Posted on 01/08/2008 4:09:13 PM PST by tantiboh
Mitt Romney is facing an unexpected challenge in Iowa from rival Mike Huckabee, who has enjoyed a groundswell of support from religious voters, particularly evangelical Christians wary of the clean-cut former Massachusetts governor because of his Mormon religion.
The common worry among evangelicals is that if Romney were to capture the White House, his presidency would give legitimacy to a religion they believe is a cult. Since the LDS church places heavy emphasis on proselytizing -- there are 53,000 LDS missionaries worldwide -- many mainstream Christians are afraid that Mormon recruiting efforts would increase and that LDS membership rolls would swell.
...
THE ONLY PROBLEM with those fears is that they don't add up. Evangelicals may be surprised to learn that the growth of church membership in Massachusetts slowed substantially during Romney's tenure as governor. In fact, one could make the absurdly simplistic argument that Romney was bad for Mormonism.
...
ONE WAY TO GAUGE what might happen under a President Romney would be to look at what happened during the period of the 2002 Olympic Winter Games. Held in Salt Lake City, they were dubbed the "Mormon Olympics."
...
Despite all the increased attention, worldwide the Church grew only slightly, and in fact in the year leading up to the games the total number of congregations fell. Overall, from 2000 to 2004, there was a 10.9 percent increase in memberships and a 3.6 percent increase in congregations.
...
The LDS church is likely to continue its current modest-but-impressive growth whether or not Romney wins the White House. Perhaps the only real worry for evangelicals is that, if elected, the former Massachusetts governor will demonstrate to Americans that Mormons don't have horns.
Carrie Sheffield, a member of the LDS Church, is a writer living in Washington, D.C.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?The early Christians baptized for the Dead, why did they stop?
17 And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.Humm Lurkers, you decide, who knows Jesus better?
18 And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine.
17 And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.So they wanted to "Destroy" him because of his teachings, They paid Judas to betray him to the Romans, they held a court at night (which was illegal) they had paid witnesses (which was illegal) they asked him to commit a crime by asking him if he was the son of God. When he agreed, they unanimously convicted him (which should have set him free because a unanimous conviction was invalid) and then they taunted him (which was illegal) in the morning, they took him before Pilate and told Pilate he was guilty of Sedition (conspiring to over throw Rome) Pilate examined him and could not find a good reason to punish him. Pilate found a way to release him and the Jews released Barabas instead. (side note, Bar meaning son of, Abus meaning God, so the people were actually chanting release the son to God when chanting for the release of Brabus. I always think that is cool)) so My dramatazation is actually pretty spot on.
18 And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine.
It’s good logic, DU. It doesn’t penetrate the closed-minded skull, though.
Isn’t it amazing how quickly we tend to shut down our ability to reason rationally when it comes to matters of faith? Particularly when the belief system in which we’re invested doesn’t make sense?
It’s one thing I appreciate greatly about Mormonism. We actually encourage our people to think for themselves and find their own answers. We do not cultivate “blind faith.” There is no such thing as a “mystery” in the LDS Church - as long as you have the patience to seek out the answer. Mainstream Christianity, on the other hand, has had to fill in the gaps in the truth that it has with man-made philosophy, and the two don’t always mesh neatly. As a result, its adherents are often asked to simply take it on faith, or to believe the assurances of those “wiser” than they, etc. What a dismal way to embrace religion. No wonder Christianity in general is mocked by the atheist and agnostic.
We’ve moved far, far away from the original topic of the thread, of course; but this point has been bouncing about in my mind of late.
2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.David is going to be at the throne of God worshipping the Lamb of God with the rest of us, dancing and singing and having a glorious time
For me it would have been the last thing I think I would ever consider to do!
I heard some of the taboo being spread by spiritually deaf and dumb!
But I had a one on one with the Holy Spirit before I ever met a missionaries or been in the Church or knew what the Book of Mormon was!
I had a copy of the Book and was ready to toss it, but I was prompted to read a mark passage and pray and the rest is history!
My conversion was by the power of the Holy Ghost.
After that the more I investigated, read, studied and ponder I was so excited that all the things I was thinking and looking for I had found at last.
I have been in the Lord’s arms ever since!
I have known some who came to the Church for other reasons and when more mature they did were able to receive the conversion!
Everyone is at a different point on their journey home!
We are a work in progress be it at the mainstream level or onto the grounds of the Lord’s Kingdom!
Sharing facilities is not an issue. I can enter their buildings and worship with Catholics, baptists, Presbyterians, etc. I am personna nongrata in a temple. Very useful control tool for the mormon leadership to keep mormons at large in line and under control.
C) Non Mormons are and have been welcome in our chapels and even recently held a meeting in our tabernacle in Salt Lake.
But not the temple – big difference.
Uniformly has a specific meaning and if there is even one Non Mormon that accepts Mormons as Christian, you are being inaccurate, I am being kind.
Uniformly, within the context I presented, indicates that as a teaching of the denomination. One can find lots of uneducated Christians who have uncritically accepted Mormonism propaganda.
As for Joseph smith rejecting Christianity, just what are you smoking?
Pleading ignorance of your own history is not becoming of you.
This shows ho little you have read of the links I have provided you, Hippolytus was the Voice of the Church as he Condemned Noetus for the heresy of saying that God and Christ shared the same substance. The Doctrine is day and night and you are in the dark because you did not read what I linked to you to read. Here, try it one more time.
You don’t have the correct setting, not suprising. Noetus was espousing the doctrine of modalism (to distill the history), Hippolytus defended Trinitarian doctrine. Hippolytus defense echoed that of Tertullian (216 A.D), Ignatius of Antioch (110 A.D) and the teaching of the Apostle John (John 1:1). You might ask yourself, who Is Hippolytus, he was the foremost theologian of his day. He wrote the Definitive work for his day on refuting heresies for the Church.
So you are championed by a Trinitarian apologist.
Mormon Doctrine was published 16 years before Bruce R McConkie was ordained an apostle, he learned much in that time, that said it's not cannon of the church, consider it a really good concordenance on Mormonism, for that is what it was supposed to be, but definitive? no.
Mormon Doctrine was republished with revisions while he was an apostle (most recent edition is 1991). At the time of the first edition, McConkie was a member of the 70, one step away from apostleship (which MD did not appear to affect).
A question, do you use any concodenances, or the internet while studying the Bible? Are they definitive for you, or merely study helps?
Both. Within my evangelical community I accept most. However, I am not a Catholic, therefore I don’t accept all their material as definitive for me, same for Baptist, Methodist, etc. There is only one Mormonism.
The Godhead is made up of three personages:
Polytheism
(1) God the father representing the end goal of our sojourn in life, as a perfected, being with an eternal body.
I represented this accurately. This god had to be procreated as some time prior by other gods
(2) Jesus as a spirit at the beginning of time becoming a mortal at the meridian of time, and being a perfected being with an eternal body by the end of time represents our journey through life.
I was correct here too. Jesus cannot become god until he is perfected, which you indicate above has not happened yet (by the end of time).
(3) The Holy Ghost is a spirit for the whole of time representing where we started in the preexistance.
You choose your words correctly, since by mormon definition the Holy Spirit (interchangeable within Christianity as the Holy Ghost) is defined as a ‘divine substance, fluid or essence’. Again, though by mormon definition, the holy ghost is a spirit child it cannot be a god since it hasn’t been perfected or have a body of flesh and blood.
All are part of the Godhead, all can be called God, collectively or singly, To receive an answer from one is to receive an answer from all for they are so close that they think and act and have the same power. They are one. They are members of the Godhead.
Tritheism (subset of poly theism). I do not care if this squares with your perception of our doctrine, for it is our doctrine, not yours.
It is exactly as I represented it, you only confirmed it. :)
Actually, I have graduated form a four year seminary (LDS)
High sounding, but deceptive. Your ‘seminary’ training, if compatible with other mormons, consisted of a theology classes taken during your high school years (hence 4 year). My equivalent experience – 30+ years.
attended many Protestant Churches with friends growing up,
Attending does not equal study or knowing
While on a two year mission to Taiwan I graduated from a Buddhist monastery run by the translator fro the living Buddha in Taiwan, and I read at 1500 WPM with measured 92% comprehension rate, I love to study religions. You?
That might have something to do with the price of tea in china, but it doesn’t indicate you’ve know Christian doctrine. I have looked at the teachings of Mormonism over the past 20 years, have a copy of the BOM that I’ve read on my book shelf and have engaged in discussions like this for over 30 years.
