Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Our Mormon Brothers?
Reformed Evangelist ^ | May 14th, 2007 | Jeff Fuller

Posted on 07/05/2007 3:00:33 AM PDT by Gamecock

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 1,341 next last
To: Enosh

Before you say another word you really need to talk to the LDS Missionairy!


141 posted on 07/05/2007 8:14:17 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: restornu
"Before you say another word you really need to talk to the LDS Missionairy!"

I have. They both went away newborn Catholics.

Here, have a towel.

(/Tiber Towel Boy)

142 posted on 07/05/2007 8:21:56 PM PDT by Enosh (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Rameumptom

Rameumptom:”many of the words you are using (that were added later by Greek Philosophers) should be disqualified.

totally depraved
wholly man yet wholly God.
inerrant

Jesus never used these words. The Apostles never did.”

Of course Jesus never used the word “God” either since he didn’t speak english, but of course we can interpret his actual words to our own language.

Eph 2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins
Eph 2:2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-
Eph 2:3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
(i.e. totally depraved)

Php 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
(i.e. wholly man yet wholly God)

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God
(i.e. inerrant)


143 posted on 07/05/2007 8:22:33 PM PDT by visually_augmented (I was blind, but now I see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Hardly to be found anywhere in the Holy Bible. It is in fact blasphemy.


144 posted on 07/05/2007 8:22:39 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: visually_augmented

Actually, we don’t worship Mary. The fact that Mary remained forever Virgin, and without sin, is based on the fact that she was born without original sin. Our capacity to sin is based in the fact that we are all born with original sin. If Mary had been born with original sin, she would have been unpure, therefore, unfit to carry Jesus. So, she was sinless when she concieved and bore Christ. Now, it is just illogical to believe that, as reward for doing his will, that God would have cursed Mary with original sin once she had given birth to Jesus. Therefore, the only safe thing to assume is that she never did get original sin, and therefore, was incapable of sinning.


145 posted on 07/05/2007 8:28:08 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
It is in fact blasphemy.

So if the Mormons believe God was like a man before he was God and that we will evolve into Gods then they are not Christians.

146 posted on 07/05/2007 8:31:25 PM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Enosh
LOL oh you are so silly ....


The things you say off the top of your beanie

147 posted on 07/05/2007 8:32:18 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
You do seem rather stuck on the class distinction theme.You have remarked on Roman Catholicism being “High Church” and claim that is a social demarcation of some sort. You now contend that the aristocracy of the south was largely Catholic.
You claim that there were established areas of significant Roman Catholic populations and then say that the RC immigrants did not begin to arrive until he 1840s-1850s.
I sense from your approach here that it is a social class view that dominates in your thinking. Not surprising as the Roman Catholic church is rigidly hierarchical no priesthood of believers, the ultimate in leveling class distincitons!
148 posted on 07/05/2007 8:33:02 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; Logophile; Gamecock; Larry Lucido
I think a better starting point in defining who is a Christian would be those that follow Jesus, seeking to live a Christ like life, knowing Jesus is the son of God and through him alone salvation is found.

That sounds like a creed to me.

Everyone is creedal whether they admit it or not. The only difference appears to be the source of your creed.

149 posted on 07/05/2007 8:38:33 PM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
Our Mormon Brothers?

..friends, neighbors, countrymen, yes--but otherwise no...

150 posted on 07/05/2007 8:42:41 PM PDT by WalterSkinner ( In Memory of My Father--WWII Vet and Patriot 1926-2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

Where I’m from, it is. If the census bureau actually counted religion, you would be able to see this pattern play out.

And as I laid out what I had originally put up here (and decided to make a private one instead), Catholics did have an influence in the antebellum South, far out of proportion with their numbers. The region was not a incubator of anti-Catholicism the way the North was, and many of our generals in the war were of Catholic extraction. Beauregard, Semmes, Cleburne, Bragg, etc. The Deep South was populated primarily by people from the Carolinas, Virginia and Maryland, and by in large, the people who came from Maryland were merchants who came to the cities to make a buck as cotton factors. So, by default, they brought their Maryland Catholicism, which was essentially an establishment religion, with them.

