Very true

"Witness to Mormons in Love"

you ought to buy william lane craig's book(s), but if you don't like him, then buy sean mcdowells' book(s), or Greg Koukl, Lee Strobel, eric hernandez', but maybe you would prefer frank tureks book(s) or even mike liconah's, or gary habermas', or best yet buy J.P. Moreland's books, god answered his prayers even if it was for a pool table, one thing is for sure though, you won't buy a jesus book cos he didn't have the foresight to write ANYTHING. he employed "ghost" writers.

I wouldn't call it true because there are lots of problems with it. That's why Orthodox theology rejects divine simplicity.

@@occultislux maybe certain forms of divine simplicity but as Orthodox Patristic scholar John Behr argues even Irenaeus held to it

​@@occultislux Problems like?

@dubbelkastrull The Catholic view of divine simplicity relies too much on philosophical ideas from ancient Greek philosophy, particularly from thinkers like Aristotle. In Catholic doctrine, God's attributes (such as His love, justice, and power) are seen as identical to His essence and to each other. This means God's love is the same as His justice, and His justice is the same as His power. I would argue that this makes it difficult to distinguish between God's different attributes and can lead to confusion about God's nature. For example, it becomes hard to understand how God's love and justice can be expressed in different ways. If God is completely simple and unchanging in the way the Catholic doctrine suggests, it raises questions about how God can interact with a changing world. This view makes it difficult to explain how God can be involved in history, respond to prayers, or have a dynamic relationship with people. I believe that the Catholic doctrine of divine simplicity is not fully supported by the Bible. The Bible presents God in more relational and interactive terms, which seems at odds with the idea of God being absolutely simple and unchanging in the philosophical sense. From the Orthodox perspective, while God is certainly one and without parts, He is also understood to have different energies (or activities) that allow Him to interact with the world. These energies are distinct from His essence but still fully divine. This view maintains a balance between God's transcendence (being above and beyond creation) and His immanence (being present and active within creation). Look into essence-energies distinctions.

@@occultislux "In Catholic doctrine, God's attributes (such as His love, justice, and power) are seen as identical to His essence and to each other." That's far more than just the Catholic doctrine, plenty of protestants subscribe to that too. You can even find that line of thinking in Isaac of Nineveh. Plus there's the fact that 1 John 4:8 sayd God is love. "For example, it becomes hard to understand how God's love and justice can be expressed in different ways." Thomists talk about it in an analogous sense because anytime we talk about the divine attributes it's ever going to be the same as when we talk about justice in a human sense. There's also the Scotist version as well where God is infinite in each attribute which ultimately causes them all to become equal because different infinities end up becoming the same so divine simplicity isn't violated. "If God is completely simple and unchanging in the way the Catholic doctrine suggests, it raises questions about how God can interact with a changing world." Malachi 3:6 "For I the Lord do not change." "Look into essence-energies distinctions." I have and I don't buy it. I'm not saying there isn't maybe some merit but the way it's discussed today seems like some recent Neo-Palamite fixation and hardly shows up (if at all) in Orthodox thinkers like Bulgakov and my favorite Orthodox thinker alive today John Behr.

The point is not that they are actively sinning, but that they are born with a sinful nature. That is standard Christian teaching.

Stephen, can you explain a bit more? Are you asking if Christians have alternative explanations for the authorship of the Book of Mormon?