CHRISTIANITY DEFINED - (LDS Site Defining Christianity) OPEN

LDS site Foundation for Christian Studies ^

[greyfoxx39]

[snip]

 

 

CHRISTIAN DEFINED One might think that defining a Christian would be simple. Webster’s Dictionary defines the word Christian to mean “adherent of Christianity”, or “relating to or professing a belief in Christianity or Jesus Christ.” Simply put, a Christian is defined as one who believes in Jesus Christ. The Encyclopedia Britannica states: “…writers of Christian history normally begin phenomenologically when discussing Christian identity; that is, they do not bring norms or standards by which they have determined the truth of this or that branch of Christianity or even of the faith tradition as a whole but identify everyone as Christian who call themselves Christian.” According to Britannica, a revered source in continuous publication since 1768, a Christian is plainly defined as someone who calls themselves a Christian. Some Refute the Defining of a Christian Despite the simplicity of the aforementioned definitions, there are some individuals and institutions who sternly contend that there are self-described Christians, and in fact entire sects of self-proclaimed Christian religions, who should not be considered Christians at all. As odd as this may seem, such allegations are common and emotionally charged. The website religioustolerance.org attempted to define a Christian and described the exercise as a “lightning rod,” and that the conclusions they came up with generated “many emails from angry Christians who denounce it,” especially among “Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Protestants.” The FCS encourages visitors to examine the content generated by religioustolderance.org on the subject of defining a Christian . Reminiscent of the Pharisees of old, the contentious individuals and institutions who deny the Christianity of others often utilize their personal interpretation of scripture and synthetic dogma to support their assertions. They contend the privilege of earning the Christian label is dependent on such things as being born again, believing in the Triune God, accepting certain creeds, and/or belonging to a particular faith community. The absurdity of the dynamic reaches its pinnacle when those who bear testimony of their devotion to Jesus Christ as their personal Savior and Redeemer are rebuked and denied the Christian marker by those who disagree with their religion and/or theological beliefs. It causes one to ponder—what would Jesus do? Historical Perspective The word “Christian” appears three times in the scriptures, all three in the New Testament. Acts 11:26 reveals that the Disciples of Christ were first referred to as Christians in Antioch, indicating those who followed Christ were starting to be referred to as Christians. Before that time it was common for those who followed Christ to refer to one another as brothers (or brethren), disciples, or believers. In Acts 26:20 King Agrippa tells Paul “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian,” likely indicating the term “Christian” was beginning to be used (perhaps even regularly) to refer to a believer in Christ. In 1 Peter 4:16, Peter refers to those who would “suffer as a Christian,” signifying that those who consider themselves Christian should be happy in their persecutions and trials. In all three scriptural references that use the term Christian, not one denotes any further requirement to be a Christian other than believing in and following Jesus Christ. In the Greek language (ancient and modern) it’s common to refer to a group of people by taking the root geographic location or ethnicity of that people and to add the suffix “anos.” For instance, those from the Cretan village of Spili are referred to as Spilianos, and a follower of Mohammed (Moameth in Greek) is referred to as Moamethanos. The reference to Christians in the original Greek translation of the New Testament is Christianos, meaning a follower of Christ. Although the term Christianos is historically believed to have been used in a derogatory sense by unbelievers, the meaning of the word remains. When one combines the three New Testament references to Christian, the historical context of the time, and the linguistics of the original Greek, one must conclude that a Christian is simply one who follows and/or believes in Christ. Should one desire to create a deeper definition of a Christian using 1 Peter 4:16, then the most far reaching conclusion that can be drawn is that a Christian is one who not only follows Christ, but more deeply puts their trust in him, is reliant upon him, and seeks to live a life that exemplifies him—all difficult traits to quantify and thus of little value in defining a Christian. The Testimony of an Apostle as a Litmus Test One would never doubt the testimony of the apostle Peter, despite the fact he had his own moments of weakness during the trial and Atonement of Christ. When asked by the Savior “But whom say ye that I am?” Peter boldly replied, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, ” to which Jesus Christ confirmed “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven” (Matt. 16;15-17). Perhaps we can use Peter’s testimony as a litmus test for all prospective Christians: do they believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of the living God? If the answer is affirmative, then they are indeed a Christian. Jesus Christ in Humility was Inclusionary Jesus Christ never administered any theological exams to his disciplines, nor established any notable prerequisites to being a Christian other than to believe on him as the Son of God. Many were healed of the vilest of infirmities by simply believing in Jesus Christ as one who had the authority to perform such healings. There is no mention in the scriptures that the healed were made whole because they embraced the doctrine of the trinity, nor because they were classified as born again, nor because they belonged to a particular sect of believers. They were healed because they believed, or were blessed to have a believer intercede on their behalf, that Jesus was the Christ. Jesus was never one to be exclusionary in his ministry, but rather inclusionary across a broad spectrum. This is beautifully illustrated in Luke 9:49-50 which reads: “And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.” Jesus did not ask about their specific belief system, nor what group of disciples they congregated with. Rather, Jesus proclaimed that those who act in His name are to be considered His disciples. Many Christians today would do well to understand this passage of scripture and apply it to their own actions towards others. The World in Pride is Exclusionary If Jesus was so inclusionary, why then do we have modern day Pharisees fighting so hard to narrow the definition of a Christian—even to the persecution of fellow Christians? Do these individuals, like the apostle John in the passage from Luke 9, seek for a more exclusive club and complain when others call themselves Christian but don’t practice the same rituals or beliefs as they do? The likely root of the reason for such passionate denials of Christianity upon others is pride and arrogance. Such pride can manifest itself into a fear of not clearly understanding the theological beliefs of others, nor taking the time to earnestly do so, thus resulting in the easier resolution of flatly denying to acknowledge another’s Christianity. There may be fear that such acknowledgement will lead to acceptance of another’s beliefs leading to a loss of membership or validity in their own religion. Greed may play a role in the denial of the Christian label by ecclesiastical leaders resisting the loss of tithe paying members by employing a strategy of quiet slander towards other denominations. Additionally, one cannot rule out the possibility of Saul’s Syndrome, where like Saul who persecuted the Christians of old out of his zeal for the law, well intentioned individuals seek to protect the faith—when in essence they are fighting against the true will of God. Excerpt from the article on Saul's Syndrome: in keeping others from the truth. Consider the Pharisee Saul before his radical conversion to the Lord when he afterwards became Paul. Through his disciplined spiritual education among the finest teachers in Jerusalem, and an unrivaled passion to protect the ways of the Lord as he knew it, Saul persecuted and fought against the spread of Christianity—even unto death among those he victimized. Paul was so blinded by his passion for what he believed to be right that he never considered that his interpretation of the scriptures and his spiritual belief system may be wrong. It wasn’t until the Lord himself appeared to Saul that he relinquished his incorrect interpretation of God’s doctrine and embraced the true gospel. How many millions today suffer from the same syndrome as Saul where religious passion overcomes the promptings of the Holy Ghost? No matter what the specific reasons are, the resulting fruits of such denials of Christianity are disunity in the body of Christ, the spread of misinformation, and the sowing of seeds of ”discord among brethren” (Prov. 6:19). Differences in Gospel Living, but all are Christians Beyond being identified as a Christian, there is an abundance of doctrine in the scriptures that helps explain true Christian beliefs and practices—even “the deep things of God” (1 Cor. 2: 9-10). Some Christian theology is simple to understand, while other theological concepts are more difficult. Paul to the Corinthians and Hebrews used the metaphors of milk and meat to indicate there were simple doctrines (milk) and more complex doctrines (meat) (1 Cor. 3:2 and Heb. 5:12), and that one must be able to digest the milk before moving on to the more difficult to digest meat. Paul points out that there may be various stages of understanding of the doctrines of Christianity among Christians. This difference in doctrinal understanding, combined with the moral agency of mankind that can lead to good and bad choices, results in their being stronger Christians who live their lives according to the precepts espoused by Jesus Christ (Matt. 25:34-36), and weaker Christians who find it difficult to live their lives in accordance with the gospel (Matt. 7:21-23). Regardless of what stage there are in, both are Christians and both must individually exercise their moral agency to accept or reject the ordinances and principles of the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Likewise, both must accept the consequences of their actions in the Day of Judgment. There will be Christians (valiant and less valiant) in all three kingdoms in the eternities—perhaps even some who will end up relegated into outer darkness. Conclusion It is the hope and prayer of the FCS that the Christian world can unite on the simple principle of allowing everyone who claims Jesus Christ as their Savior to be respectfully referred to as a Christian without caveats. We can peacefully and considerately coexist as brothers and sisters in Christ, while ascribing to different Christian beliefs and church affiliations. Imagine what we can accomplish as a diverse Christian family working together to fulfill God’s purposes on earth.