But you have just illustrated the difference between high and low church religions. High Church denominations tend to have more formalized ritual, more heirarchy, etc. And they tend to call their clergy priests. Low Church religions draw more from Puritanism and Calivinism, and they tend to call their leaders pastor, and there is not as much of an emphasis on theologically training among many Low Church believers as their is among high church believers.

It’s actually a good generic term to describe differences in Christian practices, but, in the South, religion has always had a component of class mixed in.


151 posted on 07/05/2007 8:47:51 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; Bainbridge
So if the Mormons believe God was like a man before he was God and that we will evolve into Gods then they are not Christians.

That is your limited understanding and it is not acurate LDS doctrine!

Jesus was always part of the Godhead aka Jehovah in the OT before he was born on earth!

1 Tim. 3
16 And without controversy
great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit,
seen of angels,
preached unto the Gentiles,
believed on in the world,
received up into glory.

152 posted on 07/05/2007 8:48:26 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
Obviously. This idea is blatantly contrary to any possible understanding of the Bible. It has never been believed by any Christians anywhere, anytime.
It is a novelty.
153 posted on 07/05/2007 8:52:41 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Limited understanding. No. If one reads the plain text, it is evident that the ideas and claims made by Joseph Smith and the subsequent “Prophets” are far outside the pale of Christian Orthodoxy.
The problem arises when outsiders figure out that there are 2 versions. The inside version and the one used to talk to the “gentiles”. ( It might interest our Jewish friends to know that non- Mormons are sometimes referred to as Gentiles by LDS members!
154 posted on 07/05/2007 8:56:20 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Logophile; Gamecock; Larry Lucido
Not at all. Any definition of Christian which excludes the early Apostles and saints strikes me as absurd.

No one is excluding anyone. The question is a red herring because it makes no sense. The creeds as we have them today did not exist at that time. It is like the old Saturday Night Live sketch, "What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub?"

However, since the creeds are built on the testimony of the apostles (the Bible) and the early church we have confidence that they are correct in all they teach.

What about those Protestants who claim to be "non-creedal"? Are they Christians according to your definition?

Any "protestant" who could not affirm the statements in the ancient creeds cited should have their Christianity questioned. There is much bad teaching among the "no creed but Christ" crowd, including poor constructs on the Trinity that lead to a form of modalism. The very purpose of the creeds is to sort out the bad theology among the faithful. And to help keep cults and heresies (wolves) away from the flock.

155 posted on 07/05/2007 9:03:48 PM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

Why didn’t I get that version you are talking about?


156 posted on 07/05/2007 9:15:57 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

It might also interest the Christian world, that our Jewish friend have thought in their literature that Christian are gentiles or goyim.

So what is your point?


157 posted on 07/05/2007 9:20:15 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
However, since the creeds are built on the testimony of the apostles (the Bible) and the early church we have confidence that they are correct in all they teach.

Saying something is "built on" the testimony of the Apostles is not the same as saying that it is what the Apostles themselves taught. It seems to me that the creeds add extra-Biblical concepts to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles.

But I do not want to argue the point with you. I asked for the definition of Christian. Clearly, you think that the ecumenical creeds are important in part of any such definition.

Any "protestant" who could not affirm the statements in the ancient creeds cited should have their Christianity questioned. There is much bad teaching among the "no creed but Christ" crowd, including poor constructs on the Trinity that lead to a form of modalism. The very purpose of the creeds is to sort out the bad theology among the faithful. And to help keep cults and heresies (wolves) away from the flock.

I gather that you do not approve of the "non-creedal" churches. But are they Christians? If not, what would you call them?

158 posted on 07/05/2007 9:49:08 PM PDT by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
The intent of this thread is not to determine if a Mormon should be president, or if you want one as a next door neighbor, but are they Christian?

      Phrased in this way, I believe the question is unanswerable, although several posters have made the attempt.  I do not presume to know whether any specific individual, or set of individuals, is saved.

      A more tractable, and important, question (which other posters have tried to answer), is this: Is Mormanism a Christian denomination, or is it a separate religion?

159 posted on 07/05/2007 10:08:30 PM PDT by Celtman (It's never right to do wrong to do right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Enosh
I have. They both went away newborn Catholics.

And there's another fib from Enosh.

160 posted on 07/05/2007 10:09:13 PM PDT by Spiff (Rudy Giuliani Quote (NY Post, 1996) "Most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 1,341 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson