates of creation his words had regard to the thing itself that was summoned into being; as, "Let there be light;" or to some preexistent object that was physically connected with the new creature; as, "Let the land bring forth grass" But now the language of the fiat of creation ascends to the Creator himself: Let us make man. This intimates that the new being in its higher nature is associated not so much with any part of creation as with the Eternal Uncreated himself
Why did he choose "us?" Here we evidently enter upon a higher scale of being. This is indicated by the counsel or common resolve to create, which is now for the first time introduced into the narrative. When the Creator says, "Let us make man," he calls attention to the work as one of pre-eminent importance. At the same time he sets it before himself as a thing undertaken with deliberate purpose.
Where in the bible does Jesus (who is God, and the only God) say anything about a wife for the Father? Where does scripture mention there is a Goddess? Just curious. Why would God need a wife anyway since he is not a physical being, and is a spirit? Can you tell me one Biblical, or Christian scholar/theologist that holds the belief that God is a physical being?
@burtontoker Will you settle for a verse from the Bible?
•"Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth,” (Gen. 1:26, NASB).
@myway43 The "us" is not referring to another God, or being, I believe that is a mistake and could be taken out of context to support beliefs of a Goddess. I've found something that answers why God uses the word "us," I certainly don't understand how because he uses "us" that means he is referring to a Goddess, there is no reason to come to that conclusion. There is a more reasonable explanation as to why he chose that word if you think about it.
@burtontoker Mistake? in the Bible? ... just kidding. I simply used the verse out of Genesis to introduce the aspect of God having a physical body. I did not intend to use the verse as a confirmation or refutiation of the Goddess. But that verse in Genesis surely opens serious debate on what the verse actually means. I believe it shows that God has a phtysical form and that we are made in that image, male and female.
@burtontoker In addition to what myway43 has commented on, I will answer your questions as well. However, keep in mind that I would like all comments here to stay on topic with the content of the video. Any further comments not related to the video should be done through private message, or through one of my more open video forums. Thank you.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
It is sometimes claimed that this verse proves that God is non-corporeal: i.e., a spirit, and nothing but a spirit. However, there is no indefinite article in Greek (the indefinite article in English is "a," as in "a spirit." (cont.)
@burtontoker (cont.) The New International Version (NIV) translation of the same verse reads: God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and truth. One non-LDS work noted of this verse: That God is spirit is not meant as a definition of God's being—though this is how the Stoics would have understood it. It is a metaphor of his mode of operation, as life-giving power, and it is no more to be taken literally than I John i. 5, "God is light", or Deut. iv. 24, (cont.)
@burtontoker (cont.) "Your God is a devouring fire". It is only those who have received this power through Christ who can offer God a real worship. The absence of God's body is thus only present in this scripture if one approaches it with that preconception. There is nothing which requires such a reading, and much that does not.
@burtontoker (cont.) Even the presumption that spirit means being immaterial is not scriptural, and is the product of later thinking: "in Scripture...there is no indication that by spirit and soul were meant any such principles as form or immateriality."
@M424Filmcast Unfortunately, Christian theologists/scholars do not teach there is a Goddess. They believe there is one God, no Goddess, and that Jesus is God in flesh. No scholar or theologist will agree there are multiple Gods/Goddesses, that is Mormon doctrine. I'm just saying, go to any major university where theology is taught, they will not support the claim of Goddesses or Gods.
@burtontoker Unfortunately for you, that is not entirely true. There are many mainstream churches that teach God's corporeality. In regards to "No scholar or theologist will agree..." you have skipped over the fact that those I am quoting in this video are not LDS.
God did have a wife. Her name was Israel, though, and not Istar or Asherah. When Asherah was worshipped, the true bride of Jehovah commited spiritual adultery. Can the virgin bride of Christ (Christ = Jehovah, you said) be a whore? While the scholars you quoted were not LDS propounding official LDS doctrine, you were quoting them for a reason. If I were you, I'd want to distance myself as far from what they were saying as I could. Yet that doesn't seem possible wrt official church teachings.
evangelical1 1 week ago
@evangelical1 I was quoting them for the reasons that I stated at the end of the video. And yes, I did very clearly speak and put text on the screen as to the fact that what is being said is clear speculation. However, it also goes to show that there is a need for a prophet. Without one, we only have the mass of confusion known as "mainstream" christianity. Not quite sure what your last sentence is all about. So I won't attempt to reply to that.
M424Filmcast 1 week ago
@M424Filmcast There is no mass confusion that I am aware of. Could you give a specific example of something? In contrast, Mormonism if very confusing. For example, look at all the denominations. They all follow different prophets. How do you know who Smith's true sucessor is? Amongst the many Mormon denominations, only the LDS recognize Monson. My last comment was that Mormons say the same thing as the scholars you quoted. Namely, that there are many gods and that some of them are married.
evangelical1 1 week ago
@evangelical1 The mass of confusion is the fact that all 20,000+ denominations do not in fact teach the same thing, nor are they united. They all claim to be true, yet can't agree. Jesus didn't say, "Hey, at least you agree on the core stuff. So the rest is all good." He said, "Come, follow me." There is, despite what the media tells you, only one true denomination of LDS.
In re: scholars and LDS teachers, that is a fallacy argument.