[SkyPilot]

Post #117 is excellent - and thank you for photoshopping in the real title of what a cult recruitment site should be called.

[Elsie]

There you go again: trying to use FACTS to prove your point...

[Elsie]

Imagine how short the "open" threads would be if the thin-skinned posters actually ignored them.

Or the brain-dead...

[Elsie]

The LDS Devotionals and Caucus are mainly to share information more than discussion.

Well THAT don't work very well!

We've SEEN the results of YOUR ping list RSVP!

[Elsie]

Would you please show me where the word rapture appears in the Bible?:)

You have GOT to be kidding!!

How can you SAY that; Resty?

You, of all people: a member of the LDS Organization® that can't even produce what goes on in their SECRET Temple Rites® in ANY of their Scripture, Standard Works, or the SLC PHONE BOOK!

[Elsie]

Matt 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.

HALF-truth time; Resty??

10. And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11. And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

[Elsie]

1. place cursor on picture
2. right click mouse
3. scroll to bottom of menu, clicking on PROPERTIES
4. notice name of creature in URL address.

[Elsie]

and thank you for photoshopping in the real title of what a cult recruitment site should be called.

Thank ME not; for I merely posted the two links I found in 7's reply.

[greyfoxx39]

12. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

Well, well, welll.....a mormon tells a "half-truth"....seems like I've heard that term before!

[delacoert]

Are you FOR or AGAINST?? ;)

I'm FOR occupying more real estate. ;)

[AmericanArchConservative]

Or at the worst, anti mormonISM, which is not the same thing as being anti mormon.

One term implicitly suggests the notion of being against ALL mormons, as well as their church and its teachings, while the other terms clearly is directed as being against the doctrine and teachings.

On open threads such as this, it would seem to allow the non-mormon adherents the latitude to label their mormon detractors “Anti Christians” or if they cared about more accurate use of terms than the mormons, properly, “Anti Christianity” since no branch of mainstream Christianity considers, or is willing to accept mormonism as Christianity (because it is, in fact, not!).

A.A.C.

[Colofornian]

The Executive Director and Founder of the Foundation for Christian Studies is Eric Shuster, who along with his wife Marilyn, left the rich and beautiful traditions of the Catholic faith to become members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1989. Before their conversion to the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, both Eric and Marilyn were active and devoted Catholics—Marilyn having been a Franciscan Nun with a bachelor’s degree in Catholic Theology from the distinguished University of Saint Thomas in Houston Texas, and Eric having served in lay ministry and leadership positions in Texas and California. Their story of conversion, along with comprehensive comparisons of key doctrines between Catholicism and Mormonism, will be available in a forthcoming book scheduled for an April 2009 release preliminarily titled Catholic Roots, Mormon Harvest.

Note:
(1) These guys call Christians "Pharisees" on this Web site.
(2) They claim that Jesus is "inclusionary" and Christians tend to be "exclusionary" -- without hardly bothering to mention that LDS consider their church to be the only true church on earth and that everyone else are "apostates."
(3) And, note this on their Web site under "Social Issues":

Instances Where Medical Abortion is Acceptable From the earlier statement, there are exceptionally rare concessions for medically assisted abortions under the following circumstances:
Pregnancy has resulted from incest or rape

Response: (Hey, men committing incest cover up their crimes via abortions! "Way to go" LDS for reinforcing this!)
The life or health of the woman is in jeopardy in the opinion of competent medical authority
Response: (#1, 90% of all abortions aren't done by "competent medical authorities" -- but they don't bother to define which pro-abortion medical authorities are or are not "competent"...also, oh, sure "health" can mean anything...so, just dismember the healthy baby if mom is under the weather, eh?)

The fetus is known, by competent medical authority, to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. Even when one of these conditions exists, a medically assisted abortion should only be considered after consultation has taken place between the pregnant woman and the bishop, and there is divine confirmation given through prayer that an abortion is necessary.
Response: (Oh sure, now prayer is introduced as yet another weapon in the war on the pre-born..."way to go" LDS for "spiritualizing" mass murder!)

Unfortunately liberties may be taken in interpreting the health of the mother, especially by clinical experts;
Response: (Nah, really? You set up filters-from-hell as to when to approve an abortion and gee, whiz, it easily opens the door to "liberties")

...however, a three-step process (a filter if you will), provides adequate protection against "rationalization." The process provides a clinical check, ecclesiastical check, and then an individual check—the last two being driven almost entirely by prayer and the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.
Response: (Oh, now we can rest secure: The "clinical check" in most cases -- 90% -- = the abortionist him/herself -- and we all know that full-time abortionists hardly ever recommend abortions...The "ecclesiastical check" is already on record that it's OK for an incest-perp stepdad to take his minor-stepdaughter in for an abortion...it's OK for a healthy baby to be slaughtered...and this is supposed to masquerade as a "check?"...and then on top of that, these people have the utter gall to claim that the Holy Ghost may "inspire" both the "individual" and ecclesiastical officials to say to an abortion-minded mom, "go for it?"

[restornu]

HALF-truth time; Resty??