I know, and Momrons believe more reasons than you do for that statement, but I'll just agree. However, you must admit this does set a prescident for vicarious works, I mean there is really nothing more central to the Gospel than Jesus' Sacrifice, right?
Reread the sentence, emphasis on the last half vicarious because He was the only one who could do it.
were you asking for me to list first Corenthians 15:29? 29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? The early Christians baptized for the Dead, why did they stop?
You are predictable. While there are 4 possible interpretations of the passage (none support mormon theology) Paul was using the logical argument form known as argumentum ad hominem—an argument based upon what men were doing at that time and with which the readers would be familiar. The Corinthians were familiar with people who practiced an immersion for the benefit of the dead. He used the third person pronoun “they” as opposed to “you” or “we.” New Testament baptism would have been referred to in the first or second person. This tactic of referring to what outsiders were doing (without implying endorsement) to make a valid spiritual point was used by Paul on other occasions (e.g., Acts 17:28; Titus 1:12).
Mormons believe in Grace and works, lets not leave out the grace...
Under mormon theology, I covered that with the etc.
Do you realize the bible speaks of God's physical body at in many palaces?
Many palaces??!!?? So you must also believe that god has feathers (Ruth 2:12), or a rock structure (Ps 18:2). In a word, no. The Bible is clear that God is a spirit (John 4:24) and a spirit does not have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39). Hosea 11:9 and Numbers 23:19 clearly state that God is not a man, and therefore cannot have a body of flesh and bones. The apostle Paul rebuked those who would liken the image "of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man." (Romans 1:22-23). Mormon problems circulate around misapplication of anthropomorphism to these common mormon proof texts of ‘god’. This was not the original teaching of Mormonism. In the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants Joseph Smith said the Father was a personage of spirit, as contrasted with the Son who is a personage of tabernacle (a physical body):
...We shall, in this lecture speak of the Godhead: we mean the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There are two personages...They are the Father and the Son: The Father being a personage of spirit, glory and power: possessing all perfection and fulness: the Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle...And he being the only begotten of the Father...possessing the same mind with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit... (1835 D&C, Lecture Fifth of Faith, 5:1-2, pp. 52-53, First edition.) There are no lds scriptures from 1830 to 1842 that contradict this.
Jesus as part of the Godhead was part of the design from the beginning, before any of the rest was put together. he is part of the Pattern, by your logic Adam breaks the pattern because he was not born of woman like everyone else. The pattern is God's pattern he can fashion it anyway he wants and there is nothing you or I can do about it. (except possibly understand it.)
No, Adam conforms to the pattern. Joseph Smith said "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens...I say, if you were to see him to-day, you would see him like a man in form -- like yourselves, in all the person, image, and very form as a man....it is necessary that we should understand the character and being of God, and how he came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity, I will refute that idea, and will take away and do away the veil, so that you may see....and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth the same as Jesus Christ himself did." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 3). So Adam only broke the pattern in that he returned to earth again, as he could not bring one of his wives with him unless he was exalted.
Yes, I have an uncle that speaks greek, he speaks 11 languages, he agrees with my interpretation too BTW.
He stands contrary to most other true greek scholars, not just speakers of questionable ability.
There are many places throughout the Bible that can be used to support my claim a summary dismissal like you are now making is common, but hey the gospel is about Change, stay stagnant if you want to.
There is no changing in my God.
So, believe whatever you want, I'll tell you what I believe, you can believe it or not. However, when anyone takes it upon themselves to tell someone else what they belive, or tell others what they believe, or judge them in abeyance of your own commands from Jesus, you can expect a response from the adherents of this other faith and most responses will not be as polite and fact filled as mine has been.
Been there, done that, got asbestos underware. Your problem is that you are claiming that my Christian faith is invalid by invoking your prophets. I have presented mormon doctrine that you have confirmed although ‘fact filled’ has been selective.
Actually, under the Law of the time even healing the sick on the sabbath was a crime.
When confronted by the proper application of the law, they (the teachers of the law) backed down and did not prohibit His action.
one of us is not really familiar with Jesus' ministry, I wonder which it is you say Jesus was either an unremarkable teacher who made no waves, or a controversial figure who had to be killed or he would upset the balance of power.