M424Filmcast 1 week ago
@M424Filmcast Despite what your fellow LDS Mormons tell you, there is only one true biblical Christian church. But you didn't answer my question. How do you know that Thomas Monson, as opposed to the prophet of the Community of Christ, say, is the true sucessor of Smith?
evangelical1 6 days ago
@evangelical1 Despite what your fellow antimormons tell you, your "one true biblical church" is anything but one. It is not united, but divided. I can ask a pastor of one version of "biblical christianity" whether baptism is required or not, and he may say "Absolutely yes!", then ask another "Biblical" pastor, and he will say, "No, it is not." Each will give scripture to prove it. So who is right? I used to be "biblical christian", so I know where you are stuck now.
M424Filmcast 6 days ago
@M424Filmcast What do you mean by "antimormons"?
You are simply incorrect. Biblical Christians will ALL say what the Bible says which is that baptism is not required for salvation because salvation is by grace so it is not by works (and baptism is a work). UPCI maintains baptism is necessary for salvation but they are not biblical in their theology. Catholicism may hold to baptism but they are unbiblical wrt Marian dogmas.
I'd like to hear more about your change from Christianity to LDS.
evangelical1 5 days ago
@evangelical1 So what you are saying is that I am wrong when I say the following: Baptists believe baptism is essential (pbministries [dot] org), United Methodists do not (ucmpage [dot] org). Both claim to be correct. Both claim to be biblical christian. Who is correct? I could go on, but this is just an example. You claim you are right. Confusion.
M424Filmcast 4 days ago
@M424Filmcast I am a Baptist. I was in church, the Baptist church, just yesterday. So I can assure you that Baptists do NOT claim that baptism is essential. I can also assure you that lying is a sin. So I would not tell you this unless it were true. So yes, to be frank, you are simply incorrect. That is not bad because we all make mistakes. But now you know better. The confusion is on the part of Mormonism for they misrepresent biblical Christianity to make themselves look better.
evangelical1 3 days ago
@evangelical1 In re: Thomas Monson, there is a very specific line of succession going back to Joseph Smith who received his authority from Jesus Christ and God the Father. He was ordained by those in authority, Peter, James and John. This is not found anywhere else in our church. I am sure you are going to make a claim about a line through Joseph's son, but you will lose. I have researched this, you have not. So think carefully before copying and pasting from an antimormon site.
M424Filmcast 6 days ago
@M424Filmcast Ah but I have researched it. Plus I was explicitly told by LDS missionaries, in good standing with the LDS church, working in the field, that from day one there have been splinter groups breaking away from the LDS hierarchy. Are you telling me that 100% of ALL people that maintain/ed Smith restored the gospel have ALWAYS agreed upon who his current successor is/was?
evangelical1 5 days ago
@evangelical1 Another fallacy argument. Many groups have broken away, but, the fallacy is believing that they are recognised by the LORD as the church He established. You have not researched thoroughly.
M424Filmcast 4 days ago
@M424Filmcast Thank you for conceding the point that there are many (unrecognized)Mormon denominations. Couldn't I as Baptist say the Methodists are unrecognized by the Lord while the Baptists are recognized? You can call it confusion if you want, but, it is confusion BOTH Mormons and Protestants have. So it doesn't give you any extra points. The important question is, do the LDS know that Monson is the recognized successor through the same burning in the bosom the splinter groups have?
evangelical1 3 days ago
5:40 - LOL... "HEAVILY EDITED" or in other words, "Taken away!" - This is what JOHN warned about regarding EVIL and CONSPIRING MEN who took things out of the BIBLE! OR ANYTHING FOUND IN HOLY WRIT!
eternalforever123 1 month ago
@eternalforever123 Exactly Sister. But you know, in order for someone to agree to the possibility of THAT, they would have to agree to the possibility that "historical christianity" and it's over 20,000 divided denominations worldwide might be in need of finding....*gasp*...UNITY!....(did I say that out loud?)...ummm...
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@M424Filmcast - so the whole, "Till we all come to a unity of the faith" hopes by Paul has kind of gone the wrong way for the last 1900 years? Maybe that was the plan? Maybe the goal was to splinter into 100.000 ways to then reunite somewhere along the road?
eternalforever123 1 month ago
@eternalforever123 Sure, why not? At least that's the way the mainstream sees it. I actually had a guy tell me, "It's not about which church is most right, it's about STYLE!"
Apparently, you can just do whatever you want...as long as it's close enough....
Lolz...
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
What? People think that God didn't have a wife because not much is mentioned or not much evidence of her in the Bible? The Bible is a pretty small book compared to 6000 years of history? What then? Their pastor said so? I'd probably get a 2nd and 3rd opinion before I settled into someone's ignorant belief system. And they say we LDS are BRAINWASHED?
eternalforever123 1 month ago
oh boy
sarevor 1 month ago
Unfortunately there is'nt enough space here to layout the whole story - but read the info below. I will gladly give complete story per email. Francesca Stavrakopoulou is trying to persuade us of a Yahweh-Asherah connection. She might as well tell us that Satan is married to God..! As people no longer bother to read the bible, it is easy to see how people would be gullible enough to lap up this idiots "discovery"..! A little bit of knowledge is indeed DANGEROUS...! Read next posting.
Dezmau 1 month ago
@Dezmau Haai daar vriend! Ek hoop die nuwe jaar gaan beter vir jou! I will gladly look at any information you send me via email. You have always been a very good friend. Please send it to me to my regular email. Additionally, keep in mind that this is simply a topic of interest to me. I do not back the research, I am merely saying that there is more to the Bible than we are sometimes lead to believe. God seën jou altyd my suster!
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
Dear friend, Ahab was the 8th king of Israel, 874-853 B.C; married to Jezebel a heathen princess, dtr. of Ethbaal. They worshipped demons, and their 2 main gods were known as BAAL and his PROSTITUTE consort, ASHERAH... Baal worship involved male prostitution on hilltops. Elijah, sent by God, proved that he was the true prophet as his prayers were answered with FIRE.. Francesca Stavrakopoulou is a confessed atheist and the bible is very clear when warning against those false prophets!
Dezmau 1 month ago 3
@Dezmau Amen!!!
MsSanoe 3 weeks ago
Asherah was actually the wife of the Sumerian Anu. Although she is mentioned in the bible, King Manasseh placed an Asherah pole in the holy temple and "did evil in the sight of the LORD" (2 Kings 21:7). The biblical references to asherah arent too flattering.
alfiejames8 1 month ago
@alfiejames8 Where did you copy and paste that from? Perhaps you should take this up with the scholars named in the video. And cite your sources. This is a statement made (supposedly by you), that does not carry any authority without a source.
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@M424Filmcast well the biblical verse is apparent as source. but on Asherah she is a mother goddess in semitic mythology in a number of ancinet sources which include akkadian writings.
alfiejames8 1 month ago
@alfiejames8 Like I said. Take it up with the scholars I quoted in the video.
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@M424Filmcast It's very likely that Asherah may refer to Sarah(Abraham's wife). The miracle states Sarah was barren until El gave Sarah Isaac. Sarah is the tree of life for Isra'El (sora - hebrew: rows/tree of posterity). The archeological findings of Asherah figurines with large public triangles & enlarged breasts celebrate Sarah's fertility in birthing the Israelite nation. The problem arose when the Israelites began to Worship
her as a goddess in the way some worship Mother Marry.
cindyisa10 1 month ago
@cindyisa10 Thank you Cindy. I appreciate the input on the subject which I am currently looking into. It's intriguing, though I have by no means bought into the research.
I hope the New Year is treating you well so far.
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
Genesis 2:7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
not through any intercourse, its clear
alfiejames8 1 month ago
@alfiejames8 This is not relevant to the content of this video. Stick to the subject.
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@M424Filmcast I rather think it is as it procalims that we didnt come from intercourse with a supposed wife
alfiejames8 1 month ago
@alfiejames8 This is in reference to the formation of the physical being. Where did the spirits of Adam and Eve come from?
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
this verse clearly debunks any idea that there is any marriage in heaven, and any notion that we will become gods :Mark 12:25: For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven."
And there is not one single reference to Gd having a wife in the Bible, nor did Jesus ever mention such a thing. Any manmade unearthed object wont convince me otherwise, people throughout history believe all sorts of twisted things
alfiejames8 1 month ago
@alfiejames8 Go learn what this scripture means before quoting it.
In regards to the Bible, you are relying on the current 66 book volume. Do you know what may have been in the missing books?
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
why wouldnt God have a wife and why would there not a be Mother in Heaven? if we are created in His image and if Marriage is ordained of God from way back to the beginning of time with adam and eve being married by God the father Himself then certainly why would not Our Father in Heaven have a wife. God loves companionship just as much as those He created im sure
skyaglow 1 month ago
@skyaglow Well said my sister. Thank you.
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@M424Filmcast I don't think so bro... lol!!!
MsSanoe 1 month ago
@MsSanoe The Christian Creeds have declared through the centuries that God is without body, parts, or passions. So how does Christian scholarship hold up to this type of creedal thinking? Not very well. Christian scholars have concluded the exact opposite aspects of God and have recently declared with a rather refreshing boldness that the God of the Bible is clearly a person, an anthropomorphic Deity who has serious passions, both good and bad. (cont.)
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) I will use only non-Mormon scholars. Jean Danielou notes that in the covenant relationship between man and God, "the living God reveals those attributes described in the Bible as his truth, his righteousness, and his love...the truth of God...means the faithfulness of the living God, in whom men may safely put all their trust." (cont.)
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) William F. Albright himself acknowledged that Moses' monotheism had to include God the Creator, "who is in human form..." He contrasts this God of Moses in the Bible with the later different Gods of Philo Judaeus, Rabbi Aqiba, St. Augustine, Mohammed and Maimonides as well as St. Thomas Aquinas, and Calvin, saying Moses monotheism was not as these later Christian thinkers views were at all. (cont.)
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) God is not without feelings that we consider to be only human. God can feel anger, wrath, fury, indignation, all passions (1 Kings 11:9; 2 Kings 22:17; 2 Chron 28:11; Nahum 1:2, 6; Hab. 3:2; Ezek 5:15; Zech 10:3). God may appear unto man (1 Kings 11:9; 22:19-23; 2 Chron. 18:18-22; Amos 9:1; Isa. 1:1-5; Ezek 1:1, 26-28; 3:23-24; Dan 3:25). God may be astonished (Jer. 8:21). God has beauty (Zech. 9:17). (cont.)
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) God may give compassion and comfort (2 Kings 13:23; Jer 12:15). God is involved with time, space, and this world, and nature (2 Kings 8:1; Jonah 1:4, 17; Amos 4:7-10; Isa. 23:11; 29:6; Nahum 1:3,4; Hab. 3:6-11; Jer. 3:3). God is good (Ezra 3:11). God is gracious (2 Kings 13:23). God may feel grief (Jer. 10:19). God Guides man (Isa 11:2-3; Jer 14:9; Ezek 2:2; Nehemiah 9:20). God is helpful (2 Chron. 14:11; Isa 41:10, 13, 14). (cont.)
