Turn it off

[_Tobin]

I personally know there is a God. So, if someone wants to come in and tell me that there is no God, they are simply wrong as far as I'm concerned. And I believe in Mormonism because God tells me it is true. Now what is necessarily true about it is something I'm fully up to discuss. However, I'm not going to put up with critics that are going to attack me and what I believe though. What I've experienced clearly tells me there is truth here. If they want to do that, I'm perfectly happy to ignore them in person or otherwise.

In what way does God tell you Mormonism is true?

I've seen and God has spoken to me. How about you?

[_Albion]

Not that the Bible seems to matter much to Tobin but: "No one has EVER seen God...." NIV 1 John 4:12 Many in the scriptures have seen manifestations of God but none have seen God in all his glory and light. Sinful man could not survive a nano second in the full presence of God and even to be close to his glory changes the human countenance as witnessed by the appearance of Moses when he came down from the mountain. The adversary on the other hand can take on the appearance of light according to scripture.

[_ldsfaqs]

Not that the Bible seems to matter much to Tobin but:

Not that the whole truth and the whole Bible actually matters much to Albion.... but

"No one has EVER seen God...." NIV 1 John 4:12 Many in the scriptures have seen manifestations of God but none have seen God in all his glory and light. Sinful man could not survive a nano second in the full presence of God and even to be close to his glory changes the human countenance as witnessed by the appearance of Moses when he came down from the mountain. The adversary on the other hand can take on the appearance of light according to scripture.

Criticism

Critics claim that the Bible teaches that God cannot be seen by mortals, and so claims by Joseph Smith and others to have seen God the Father or Jesus Christ must be false.
See also: Citations to the critical sources for these claims

Summary conclusion

Numerous Biblical verses attest that God has been seen by select humans. John 1:18, which the critics use to argue otherwise, has been interpreted differently by early Christians to avoid the self-contradiction which the critics' reading creates for the Bible.
If God can say "I change not," (Malachi 3:6) and he has appeared to mortals in the past, as the Bible bears record, why would he change his tactics and refuse to appear to modern prophets?

Supporting Data

See also FAIR wiki article charging that D&C 84 claims that the priesthood is necessary for any vision of God (click here).

The most commonly used Biblical citation invoked by the critics is probably John 1:18, which reads “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”

Early Christian author Irenaeus wrote in A.D. 180 that this scripture should be read “For "no man," he says, "hath seen God at any time," unless "the only-begotten Son of God, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared [Him]."[1]

Interestingly, Joseph Smith's revision of the Bible agrees with Irenaeus' reading:
No man hath seen God at any time except he hath borne record of the Son . . .(italics represent changes in JST)

Irenaeus' "unless" (or Joseph's "except") makes all the difference. Irenaeus knew that righteous men had seen God in the past:

Acts 7:55-56
Genesis 32:30
Genesis 17:1
Genesis 18:1
Acts 7:2
Exodus 3:6
Exodus 19:11
Exodus 33:11
Numbers 12:7-8
1 Kings 9:2
1 Kings 11:9
Isaiah 6:1,5
Exodus 24:10-11
Deuteronomy 34:10
Deuteronomy 5:4
Judges 13:22
Genesis 3:
Hebrews 11:27
Job 42:5
Job 33:26
Job 19:26
Ezekiel 1:1
Ezekiel 8:1-4
Joshua 5:12-15
Revelation 22:4)

Furthermore, by adopting this approach, Irenaeus' interpretation of John 1:18 harmonized with the rest of the Bible and the qualifications which the Bible provides for those who may see God.

The requirements are:
Must be "of God" “Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.” (John 6:46.) Some critics will argue that only Jesus "is of God", but that position is unscriptural. Moses too was "of God"(Deuteronomy 33:1), as well as Samuel (1 Samuel 9:10), Shemaiah (1 Kings 12:22), and Elijah (1 Kings 17:24).

Must have "peace and holiness" within you "Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which, no man shall see the Lord" (Hebrews 12:14.)

Must be pure in heart "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God" (Matthew 5:8.)
As the numerous Biblical references demonstrate, the idea of seeing God is hardly foreign to Hebrew or early Christian thought. There are also non-scriptural examples: Philo the Jew taught that the name Israel was compounded of 3 words “ish” “rah” “El”, which means “man seeing God;” this view is also found in the apocryphal Prayer of Joseph. [2] And, an early Christian document called the Clementine Homilies portrays the apostle Peter as agreeing with Irenaeus' view:
For I maintain that the eyes of mortals cannot see the incorporeal form of the Father or Son, because it is illumined by exceeding great light. . . . For he who sees God cannot live. For the excess of light dissolves the flesh of him who sees; unless by the secret power of God the flesh be changed into the nature of light, so that it can see light.[3]

Joseph Smith revealed the same essential truth (DC 67:11, DC 84:22).
It is the critics' view of John 1:18 that is novel and at odds with the earliest Christian understanding of the scripture, not Joseph Smith's.