****

Really

Not all of Christendom is as ignorant as this group many know that Elijah never died and will appear again to prepare the way for the second comming!

from an Trinity Chirstian site.

Yet another reason for this theory is that when Elijah comes back, it is believed that he must die so that he can be judged by God (Hebrews 9:27).

It is argued that since Elijah never died, he will have to return to the natural realm and suffer death to fulfill Hebrews 9:27 which says, “It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.”

Since Elijah’s physical body was taken up into heaven, having never seen death (2 Kings 2:9-12), he must come back to earth and die. Since the two witnesses are shown to have been killed and then resurrected (Revelation 11:7-12), it seems like this would be the perfect place for the fulfillment of Scripture: Elijah would have come again, and he would finally see death so that he might be judged.3

The weakness of this last argument is found in the fact that multitudes of saints will be glorified at the coming of the Lord, never to see death (1 Corinthians 15:51-55; 1Thessalonians 4:14-18), and yet they will be judged at the judgment seat of Christ. While judgment necessarily follows death, death is not necessary for judgment.

We see, then, that Elijah, and not John the Baptist is the one to come again. Elijah’s coming has not yet occurred, but is yet to take place during the tribulation period.

http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/elijahcome.htm

[greyfoxx39]

Even when one of these conditions exists, a medically assisted abortion should only be considered after consultation has taken place between the pregnant woman and the bishop, and there is divine confirmation given through prayer that an abortion is necessary.

We all know how much "training" mormon bishops have in counseling, right? So, an untrained layman, with no knowledge of the psychological effects to a woman (or her husband) of having an abortion, is going to seek "divine confirmation given through prayer that an abortion is necessary"...in other words, divine instructions to kill that baby.

No worries...in mormon belief, there are lots of little "spirit babies" in the "premortal life" just waiting to take the place of the murdered one.

You can see where Mitt ( Romney was a leader in the Mormon church while living in Belmont, Mass. He was bishop of the Cambridge congregation, then bishop of Belmont, and in 1986 became president of the Boston-area "stake," similar to a diocese.) got his views on abortion...one wonders how many abortions took place in his ward after his seeking of "divine confirmation".

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***I have always noticed that for some reason if they (cults) get the Trinity wrong they also are big into works. ***

“Look here sir! There are hundreds of religions in this country, and the followers of some think theirs is the only right one. How can poor, plain men like us find out what really is the truth?”

We generally reply something like this. “Hundreds of religions you say? That is strange; I’ve heard of only two.”

“Oh, but surely you know there are more than that?”

“Not at all, sir, I find, I admit, many shades of differences in the opinions of those compromising the two great schools; but after all there are but two. The one covers all who expect salvation by DOING; the other, all who have been saved BY SOMETHING DONE. So you see the question is very simple. Can you save yourself, or must you be saved by another? If you can be your own saviour, you do not need to listen. If you cannot, you may well want to learn about Jesus Christ and the message of the cross.

-Modified from H.A. Ironside

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***There is NO mention in this article that the website is maintained by and dedicated to mormon beliefs...in fact it is carefully worded to AVOID those facts. ***

Several years ago a friend of mine was looking on the internet for a graph of of the history of the Old Testament and New testament kings. He found a very interesting one, great printing, colors, and testimonials from various Christian bible teachers as to how the graph was good for Sunday School use. along with it was an simple address to order them.

He looked at several other web sites and, BEHOLD! There was the SAME graph, from a MORMON printing house, with the same address to order from, but now listed as a LDS publication.

One now has to be very careful of just about anything of a religious nature found on the internet due to the infiltration of the LDS chamelion.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***They aren’t hiding their connections to the mormon church, and a few seconds glancing over the listings under the heading “Doctrinal Study” tells the tale....”Premortal Existence”, “Eternal Families”, “Godhead/Trinity”.***

They even stole the dove and the fish symbol of the Christians! What gall!

[Colofornian]

You can see where Mitt ( Romney was a leader in the Mormon church while living in Belmont, Mass. He was bishop of the Cambridge congregation, then bishop of Belmont, and in 1986 became president of the Boston-area "stake," similar to a diocese.) got his views on abortion...one wonders how many abortions took place in his ward after his seeking of "divine confirmation".

Imagine. Making God out to be a before-the-act accomplice to murder.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Romney announced in a radio interview in Iowa, that Jesus was coming back to Missouri***

My second and last time I was at a Mormon Church 35 years ago the teacher in the class said that when Jesus returned to set up his kingdom they would all be taken back to Jackson county, Missouri.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Ted Bundy was rebaptised by the mormons recently...and given temple endowments...***

And why not? All he did was give “blood atonement” to some sinful college girls for their sins!

(I can't believe I posted that!)