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) God may be jealous (1 Kings 14:22; Nahum 1:2; Joel 2:18). God is merciful (2 Chron 20:21; Isa 14:1; Ezra 3:12; Zech 1:6; Joel 2:13). God is a revelator (1 Kings 19:12; 2 Kings 17:13; Jonah 1:2; Amos 3:6-8; Hosea 12:10; Isa 6:8; Jer 33:6; Ezek 1:3; Dan 2: 18-19; Nehemiah 9:13f). (cont.)
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) The biblical reality is that of God being active and interested in history, creation, etc. This God in the Bible is not the illimitable God of the philosophers. This is not the god who is "wholly other" or "without body, parts, and passions" at all. Norbert Samuelson, "That the God of the Philosophers is Not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," in "Harvard Theological Review," Vol. 65, January 1972, #1, pp. 1-27, (cont.)
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) showing that the properties, descriptions, and characteristics of the philosophers God does *not* match the God found in the Bible and hence cannot logically nor philosophically be the God of the Bible!
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@M424Filmcast lol!~ yes ur right ur God is not the God of the bible,hahahaha!
you my friend,you have no point..OK so God has feels,who doesn't know that,he said he love's us,thats a feel,so whats ur point?
(Gen. 1:26) lets make man in our image.arms,legs,eye,nose,mouth,ears etc. lol.
(1 John 4:2) clearly we see Jesus in the flesh.(you do know Jesus is God (1 John 5:20, st John 1:1-5,14. Act 20:28 please read that Act 20:28) You see i can pull scriptures to! lol.
But clear we have differences.
MsSanoe 1 month ago
@MsSanoe Well brother, I am not quoting me, or LDS scholars. I am quoting non-LDS christian scholars. So you are not debating me, but them. I know we have differences brah, and it's cool. I just wanted to share with you what your own people say.
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@M424Filmcast Thats ok, there insured,lol!! i'll just have to pray for them...Aloha's
MsSanoe 1 month ago
@MsSanoe LOL! You're a good man braddah....Mahalo!
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
@skyaglow God is not a human (Nu. 23:19), he does not have human desires (Is. 55:8-11)... Marriage is a gift from a loving God 2 human's (Luke 20:34 we also see hear that marriage is for earth,so there is no heavenly mother) (Gen.2:22)!!! A women is a help mate to her husband (Gen. 2:18-23)...God don't need no help because he is NOT HUMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Job 9:32)
MsSanoe 1 month ago
Really interesting info!
Dandeeman26 1 month ago
@Dandeeman26 I thought so too.
M424Filmcast 1 month ago
Really interesting history unknown to me
Dandeeman26 1 month ago
(Yeah, it's Lakota, but we all say it, yeah? lol yES WE ARE lOOSE OUR nATIVE TALK...LOL THANK YOU.... WHEN THE WINDS BRING US TOGETHER, MY BROTHER
SteeleHorse45 2 months ago
@SteeleHorse45 Sounds good my friend. May Wakan Tanka watch over you until that day.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Yes My Brother, even though I look white, Grandmother was Full Cherokee ...never even had Soc,Sec. number...live in Oklahoma. A lot of Angry people out here...I use say I was just White But I talk to an Elder and told me Stop doing That tell the Truth...Dont be ashamed. I wasnt ashamed jut didnt want to Fight all the time...
SteeleHorse45 2 months ago
@SteeleHorse45 I understand you brother. I am part Navajo, though I don't think I look very white LOL. It's cool man. I have no problem with skin colour. If you are a brother, regardless of the colour of your skin, or your walk in the sacred circle. Christian or traditional, or whatever, I respect that. I myself have been through many Inipi ceremonies, and have even poured water. I might even post some drum and song one day. Have you seen my video of "An Indian Prayer"?
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast I will check out you Vids Brother, I used to go to many ceremonies when I was young, but after my Dad passed, only my Uncle's would take me...Grandmother was on my Dads side...And now i still a Friend who live around the Block we hang out, hes Navajo Too! He still takes items to the Cherokee Reservations.
THANKS BROTHER...GIVEN NAME IS ....SPOTTED HORSE...WHAT YOURS
SteeleHorse45 2 months ago
@SteeleHorse45 You can call me Eagle Bear. Thank you for sharing. Aho! Mitakuye Oyasin! (Yeah, it's Lakota, but we all say it, yeah?)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Your right! They are Fools! False Gods Had A Wife!!!!!! Seek AHAYAH!
SteeleHorse45 2 months ago
@SteeleHorse45 I take it you are a fellow native?
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Aloha, can you prove trough bible scripture that God have a wife, or that we have a mother in heaven??
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe Hey brother. This is just a video based on an article I found. I do not currently use the Bible to support the doctrine. I still have further research to do on the subject. The only information I have on the subject is what I presented in the video. I do, however, have a testimony of the teaching. Even as a child, I believed we must have a Mother in heaven as well as a Father. Everything we do as family on earth is supposed to be a reflection of all things eternal. (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast if you don't have a bible support of this clam, why would you say "The bible teaches a heavenly mother" ....