Misinterpret my statement again. That Jesus challenged the status quo is not deniable. What is also undeniable is that he challenged the traditions overlaid on the law, not the actual law itself. This resulted in false righteousness.
As I am factually proving my points here and you like the Sanhedrin are refusing to see the logic behind my statements (although others can) Wow really good case in point you are putting up here.
Your statements to date are not logical, but founded upon sand as your following statement show.
Like the Trinity that was added to the Biblical teaching of the Godhead that we believe? (The word Godhead is in the KJV Bible, the trinity is not.)
The fact that theotes is used here ("deity") versus theiotes ("divinity") as essence differs from quality or attribute. If mormon interpretation was valid, theiotes would have been used. The teaching of the Trinitarian nature of God was not in dispute until various cults tried to move in and corrupt it. Here in 2008 there is another corrupter who’s been working since the 1830’s.
You mean like contradicting the Made up Trinity thingy?
Only when applying flawed, non-contextral interpretation. But here are a few that I’m thinking of:
Alma 34:36 And this I know, because the Lord hath said he dwelleth not in unholy temples, but in the hearts of the righteous doth he dwell; yea, and he has also said that the righteous shall sit down in his kingdom, to go no more out; but their garments should be made white through the blood of the Lamb.
CONTRADICTS D&C 130:3, "The appearing of the Father and the Son, in that verse, is a personal appearance; and the idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man’s heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false."
Elephants, honey bees, cimitars, steel, horses, silk, and other items that either did not exist at the time or location.
There is only one God - Mosiah 15:1,5; Alma 11:28; 2 Nephi 31:21
Mormonism teaches there are many gods - Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 5
Polygamy condemned - Jacob 1:15; 2:23,24,27,31;3:5; Mosiah 11:2,4; Ether 10:5,7
Polygamy was taught and practiced - Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, p. 266 and D&C Section 132.
Does or doesnot the Lord dwell within the heart. Alma 34:36 says that "the Lord" dwells in the hearts of the righteous.
D&C 130:3 says that the "idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man's heart" is false. (D&C 130:22 says that it is the Holy Ghost that "dwell[s] in us")
Who created the earth? PoGP Moses 2 says "I, God [created everything]..." (see also BoM 2 Nephi 2:14, Jacob 4:9, Alma 18:26-32).
PoGP Abraham 4 says "they (the Gods) [created everything]".
What was the name of the angel who appeared to Joseph Smith in 1823 and later delivered to him the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated? Most Mormons believe his name was "Moroni," as reported in modern editions of the PoGP (JS-History 1:33).
However, the earliest reports by Joseph Smith and others gave his name as "Nephi" (a completely different character in the BoM who supposedly lived a thousand years before Moroni), including the 1851 edition of the PoGP (mormon standard work), the 1853 biography of Smith by his mother (Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith p 79), and two early Mormon periodicals The Millennial Star 3:53, 71, and Times and Seasons 3:749, 753 (the latter personally edited by Smith himself).
These are just a few
The Urim and Thummim were biblically also used for interpetaion, and revelation.
Only in association with the ephod within the temple by the high priest. Never in the context applied by mormon history.
As for the Seer stone, it was a preparatory stone and not a "Common rock" at all Think of it as a Urim and Thummim with training wheels.
The ‘seer stone’ was use instead of the Urim and thummin as clearly stated in my previous post. In fact, it was used far more.
Actually, I'm not, have you heard of word printing?
Then you must accept the extant MS that we have and use.
But you still believe the Bible,
Because of the overwhelming scholarship and supporting documentation that have been preserved for us.
I submit that if the church produced a set of Gold plates that fit the description exactly, and forensics agreed that they were really old, you would be claiming it was a fraud, fake or that the validators were lying, why not, you discount the witnesses who were there.
You’d lose that bet. Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer & Martin Harris were all excommunicated from Mormonism. Joseph Smith said Dec 16, 1838, "Such characters as McLellin, John Witmer, David Witmer, Oliver Cowdry, and Martin Harris are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them." History of the Church, Vol 3, p232. Hardly resounding character references for me to believe these ‘witnesses’. Martin Harris and David Whitmer later testified that he did not see the plates literally with his fleshly eyes: He said he saw the plates "by the eye of faith" handled by an angel.(Palmyra Reflector, March 19, 1831).
