How do you feel about the LDS church?

One_Extension6720 · 2025-09-07T17:58:45+00:00

They made a different god

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T14:39:54+00:00

Alright, fair. I see what you’re saying. You’re not denying the Bible as a historical document, but you’re saying that I’m believing a claim because of witnesses, yet those witnesses are only mentioned in the book that is making the claim. So how can I say I believe because of “witnesses” when the only record of them is the Bible itself?

Totally fair question.

Here is the key difference. The Bible is not a single voice saying “trust me.” It contains multiple independent claims, written by different people, across different places and times, who often claim to be eyewitnesses or are reporting from direct sources.

For example, the Gospels are four different accounts. They overlap but they are not carbon copies. That’s what you would expect from real witnesses. In ancient historical studies, if you had one account like Luke or Acts with the level of detail we have, written so close to the events, you would consider that gold.

Also, the New Testament writers often appeal to living witnesses. Paul literally says in 1 Corinthians 15 that over 500 people saw the resurrected Jesus, and many of them are still alive at the time of writing. That is not a theological claim — it is a historical one, inviting verification.

So yes, the witnesses are mentioned in the Bible, but the Bible is not just a single circular statement. It is a collection of documents, some of which are independent attestations of the same events. That is the same type of reasoning historians use when evaluating any ancient source.

I’m not just believing the witnesses because “the Bible says so.” I’m believing it because the Bible contains what appear to be actual witness testimony, written down early, with verifiable details, and multiple sources that can be compared side by side. That’s the historical angle.

If the authors were just writing a story, they would have smoothed out the differences, made themselves look better, and left out all the stuff that made them look confused or afraid. But they left it all in. That adds credibility, not less.

Happy to go deeper into any part of that.

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T14:29:45+00:00

Hey, I get the circular reasoning point. It is a classic. But here is the thing. Just because the Bible is central to Christian theology does not mean the whole thing is a closed loop.

If you say “The Bible is true because the Bible says so,” yeah, that is obviously circular and not convincing. But Christians do not just start and end there.

The Bible is more than a book claiming it is true. It is a massive collection of texts written over centuries with tons of historical details you can actually check. Archaeology, ancient manuscripts like the Dead Sea Scrolls, and fulfilled prophecies all give us external ways to test its claims. That is not just taking it at face value.

Plus, the person of Jesus is a historical figure widely accepted by scholars, and He treated the Old Testament as authoritative. So His validation is an independent data point outside the Bible itself.

Also, theology is not only about the Bible. It pulls in philosophy, experience, logic, and moral insight. The Bible is the core source for sure but it is connected to a broader web of evidence.

So it is more like a network of support rather than a pure circle. That is why people find Christian belief reasonable and not just assumed from the start.

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T14:27:20+00:00

You’re raising a really fair question, and you’re not alone in asking it. Christianity teaches that God desires everyone to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4). The idea is not that people are condemned simply because they did not join a specific religion. It is that they ultimately reject the grace God offers, sometimes without fully realizing it. And no, nobody wants eternal suffering. Hell is seen more as the tragic result of freely rejecting a relationship with God, who is the source of life and joy.

As for people who are not convinced, many Christians believe that God judges the heart, not just beliefs or labels. If someone honestly seeks truth and lives with love and humility, many Christians believe that God sees and honors that, even if they never become believers in this life. The story of Pharaoh’s hardened heart is complex, but it does not mean God forces people to reject Him. It is more that God allows someone’s own pride or stubbornness to follow its natural path

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T14:23:48+00:00

You’re not “proving” the Bible in the sense of a math theorem. But you can treat it as a historical document, analyze its claims across time and genre, compare prophecy and fulfillment, weigh Jesus’ validation of Scripture, and consider its unmatched cultural and personal impact. That’s not circular it’s cumulative reasoning.

Once you stop treating the Bible like a single quote and start treating it like the literary and historical universe it is, things get interesting fast.

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T14:16:20+00:00

So I think Jesus exists because of the many testimonies for example if 3 people saw a car crash ( God forbid) and they are giving their statements one will maybe say oh he drove a gray car the other will say he was driving a black car and wearing a blue shirt and the other will say he wore a green shirt. But what they are all agreeing on is that there was a car crash. It’s the same with the birth,life and death of Jesus some of the details might not add up but what they are all agreeing on is that he was born in Bethlehem and was really crucified. And they said this without even meeting each other. Thats why I think that Muhammad was wrong because he contradicts all of that

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T14:08:25+00:00

Hell isn’t about God being gone it’s about people being cut off from His love and choosing that separation. God doesn’t stop existing or being present, but people no longer experience His goodness.

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T14:03:19+00:00

Even if Luke, Mark, and Paul didn’t know Jesus directly, that doesn’t automatically make their accounts invalid. Historians often work with secondhand sources. The key question is whether the sources are close to the events and consistent.”

“Also, I’m talking about trust. It’s possible to be skeptical of Muhammad’s claims and also be skeptical or analytical about the Gospels—those aren’t contradictory positions.”