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe Remember, I was quoting an article. I very specifically said that these were not my opinions, nor the opinions of the church. Please watch the video again, and listen for it. I also placed this statement in text on the screen.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast hear!!!
maybe i misinterpret what it means wen you say: "not currently use bible to support the doc.) If so (Sorry about that)...
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe No prob bro. It happens.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) I did not become a member of the LDS church until I was an adult. I grew up Catholic, later agnostic/atheist, then Protestant for many years. I studied for a time with the JW's, and even the Muslims. Nothing satisfied me until I found the answers to everything I ever wanted to know. If God is our Father, and Adam was a man, then who was Eve (a woman) made to look like? And how would we have a real family without a Mother? Thank you for your question. Mahalo!
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast still you didn't answer my question. Yes Eve was Adoms wife but she was not God's...
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe Correct. She was not God's wife. At this point, as I said, I am still researching. Logic cannot deny, however, that absence of proof is not proof. Some things can only be known by the Spirit until things come along that provide "proof". The answer at this point is, that research is ongoing, and continues to be going in the direction we have been saying all along. I will offer the following: (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) Elohim, the name-title for God, suggests the plural of the Caananite El or the Hebrew Eloah. It is used in various Hebrew combinations to describe the highest God. It is the majestic title of the ultimate deity. Genesis 1:27 reads, "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him, male and female created he them" (emphasis added), which may be read to mean that "God" is plural.
(cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rejects the idea found in some religions that the spirits or souls of individual human beings are created ex nihilo. Rather it accepts literally the vital scriptural teaching as worded by Paul: "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God." This and other scriptures underscore not only spiritual sibling relationships but heirship with God, (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) and a destiny of joint heirship with Christ (Rom. 8:16-18; cf. Mal. 2:10). Latter-day Saints believe that all the people of earth who lived or will live are actual spiritual offspring of God the Eternal Father (Num. 16:22; Heb. 12:9). In this perspective, parenthood requires both father and mother, whether for the creation of spirits in the premortal life or of physical tabernacles on earth. A Heavenly Mother shares parenthood with the Heavenly Father. (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast No! it doesn't !!!! but believe what you want!
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) This concept leads Latter-day Saints to believe that she is like him in glory, perfection, compassion, wisdom, and holiness. As a former agnostic/atheist, I can tell you that it is easy for someone to "disprove" the existence of God by simply saying there is no evidence. It is not until the Spirit testifies to you that you KNOW there is a God. This is the case for me with a Mother in Heaven.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Non-seance!!! the bible teaches 1 God (Deut, 6:4) not a god. God don't need a wife or anyone to do anything... this is why he is ALMIGHTY GOD!!!
YOU STILL DID NOT PROVE TO ME A HEAVENLY MOTHER. THIS SHOW'S YOU ARE GOING ON FEELING NOT FACTS ALSO SOMEONE ELSE'S OPINION....
THE BIBLE IS & ALWAYS WILL BE PROVEN FACT'S.....
so till you can prove a heavenly mother there is none..& all you said is BLASPHEMY!!!!
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe You are attempting to assert that Elohim, Jehovah, Adonai and other similar Old Testament Hebrew names for deity are simply different titles which emphasize different attributes of the "one true God." In support of this criticism, you cite Old Testament scriptures that speak of "the LORD [Jehovah] thy God [Elohim]" (e.g., Deuteronomy 4:2; 4:35; 6:4) as proof that these are different titles for the same God. (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) The separation of Elohim and Jehovah in the Hebrew Old Testament is not as clear as you would like to believe. The following scriptures illustrate the confusion of divine names in the Old Testament: Exodus 34:23 combines the Hebrew words Adon (Lord), Jehovah (LORD) and Elohim (God [of Israel]) into one title which is translated "Lord God, the God of Israel" or "Lord Jehovah, God of Israel." (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) The Hebrew version of Psalm 82:1 reads: "God [Elohim] stands in the assembly of God [El]; he judges in the midst of the gods [Elohim]." Psalm 110:1 reads: "The LORD [Jehovah] said unto my Lord [Adonai], Sit thou at my right-hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." (Hebrews 1:1–3 indicates that God the Father said this to Jesus Christ; see also Matthew 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42.) (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) In one instance (Psalm 8:5), the Hebrew Elohim is even rendered "angels." The Hebrew text states that Jehovah made the son of man "a little less than Elohim" [KJV "angels"]. Though most literal translations render Elohim as "God" in this verse, there is justification for translating it "angels": Hebrews 2:7 quotes this verse, using the Greek word aggelos ("angels") in place of Elohim. (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Again NO! the word Elohim is not found in Heb. 2:7 but the word Angelous is (Hebrew text) witch mean angels!!!
Angelous is not a Greek word!
Sorry, but you still jumping my question...Where in the bible do we have a mother in Heaven?
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe In re: angelous, I used the greek "aggelos" which means angels. This is common. You should read what I actually reply with rather than ignore it and use red herring arguments. I am not jumping your question. I very clearly have stated that I am not making the assertion that it is contained in the Bible. Rather, that other scholars (non-LDS) and researchers are making the assertion, and the evidence is mounting in our direction.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) We also find that Elohim is translated in four instances as "judges" (Exodus 21:6;), though "God's representative" is probably the intended meaning. This nevertheless shows that divine names were used by inspired writers with different meanings. I do not speak blasphemy, nor do I go on feeling, or someone else's opinion. I not only read the Bible, but study its meaning in depth.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Your former comment states that you don,t study the bible...