You should do a little research into the Book of Enoch,
The Book of Enoch was well known during the time of Jesus. It was generally considered a part of the Jewish scripture immediately prior to and during the first century (until it was removed by the Sanhedrin in AD 90). Why isn't this wonderful book included in the Bible? The answer is that Jesus and the apostles never called it scripture. It is important to note that a few early church fathers highly valued the book of Enoch but they never referred to it as scripture. Therefore, we cannot view it as authorative since it is not the Word of God. To simply mention an extra-biblical document doesn’t canonize it. Oh, and this book isn’t ‘lost’, it is available for review.
punctuation and spelling were not as precise and formal as they are now, that accounts for most of the changes,
I have not included those in my count.
the bulk of the remainder of the changes come from the manuscript that Joseph marked up after it was dictated, but never made it into print.
Then he misrepresented the book when it was printed. The manuscript was copied as it was read by Smith. The Lord supposedly dictated the Book of Mormon letter by letter. To go back without the plates for reference and ‘mark up’ means his mark-up were of man and not plates or god.
There are a few changes that have been necessitated by changes in language "White" has been changed to "pure" in one instance that Anti Mormons have tried to make hay out of, but it's actually very simple, read it, pray about it, God will tell you if it's true or not. And that has been my point all along if you pray, these "logical" arguments become moot.
The mormon church for 150 years denied the bom was changed. Here are a few exceptions that are unexplainable without the plates:
Book of Alma p.315; (1830): "But behold, as the seed swelleth and sprouteth and beginneth to grow, and then ye must needs say, That seed is good; for behold, it swelleth and sprouteth and beginneth to grow."
Today: Alma 32:30: "But behold, as the seed swelleth and sprouteth and beginneth to grow, and then ye must needs say, That seed is good; for behold, it swelleth and sprouteth and beginneth to grow. And now behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say that I know that this is a good seed; for behold, it sprouteth and beginneth to grow."
A lot of words for a few grammar changes.
Book of Mosiah, p.200; (1830): "...on learning from the mouth of Ammon that king Benjamin had a gift from God..."
Today: Mosiah 21:28: "...on learning from the mouth of Ammon that king Mosiah had a gift from God..." As well as several other locations.
1 Nephi 5… O house of Jacob, which are called out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the Lord …
Today: 1 Nephi 20:1 … O house of Jacob, which are called out of the waters of Judah, or out of the waters of baptism, which swear by the name of the Lord …
Also noting the change in text numbering.
the book of abraham scroll was destroyed in the Chicago fire when the museum storehouse it was in burned. What exists now is a copy of the book of breathings and a copy of the Book of the dead that were so common the museum didn't want it. Nice try though.
November 27, 1967, the church's Deseret News announced one of the most significant events in Mormon Church history: "NEW YORK--A collection of papyrus manuscripts, long believed to have been destroyed in the Chicago fire of 1871, was presented to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints here Monday by the Metropolitan Museum of Art.... Included in the papyri is a manuscript identified as the original document from which Joseph Smith had copied the drawing which he called 'Facsimile No. 1' and published with the Book of Abraham."
They were presented to President Eldon Tanner, who accepted the on behalf of the church. The mormon church has never issued a proclaimation that denies that these were Smith’s papyri.
LOL! Which God of the trinity are you referring to when you say God? You are funny. Pick "one" since they are "one" to know one is to know all three members of the Godhead.
Again, you show your ignorance of Christian theology. When I refer to God, I refer to the whole personage – Father, Son and Spirit. Trinitarianism is not modalism.
U Said: How do you find the lds website - type in www.believe.org. Actually, that is a missionary site we set up because Anti's wanted to put stuff there and tell people it was "our site" it's a very shallow site which exists solely for missionary efforts.
It is an abuse to deliberately misquote an individual. I did not say the above. My response was as follows:
How do you find the lds website - type in www.mormon.org.
See also http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1950542/replies?c=285
The Google sponsored link is listed as such:
Mormonism
www.mormon.org The truth about Mormonism. Visit the official site.
2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.
_______________________________________________________
That man was not dead at the time....
Let me help you here with a little highlighting, red is Jesus, bold is David
_______________________________________________________
and black is Peter...........
They are correct in one area, a belief & acceptance of Christ is all that’s necessary for salvation. However, salvation doesn’t encompass all that the father has, all the mansions prepared for us by the Lord. Therein is the difference. We believe there’s more than just salvation, as described in the scriptures.