Endnotes

[note] Irenaeus, "Against Heresies," in Chapter 6 Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff (Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886)1:427. ANF ToC off-site This volume
[note] Charles A. Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents and Early Evidence (Leiden; New York; Köln: Brill, 1998), 139. off-site
[note] Apostle Peter (attributed), "Clementine Homilies," in 17:16 Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff (Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886)8:322–323. ANF ToC off-site This volume

[_Tobin]

Exodus 24:9-11KJV

9 Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel:
10 And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.
11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

It would seem the Bible does not agree with Albion. He should find another book more to his liking.

[_Albion]

A great passage of scripture considered by many to be an anthropomorphic way of describing the experience of favored people. Nowhere do they describe the appearance of God but only what was under his "feet". Later translations from the Greek render "they say the God of Israel" as "they saw the place where God stood". In other scriptures Isaiah who also said he "saw" God describes only those things around what he saw. In Deuteronomy Moses talks of the incident and says this in support of the idea that they saw a representation of God only: "You came near and stood at the foot of the mountain while it blazed with fire to the very heavens with black clouds and deep darkness. The the Lord spoke to you out of the fire. You heard the sound of words BUT SAW NO FORM: there was only a voice." NIV Deut. 12:11-12

In both his Gospel and in his epistle John declared firmly and unmistakably "No one has seen God." Many have seen representations of God...Moses did in the form of a burning bush...but none has gazed upon God in all his glory and nor could they. Even Moses standing close to a glorious representation of God, washed in his light and majesty, was transformed in his countenance such that people even saw it when he came down from the mountain. He was so changed in appearance that he wore a veil to cover it.

[_Tobin]

A great passage of scripture considered by many to be an anthropomorphic way of describing the experience of favored people. Nowhere do they describe the appearance of God but only what was under his "feet". Later translations from the Greek render "they say the God of Israel" as "they saw the place where God stood". In other scriptures Isaiah who also said he "saw" God describes only those things around what he saw. In Deuteronomy Moses talks of the incident and says this in support of the idea that they saw a representation of God only: "You came near and stood at the foot of the mountain while it blazed with fire to the very heavens with black clouds and deep darkness. The the Lord spoke to you out of the fire. You heard the sound of words BUT SAW NO FORM: there was only a voice." NIV Deut. 12:11-12

In both his Gospel and in his epistle John declared firmly and unmistakably "No one has seen God." Many have seen representations of God...Moses did in the form of a burning bush...but none has gazed upon God in all his glory and nor could they. Even Moses standing close to a glorious representation of God, washed in his light and majesty, was transformed in his countenance such that people even saw it when he came down from the mountain. He was so changed in appearance that he wore a veil to cover it.

So basically you don't believe those and other verses that say people have seen God. Fascinating. So you pit one scripture against another for the sake of preserving your interpretation. I'm continually amazed by you pseudo-Christians that claim to believe in the Bible, but as soon as something contradicts what you believe - you stop believing what it says in black and white. Ah well, you can keep your unseeable, unhearable God that not one of you have seen in 2,000 years. It's a fiction - pure and simple. One day you will see and speak with the real God and I'd love to see you tell him how that isn't possible.

[_Droopy]

I think it's important that we look within when determining who or who not to listen to. If Baxooka or anyone else provides valuable insights then naturally he should be listened to.

The chance of Bazooka providing valuable insights is about the same as of Hugh Hefner joining the Christian Coalition.

[_Albion]

You posted a passage as evidence for your claim whereas more study reveals quite clearly a wider explanation of the event. I am sorry if that knocks a hole in the passage you quoted but I am not responsible for the continuity of scripture. As I have expressed many have seen expressions, for want of a better term, for God but as John states emphatically with the hindsight of scripture, no man has ever seen God. All mankind is tainted by sin and sin cannot live in the presence of a holy God. Just as light destroys darkness so sinful man cannot abide the full and glorious presence of Almighty God.

[_Tobin]

You posted a passage as evidence for your claim whereas more study reveals quite clearly a wider explanation of the event. I am sorry if that knocks a hole in the passage you quoted but I am not responsible for the continuity of scripture. As I have expressed many have seen expressions, for want of a better term, for God but as John states emphatically with the hindsight of scripture, no man has ever seen God. All mankind is tainted by sin and sin cannot live in the presence of a holy God. Just as light destroys darkness so sinful man cannot abide the full and glorious presence of Almighty God.

Not really. The passage is very clear as to what it says. What I find interesting is how you scurry about to dismiss it. I find that quite funny actually.

[_Albion]

As an additional point, Tobin, it is you who is pitting one scripture against another. You want to take your Exodus quote as a stand alone proof text despite the clarification of it given in Deuteronomy and the emphatic statements of John. I try to read scripture as a whole not basing my understanding on a single verse or passage as a proof text to make it support the position I have already arrived at. I think the shallowness of your argument is highlighted by the personal nature of your response. Attacking the messenger is no response to the message.