So please stop lying my friend...
clearly you can prove nothing 2 me ur anyone...
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe I would like you to please point out exactly where I stated that I don't study the Bible. That is patently false.
And again, the purpose of this video, and our discussion here is not to "prove" anything. Rather, it is to show that we, as a church, are constantly ridiculed for our beliefs, yet evidence continues to mount in our favour in relation to our teachings.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Go take a look at some of the comment you sent me...
Let me ask another,The church you proclaim ear is it the same as all others. Like pentecostal,battist,frist assembly of God,etc????
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe You made the accusation of me saying I don't study the Bible. I never said any such thing. Can you prove me wrong?
Pentecostal, Baptist, First Assembly of God are all Protestant churches. We do not claim any affiliation with them. They do not even agree with each other, or they would all be one church. They are Reformist churches. We are not a reformationist church, but rather the restored church of the Saviour.
I used to attend the types of churches you mentioned, (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast So the church i clam is not the church you clam? much like the same God you clam is not the same as mine! or should i say: The Jesus of the bible that i clam is not the jesus you clam???
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe To use that logic, you would have to say that all of those churches claim a different God and a different Jesus. They all teach differently. Some say baptism is necessary, others say no. Some say faith without works, others say the opposite. Some say you must speak in tongues, others say no. The point is, they do not agree with each other. Our church is one. We are in full agreement. We follow the words of Paul on those things. We follow the Saviour in all things.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Comment removed
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe That all depends brother. Some churches claim the trinity doctrine which is post-nicene era teaching, and was not accepted until a vote decided the matter. Other churches agree with us that the trinity doctrine is false.
One thing I agree with you on is that Jesus is the only way to the Father. We do believe the Gospel. I hope this discussion brought more understanding to you. We may not agree on everything, but I still consider you a Brother in Christ. Aloha, and God bless.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Comment removed
MsSanoe 2 months ago
Comment removed
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast I do believe in the trinity there is just to much referenece i can't deny!!!
But YES we still can be friends even if we disagree!!!
Aloha & malakaliki maka & houol makahiki hou...
peace!!!
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe Same to you brah! Take care, and if you have more questions, please ask. I have no problem having a discussion, and at least you didn't cuss at me or call me names! LOL. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you to brother. And a big double-shaka from the mainland! Mahalo.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast hahahahaha...& thank for not callin me names 2,lol!!!
SHAKA BRADAH!!!!!
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) but could not get any firm answers to my questions. The beliefs are so different between them, and so are the practises. The house of God is a house of order, not confusion (Eph. 4:13). There is only One Faith, One Lord, One Baptism. Not 1000's of different versions (Eph. 4:5).
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe In regards to "proving" to you that there is a Mother in Heaven, I am not under any obligation to do so. Rather, this is something you need to take up with your Father in Heaven, and gain a testimony about. This in no way takes away from God, His authority, or his Supreme status as Ruler of all Creation.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast You have put up a video, so i and anyone else can ask you 2 prove it!!!
the problem is you can't,lol!!!
so ur video was in vain & non-sense!
Anyways, have a nice life, peace,
Aloha.......
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe Putting up a video does not necessitate having to prove something, especially when the purpose of the video is information provided by a third party. It is simply to get people to look beyond what they already know, and open their mind to other possibilities. There was a time when religious leaders and followers were 100% sure that the earth was the centre of the universe, and that everything revolved around it. They closed their mind to anything else (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Sure it does!!! especially when 1 says "God had a wife"...
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe The title is not an assertion, but a question.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) and claimed that any other belief was blasphemy, and denied the power of God. Do you still believe that the earth is the centre of the universe? No. We know it is not, because further research and study has shown that this is not true. Lack of evidence is not evidence.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Yet this so call "study of ur's have been done 4 centuries & not 1 evidence have provided"
sorry bra. it make no sense!
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe It took more than four centuries to prove the earth was not the centre of the universe and that the earth was not flat. It made no sense to anyone until the proof finally came forth. But it did not make the studies false.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Of course you know the bible teaches that the earth is circle not flat (Is. 40:22) . so it shows how stupid it was to think another wise!
this also prove that the religion then was not doing there job. much like the religion of today.
If God had a wife, he would have put it in his word (the bible)..2 think other wise would be stupid....
(Please don't think i mean you) Just in general!!!
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@MsSanoe I get what you mean brother. But have you considered the fact that there are missing books in the Bible? Can you tell me where the following books went? Book of the Wars of the Lord (Numbers 21:14), Book of Jasher (Joshua 10:13, 2 Samuel 1:18), Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kings 11:41), Book of Samuel the Seer (1 Chronicles 29:29), Book of Gad the Seer (1 Chronicles 29:29), Book of Nathan the Prophet (1 Chronicles 29:29, 2 Chronicles 9:29), Prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chronicles 9:29) cont
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.)
Visions of Iddo the Seer (2 Chronicles 9:29, 2 Chronicles 12:15, 2 Chronicles 13:22), Book of Shemaiah (2 Chronicles 12:15), Book of Jehu (2 Chronicles 20:34), Sayings of the Seers (2 Chronicles 33:19), lament for Josiah (2 Chronicles 35:25), Paul's epistle to Corinthians before our "1 Corinthians" (1 Corinthians 5:9), Paul's possible earlier Ephesians epistle (Ephesians 3:3), Paul's epistle to Church at Laodicea (Colossians 4:16), (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@MsSanoe (cont.) 1 Enoch 1:19 and The Assumption of Moses (Jude 1:14-15). These are all mentioned in the Bible, yet they are missing. There is nothing in the Bible that says it is complete. These are proofs right in the Bible that it is missing things. Who decided that they should not be included? If God inspired men to write them, they should be included right? I don't think He would tell people to write them, and then say "Oops! Sorry, take those out!"