As a convert myself, this is one of the things that struck me the most about “Christianity”, the lack of answers to some of the most basic questions & the lack of continuity amongst the answers they do have. The Lord never taught that w/ His people before, why now? The Lord always had prophets & later apostles as well, why would we be left now to fend for ourselves. Are we not as deserving? The argument that we now have scriptures is a dubious one being that those of ancient times had the Lord’s writings as well.
The Lord never told Moses, Isaiah, Peter, Paul, etc., just tell the people to believe, don’t worry about the doctrines, we’ll let them figure it out on their own. Yet some on this board would tell us that IS our lot today! That was a hard one for me to understand back before I joined the church & an even harder one to understand now.
I would submit, the Lord is not the author of confusion. He wants us to know the truth definitively, & by HIM, not the “wise” of the earth. It amazes me how many fight against the proposition of inquiring of the Lord. I know the Lord answers prayers. But that’s a personal thing for me & one that I don’t push on others except to encourage them to do likewise. I would never be so audacious as to say I know better than others b/c of my much learning, which is fairly extensive, but still limited here in mortality & susceptible to weaknesses in the flesh. If I want the whole truth to a matter, I would go to the author. I have done so & have received something more valuable than all the treasures of the earth, my testimony of Jesus Christ & all that comes w/ that testimony. I thank the Lord for that every day.
John 5:28-29
"28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation".
So, who shall come forth unto the resurrection of life? Those that have done good.
Luke 18:18-22
"18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? 19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God. 20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother. 21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up. 22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me".
Now, this ruler was already a believer, & yet when asked about how to inherit eternal life, did the Lord say, just believe in me? No. His answer is quite revealing.
And finally, John 11:25-26
"25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
Now, if all that was required was to believe, why say "And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die"? Note it says liveth and believeth.
Good questions about the grace vs. faith crowd.
~”As a convert myself, this is one of the things that struck me the most about “Christianity”, the lack of answers to some of the most basic questions & the lack of continuity amongst the answers they do have.”~
I was raised in the Church, and have only recently begun to grasp the significance of that. All those ontological questions that plague Christian and Pagan alike, we know the answers to. What a blessing that is. What an impact that has on how we regulate and order our lives. Some of us in the Church take it for granted, I think, particularly when we’ve grown up with it.
~”I would submit, the Lord is not the author of confusion. He wants us to know the truth definitively, & by HIM, not the “wise” of the earth.”~
That is indeed the crux of it. Well stated.
That was very long.
Still hiding your faith?
DU :
If the Bible is true, and there is even one scripture that says that Grace is required, then it is. If the Bible is true and there is even one scripture that says that Works are required, then it is. If there are no such scriptures than neither are required. If there are scriptures requiring both, then both are required.
First, the poster assumed that a single verse would establish his asserted legs to his syllogism stool, ignoring the FACT that the Bible is its own best commentary and thus will ALWAYS have more than one citation to establish a fundamental truth. Second, the poster makes flawed/mismatched legs of his assuming syllogism ... the poster goes from single citation is all that is required to multiple citations required to establish 'both are true' and then doesn't follow through, as we see below:
DU :
Are there any that list Both? ... 3. James 2:20 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? ... OK, so if you actually believe the whole Bible, not just cherry picked scriptures then you need faith and works.
Aside from the obvious violation of his own verdict against 'cherry picking' (read trying to take a passage out of context to use it speciously), works are not asserted in the passage found in James as making Faith alive, nor are works stated as necessary to keep Faith alive, it is ONLY positing that a claim of faith is not alive if no works authored by God's presence within are in evidence (as contextual teaching from the preponderance of the Bible teaches), thus the claimed faith is not LIFE as taught in other scriptures passages which are conspicuously absent from the flawed three leg syllogism.
You cultist need to stop with your echo chamber of reinforcing each others' foolishness. FreeRepublic is not some field of uneducated dupes. Do Mormons really think that illogic and cherry picked scriptures exhibited would be swallowed because one apologists slaps another apologist on the back claiming flawed logic is 'good logic'?
Forgot to ping, sorry Ladies.
That is indeed the crux of it. Well stated. [Tantiboh]
How is it you seem, Reno, to be able to highlight one truth sourced in Paul's first letter to the Corinthians that backs up what you say, but seem to gloss over yet other vital additional truth via Paul in later letters?