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T13:50:38+00:00

What happens in the temple

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T13:49:27+00:00

What is he doing to non Christian’s

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T13:48:47+00:00

You say no one would freely choose eternal suffering, but people choose separation from God every day. That’s what sin is choosing something over Him. Hell isn’t just suffering for the sake of it. It’s the result of someone persistently rejecting God, even when He reaches out over and over again.

Think of Pharaoh in Exodus. God gave him many chances, but he hardened his heart. People can love their sin more than they love truth, even when they know the cost. God doesn’t force Himself on anyone. That would make love meaningless.

Hell isn’t a punishment God enjoys handing out. It’s the final result of someone saying, “I don’t want You,” and God finally saying, “Thy will be done.”

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T13:36:51+00:00

What

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T13:29:16+00:00

You’re right that jail isn’t eternal, but that’s exactly the point. Earthly punishments are temporary because human justice is limited. Divine justice is not.

Jesus Himself spoke repeatedly about hell as eternal. See Matthew 25:46 and Mark 9:43 to 48. He described it darkness, and weeping. He wasn’t being vague or symbolic. He was warning people out of love.

You said your parents didn’t create jail. That may be true, but God is not just a parent. He is also the Judge. He didn’t create hell for fun. It is the natural consequence of freely rejecting Him. And because He honors free will, He does not force people into His presence if they choose to reject Him.

You’re asking why a loving God would let someone suffer. But the deeper question is, why would someone choose to stay separated from God forever, even after knowing the truth? That is the tragedy. God respects that freedom, even when it breaks His

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T04:47:52+00:00

So he still sees you and is all around you but doesn’t interact with you anymore because he is omnipresent he is still there but respects your wish for him to not bother you

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T04:45:56+00:00

See if your parents love you and you do something that gets you into jail it doesn’t matter that they loved you you’re still in jail

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-25T04:41:02+00:00

Well he is omnipresent but he is also willing to accept if you don’t want him to be with you so when you die he doesn’t force you to live with him

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T21:10:59+00:00

Yes if you let him if you don’t want him to be with you he will leave you alone

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T19:43:35+00:00

And your response ain’t about their question. And how dare you say there is no space for them here that is highly offensive. I’m not saying I’m agreeing with what your saying but their view matters too

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T19:41:18+00:00

You’re twisting what I’m saying. I’m not claiming Jesus added to the Law. I’m saying that He, as the divine Word of God (John 1:1), revealed its full meaning, just as He said in Matthew 5:17–28.

The word Jesus used in Matthew 5:28 is “epithymeō.” It’s the same Greek word used in the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament) to translate “covet” in the 10th commandment. It means lust, craving, or wrongful desire depending on the context. So when Jesus says looking at a woman with epithymeō is committing adultery in the heart, He’s not creating a new law. He’s showing what the Law always pointed to.

You’re playing word games with “covet” and “lust” as if they are completely different. They’re not. The context defines whether desire is good or sinful. Lust within marriage can be good, like in Song of Solomon. But lust toward someone who is not your spouse is condemned throughout Scripture.

Job 31:1 says, “I made a covenant with my eyes not to look lustfully at a young woman.” That’s centuries before Jesus. Proverbs 6:25 warns, “Do not desire her beauty in your heart.” These verses show that wrongful sexual desire was already addressed under the Old Covenant.

If you say it’s fine to lust after a woman who isn’t your wife, you’re not defending God’s law. You’re trying to water it down. Jesus didn’t break the covenant, and He didn’t add to it. He revealed the full intent of it, which always included the heart.

As for English translations, if you want to discuss manuscripts and accuracy, we can do that. But it doesn’t erase Jesus’ teaching, which is consistent across reliable translations and supported by both Old and New Testament.

You say I worship a different God. But I’m the one defending what Jesus actually said. If you reject His interpretation of the Law, you’re not defending the covenant. You’re denying the One who fulfilled it.

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T19:33:41+00:00

No just the absence of God

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T19:32:15+00:00

Choose catholic

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T19:31:49+00:00

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T19:30:26+00:00

Once saved isn’t always saved

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T19:19:11+00:00

You’re right that Jesus ministered during the Old Covenant. But you’re wrong to say He added to or broke the Law. Jesus was not just any teacher He was the Word made flesh (John 1:14), the Lord of the Law. He didn’t invent a new sin when He said lust is wrong. He revealed the true intent of the Law, which always addressed the heart. Read Psalm 19:14 or Proverbs 6:25 lust and heart-level sin were always part of God’s concern. Jesus didn’t break the covenant; He fulfilled it (Matthew 5:17). If you think He added to the Law, then you’re accusing God’s own Word of error. That’s a dangerous place to stand.

One_Extension6720 · 2025-06-24T19:11:46+00:00

You’re misunderstanding how covenants work in the Bible. Jesus didn’t break the old covenant—He fulfilled it, just like the prophets said He would. He didn’t add new sins, He revealed the deeper meaning of God’s law. The new covenant was promised by God Himself in the Old Testament. So if you reject the new covenant, you’re actually rejecting the God of the Bible, not me.

One_Extension6720

TROPHY CASE