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Hahahahaha you funny! all tis scriptures can be sum up in 1, (John 21:25) what John says about Jesus,i can say about wat you'er asking!
but even doe still you would ask another. Then i will say ask the Hebrew tormenters Ask Egypt, Ask Babylon or Rome, they must had have something to do with it!!! Don't you think?
MsSanoe 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast - I want to wish you a merry christmas and a great new year.
For anyone who hasn't seen the 4 vids by Dr Francesca Stavrakopoulou, here they are: youtube.com/watch?v=RZ9cvYB7Tes
cindyisa10 2 months ago
@cindyisa10 Thank you Cindy! I wish you a very Merry Christmas, and a Prosperous and Happy New Year as well! Thank you for the link! I will definitely check it out!
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Hi, I find this subject fascinating. I was listening to a radio show one night (Coast to Coast A.M.) where they had a guest, Micheal S. Heiser. He had written a book about the Divine Council in Heaven. He also talked about Asherah. You can get a lot of information at the divine council.com. Really fascinating
myway43 2 months ago
@myway43 Thanks for the reference to the website. I will check it out. LOL, I also listen to Coast to Coast A.M. and have been a caller on the show twice. Once with George Noory, and once with Art Bell himself.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
I was catholic too.
dorisfenella 2 months ago
The answer to this can be found in 2 Kings Ch23 v1-27.
soulmagi 2 months ago
Who said Rockers were brain dead?
The records are unclear. The Bible -- which was edited and compiled in the post Babylonian (Ezra) period may have been adjusted to reflect a new (apostate?) paradigm -- BUT this is hard to establish. So the critics feel that they still have a good position.
In my mind, the evidence I have for a mother in heaven would be: Gen 1:27.
ImLDSRU2 2 months ago in playlist Sound Doctrines
@ImLDSRU2 LOL! Yeah, we may rock n roll, but we are not dumb. Good point on Gen 1:27 btw. Exactly my point in the vid about "who was Eve created to look like?"
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Looking through the dim dust of history, who knows what was going on, but there are (as I recall) some references that indicate two pillars in the Temple by the door had names that essentially boiled down to "Asherah" and "Jehovah" or something like that.
Was that an apostate time or was that real? I have no idea.
ImLDSRU2 2 months ago
@ImLDSRU2 I will look into that for you. Send me a PM with any info you have, and I will check it out with some of my sources. Don't forget to remind me a few days after sending me the msg. Thanks for asking!
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Oh... I'm working of some dim memory there!
ImLDSRU2 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast The women was created to look like, GOD!!! Gen. 1: 26 in his image. God created him MALE & FEMALE vs. 27.. God took a rib from the MAN AND MADE IT INTO A WOMEN,vs 21-23...
Come on bro... just read the bible!!!
MsSanoe 2 months ago
Dude, you rock!
davidlory 2 months ago
@davidlory Haha...Thanks kindred spirit. LOL
I still love the title of your vid: "Joseph Smith Mormon Prophet, Water Conspiracies, and Mexican Pepsi"
There was no way I could see that title, and not watch!
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast hahaha
davidlory 2 months ago
You bring out some good things. I have also produced videos on this with a lot of incredible information. Good video. Yes you pronounced a few things different than I have heard, and no it's not a big deal! Good on ya bro!
TheBackyardProfessor 2 months ago
I respect what you are doing here. Not sure about where my own Christian journey will end up taking me? Living among some persistent confusion for a few years researching Christian denominations. Am a believer in our Lord Jesus Christ as my Savior, & in our Heavenly Father, & the Holy Spirit - our comforter. Have spent unbelievable time on Protestantism, LDS church & love all of the history about Joseph Smith and the BOM, enjoyed Catholicism RCIA but had been divorced & that is not acceptable,
betsybk56 2 months ago in playlist More videos from M424Filmcast
@betsybk56 Hi betsy. Thanks for your comment. I too, spent many years among various protestant denominations.The first twelve years of my life, I was Catholic. And I share your beliefs in the Saviour, our Heavenly Father, and the Holy Spirit. It can ve very confusing, however, once I studied with the LDS, I knew I had found what I was looking for. It has now been over 19 years, and despite the critics, I know this will always be the church for me.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@betsybk56 If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me through private message. As an up and coming apologist, I can also address any concerns or questions you have regarding any of the criticisms you have heard about our teachings, history, etc.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Good job bro :)
imtherealthing 2 months ago
@imtherealthing Thanks realthing. I knew this would be an interesting subject. Glad you appreciated it. As always, your opinion means a lot to me.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Great video my friend, I'm glad to see a mormon using evidence to support his beliefs, its refreshing. As to how a mainstream Christian like myself would respond I'm not sure, I'll have to look into it.
philosophizer149 2 months ago
@philosophizer149 Thanks philosophizer. It is refreshing for me as well, when a mainstream Christian appreciates my point of view rather than simply being dismissive. Glad I could give you something to think about.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Awesome video man! I actually haven't heard any of this before.