Yes, it's true that the worldly wise is foolish to God (1 Cor. 1:20)...that God's wisdom is quite distinct from that of this age (1 Cor. 2:6)--things not taught by human wisdom (1 Cor. 2:13). But Paul is especially highlighting worldly philosophers (1 Cor. 1:20)...worldly scholars (1 Cor. 1:20)...worldly debaters (1 Cor. 1:20)...and worldly rulers (1 Cor. 2:6). He's not talking about the Church-at-large.
He wants us to know the truth definitively, & by HIM, not the “wise” of the earth.”
Tanty, does your "crux"--and Reno, does your "wise" include the church who best represents the traditions of Paul? (If it doesn't, you have abandoned Paul's epistles & much of the NT!)
Consider this passage Paul wrote to the Ephesians: This grace was given to me--the least of all the saints! to proclaim to the Gentiles the incalculable riches of the Messiah, and to shed light for all...This is so that God's multi-faceted wisdom may now be made known through the church to the rulers and authorities in the heavens." (Eph. 3:8-10)
Now, how do we know Paul wasn't talking only about the NT church & the Latter-day church?
Simple, keep reading Eph. 3! ...to Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. (Eph. 3:21)
Paul makes it ABUNDANTLY clear that it's the Church-at-large which gives glory to God "to all generations, forever and ever" (Eph. 3:20-21) that is the source for God's manifest, multi-faceted wisdom (Eph. 3:10)!!!
Where were the Mormons for 1800 years among all those "forever & ever generations?" (They're the johnny-come-latelies...the very ones Elsie has reminded you via his consistent postings of Galatians 1:6-8...a passage, BTW, that Mormons ALWAYS ignore & FReepers Mormons also tend to ignore): I am amazed that you are so quickly turning away from Him who called you by the grace of Christ, and are turning to a different gospel [a new Mormon gospel version, BTW, where grace doesn't even kick in until ALL you can do!!!] ...there are some who...want to change the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel other than what we have preached to you, a curse be on him!
...the Lord is not the author of confusion.
Exactly. If the Mormons would have been as noble as the Bereans of Acts 17:11...and actually compared Smith's newer revelations to the existing ones, "to see if it was so," LDS everywhere wouldn't be in this mess! Instead, the LDS are the ignoble of the earth!!!
And not only ignoble, but you, Reno, ignore that God is not the lone author: Instead, we have renounced shameful secret things, not walking in deceit or distorting God's message, but in God's sight we commend ourselves to every person's conscience by an open display of the truth. But if, in fact, our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. Regarding them: the god of this age has blinded the minds of the unbelievers so they cannot see the light of the gosepl of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For we are not proclaiming ourselves but Jesus Christ as Lord..." (2 Cor. 4:2-5)
WHEN...
...people ignore the order of Acts 17:11--comparing new revelations by what's existing...
...THEN...
We get what we see in the LDS church...LDS apologists & leaders doing cartwheels to cover up & negate what past LDS "prophets" have sermonized as "truth"...mass confusion because so many LDS "prophets" disagree with one another...
And WHY???
Because of what Jesus said long ago: Jesus answered them, "You are deceived, because you don't know the Scriptures or the power of God." (Matt 22:29)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth My Word, and believeth on Him who sent Me hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from life unto death. John 5:24
Now, if all that was required was to believe, why say “And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die”? Note it says liveth and believeth.
______________________________________________________
Yes thats right In John 11:25, 26 Jesus does say that while you live, believe on Me and you will never die spiritually...
Once you are dead its too late.....
Believe on Jesus while you are still alive...
~”Tanty, does your “crux”—and Reno, does your “wise” include the church who best represents the traditions of Paul?”~
You will understand, I’m sure, when I say that, in my opinion, the LDS Church is the church that best represents the traditions of Paul. I do not posit whether or not those traditions are as you have stated them. The answer to your question is, Yes. I do not necessarily trust the authorities of the LDS Church in and of themselves; however, I know I always have a source to confirm their counsel and instruction. I may not always call on that source, but it is always available.
~”Instead, the LDS are the ignoble of the earth!!!”~
I have to admit, that’s a new one. I’ve not been called ignoble before. Kudos for originality!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.