What would LDS apologetics do without chat GPT?

You have a counter-part amongst the Roman Catholic online agitators: a guy named Bishop Jaxi (he’s not a bishop). You both post absurd stuff just for clicks and giggles. Ignorance is your shield, as well as your sword. Neither of you do your homework. You opine on things about which you know nothing, and seem to enjoy displaying ignorance. You both address important theological and historical questions with the seriousness of the kids trading Pokemon cards on the street corner. Maybe it is the way of the future? Can’t imagine such a dystopia. Be that as it may, the comments about Smith are directly relevant. First, I do not take him seriously, and I don’t know how anyone who has read his history, even from LDS authors, could. I stand firmly behind my statement: if Smith had been given only two more years there would be no Mormonism today. He was evolving and changing so fast, without any foundation or connection to logic and reality, that no one could have made heads or tails out of his teachings in another two years. His murder allowed Mormonism to survive, move to Utah, morph, and spread. The most important point is that no one who is a polytheist has a seat at the table to even discuss the issues of predestination, election, even time. Unless you are a neo-Mormon, Ostlerite, or some other such BYU-originated spin off, your god is temporal. Not the creator of all things, but a mere organizer of a portion of the “universes,” however you end up interpreting that. You have no place in the historic (let alone Biblical) discussion of God, time, predestination, election, grace—none of it. The Mormon god is utterly insufficient to even speak to the topic. Only the eternal, unchanging, Triune God of the Christian Scriptures is the sufficient ontological basis for creation, time, and the interaction between the Creator’s eternal decree and the events in time. Your god came out of a process of development and exaltation. The Christian God is the ground of all things, all meaning, and hence every process as well. He is above and beyond, yours is beneath and below. Hence, Mormonism has nothing to say to the Bible’s discussion of this high truth. All you can do is mock and deride, but you have nothing to add since you have no ground upon which to stand. Which probably explains why folks like you don’t even bother to read and study—why? Just a waste of time. Instead, you are left with the reality that your views on this came out of Smith’s detestation of Presbyterianism due to what happened at Alvin’s funeral in November of 1823. That’s a real solid basis! Now, I would try to engage the question you asked, as I tried with the Ward Radio chaps, but we have no common ground. I go to Scripture, you have your own which contradict and over-ride the historical Scriptures Jesus taught from and verified. So I can take you to key texts where human decisions and God’s sovereign decree flow hand-in-hand, but you won’t hear Genesis 50 or Isaiah 10 or Acts 4. Your temple ceremonies mock ministers who teach such things as hirelings of Satan, so…why waste the keystrokes?

What makes anyone think that they should get mercy and not hell?

"God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established." Westminster Confession 3.1

Dispensationalism is awful 🤦‍♂️

Love this

Point proven

The key to LDS apologetics: Redefine everything. Ad hom your opponents. Then act like you did something cool. Lets get back to good charitable loving discussions.

Look, it's not rocket science. If someone sacrifices an animal to a demon during the time he's allegedly receiving divine revelation, chances are he's not from God.

What would it take then? Lol

Mormons sure are showing some bad "fruits" in these comments.

No he should read the entire BOM.. Which is also why we don't take seriously those who debate Calvinism yet have never read a published work on the topic. Glad yall agree that its important to do!

Luke evidently agrees: reading relevant books *is* important when credibly preparing for a debate.

Atonement is limited. Jesus says in John 10:11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life FOR THE SHEEP. He continues and now hes speaking to the Jews at the temple John 10:25-26 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe BECAUSE you are NOT among MY SHEEP." Why don't they believe? They aren't of his sheep that he dies for. He continues.. John 10:27-28 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give THEM eternal life, and THEY will never perish, and no one will snatch THEM out of my hand. He only gives his sheep eternal life. Yes atonement is limited. Atonement is definite. This is Gods word.

It’s amazing how much of Mormon apologetics consists in hiding their core beliefs from the public.

Both the old and new testament know nothing of this...