Nixmix24 2 months ago
@Nixmix24 Wassup my brotha! Yeah, I ran across it one day by chance. Amazing how we continue to be vindicated, isn't it?
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
Only a plurality of persons can justify the phrase. Hence, we are forced to conclude that the plural pronoun indicates a plurality of persons or hypostases in the Divine Being.
burtontoker 2 months ago
...[cont].. when transferred into the third person of narrative, become "his image, the image of God," and thus limit the pronouns to God himself. Does the plurality, then, point to a plurality of attributes in the divine nature? This cannot be, because a plurality of qualities exists in everything, without at all leading to the application of the plural number to the individual, and because such a plurality does not warrant the expression, "let us make."
burtontoker 2 months ago
We have no ground, therefore, for transferring it to the style of the heavenly King. Was it with certain other intelligent beings in existence before man that he took counsel? This supposition cannot be admitted; because the expression "let us make" is an invitation to create, which is an incommunicable attribute of the Eternal One, and because the phrases, "our image, our likeness," ......[cont]...
burtontoker 2 months ago
The plural form of the sentence raises the question, With whom took he counsel on this occasion? Was it with himself, and does he here simply use the plural of majesty? Such was not the usual style of monarchs in the ancient East. Pharaoh says, "I have dreamed a dream" Genesis 41:15. Nebuchadnezzar, "I have dreamed" Daniel 2:3. Darius the Mede, "I make a decree" Daniel 6:26. Cyrus, "The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth" Ezra 1:2. Darius, "I make a decree" Ezra 5:8.
burtontoker 2 months ago
Moreover, in the former mandates of creation his words had regard to the thing itself that was summoned into being; as, "Let there be light;" or to some preexistent object that was physically connected with the new creature; as, "Let the land bring forth grass" But now the language of the fiat of creation ascends to the Creator himself: Let us make man. This intimates that the new being in its higher nature is associated not so much with any part of creation as with the Eternal Uncreated himself
burtontoker 2 months ago
Why did he choose "us?" Here we evidently enter upon a higher scale of being. This is indicated by the counsel or common resolve to create, which is now for the first time introduced into the narrative. When the Creator says, "Let us make man," he calls attention to the work as one of pre-eminent importance. At the same time he sets it before himself as a thing undertaken with deliberate purpose.
burtontoker 2 months ago
Where in the bible does Jesus (who is God, and the only God) say anything about a wife for the Father? Where does scripture mention there is a Goddess? Just curious. Why would God need a wife anyway since he is not a physical being, and is a spirit? Can you tell me one Biblical, or Christian scholar/theologist that holds the belief that God is a physical being?
burtontoker 2 months ago
@burtontoker Will you settle for a verse from the Bible?
•"Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth,” (Gen. 1:26, NASB).
myway43 2 months ago
@myway43 The "us" is not referring to another God, or being, I believe that is a mistake and could be taken out of context to support beliefs of a Goddess. I've found something that answers why God uses the word "us," I certainly don't understand how because he uses "us" that means he is referring to a Goddess, there is no reason to come to that conclusion. There is a more reasonable explanation as to why he chose that word if you think about it.
burtontoker 2 months ago
@burtontoker Mistake? in the Bible? ... just kidding. I simply used the verse out of Genesis to introduce the aspect of God having a physical body. I did not intend to use the verse as a confirmation or refutiation of the Goddess. But that verse in Genesis surely opens serious debate on what the verse actually means. I believe it shows that God has a phtysical form and that we are made in that image, male and female.
myway43 2 months ago
@burtontoker In addition to what myway43 has commented on, I will answer your questions as well. However, keep in mind that I would like all comments here to stay on topic with the content of the video. Any further comments not related to the video should be done through private message, or through one of my more open video forums. Thank you.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@burtontoker In John 4:24 Jesus says:
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
It is sometimes claimed that this verse proves that God is non-corporeal: i.e., a spirit, and nothing but a spirit. However, there is no indefinite article in Greek (the indefinite article in English is "a," as in "a spirit." (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@burtontoker (cont.) The New International Version (NIV) translation of the same verse reads: God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and truth. One non-LDS work noted of this verse: That God is spirit is not meant as a definition of God's being—though this is how the Stoics would have understood it. It is a metaphor of his mode of operation, as life-giving power, and it is no more to be taken literally than I John i. 5, "God is light", or Deut. iv. 24, (cont.)
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@burtontoker (cont.) "Your God is a devouring fire". It is only those who have received this power through Christ who can offer God a real worship. The absence of God's body is thus only present in this scripture if one approaches it with that preconception. There is nothing which requires such a reading, and much that does not.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@burtontoker (cont.) Even the presumption that spirit means being immaterial is not scriptural, and is the product of later thinking: "in Scripture...there is no indication that by spirit and soul were meant any such principles as form or immateriality."
M424Filmcast 2 months ago
@M424Filmcast Unfortunately, Christian theologists/scholars do not teach there is a Goddess. They believe there is one God, no Goddess, and that Jesus is God in flesh. No scholar or theologist will agree there are multiple Gods/Goddesses, that is Mormon doctrine. I'm just saying, go to any major university where theology is taught, they will not support the claim of Goddesses or Gods.
burtontoker 2 months ago
@burtontoker Unfortunately for you, that is not entirely true. There are many mainstream churches that teach God's corporeality. In regards to "No scholar or theologist will agree..." you have skipped over the fact that those I am quoting in this video are not LDS.
M424Filmcast 2 months ago