| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 02/20/2008 6:54:12 AM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior |
Posted on 02/16/2008 3:13:15 PM PST by restornu
Oh, good, you’re familiar with them. No need to rehash the old arguments, then. After all, I eschew behaving like an anti-Mormon whenever I can.
Once again, GF, you’re taking a quote out of context and twisting it to suit your purposes. The “my faith must be refuted” was part of a thought that continued beyond the comma, you see.
I thought they actually taught things like English grammar and sentence structure in school when you were growing up?
Nice try, GF.
I do eschew all other religious denominations, because I consider them inferior to my own, as coal is inferior to diamonds.
I would presume that you are of the same mind regarding your own faith. If that presumption is correct, then this accusation by you is unadulterated hypocrisy.
The difference between you and me lies in the fact that I don’t go about seeking to discredit what you believe. Frankly, I don’t even know your denomination, other than ex-Mormon.
You, on the other hand, are obsessed with demonstrating the error of my ways. You and I have been sparring in this arena for months.
I proclaim boldly that the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ lies in the LDS Church, and nowhere else. You are free to take insult if you like, but there is no comparison between that simple declaration and the tactics of the anti-Mormon to smear, misrepresent, and distort my faith.
Nicmarlo, you have again refused to understand what I said. I said - and re-clarified - that salvation requires acceptance of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (the fullness thereof), and that this Gospel was taught by Joseph Smith. It is an incidental truth that results to say that Smith must be accepted as a prophet in order to receive salvation.
If you accept the fullness of the Gospel, acceptance of Smith is a natural consequence.
Do try to keep up.
~”Come nopw, list the heresies you clAIM WE BELIEVE IN. gO AHEAD.”~
No. I choose to retain the moral high ground, thank you. I’m not here to tear your faith down, I’m here to defend my faith from your attacks.
Unlike the typical anti-Mormon, I do not find the defense of my faith to necessitate the deprecation of another. You go believe how you wish. I will politely disagree.
~”HOW then can the “acceptance of the prophet be incidental since these questions determine the “worthiness” of one to be allowed entrance to the temple and partake of the required ordinances??”~
The Priesthood is part of the Gospel. The Prophet is the priesthood leader.
Don’t like it? Find another church. Oh, wait, you already did. So why the ongoing obsession, Greyfoxx?
Hello, II. I hope you are well.
The Gospel is Christ’s Gospel, not Joseph Smith’s, nor Moses, nor Abraham’s, not Paul’s.
It is about Christ. I believe that Paul was an Apostle of Christ, chosen and blinded by an angel.
But even if I didn’t believe these things, my salvation does NOT come from whether or not I believe anything about Paul, Moses, or Abraham, but that I believe in Christ, and have accepted Him as my Savior.
My salvation comes from belief in no one and nothing else.
~”So the next question is, “Is the Doctrine & Covenants ‘finished?’””~
No. We believe in an open canon. God continues to speak. If He gives new light and knowledge that the membership of the Church finds sufficiently precious to include in our scriptures, it will be included. The last time this happened was 1918 (some would argue 1978).
Some think that the Proclamation to the World could appropriately be called “Section 139, pending.”
Unlike the bulk of Christendom, we believe that God still speaks to His people, as He has always done. It’s a pity most people don’t choose to listen.
~”I keep waiting, where is that pesky list?”~
I have, of course, already denied your request, but... Give me a break. Some of actually have jobs. You know, the place you go during the day to make money to live? We don’t have time to sit about all day bashing and pestering people on the Internet.
He has a guilty conscience because he allows himself to be carried on the rolls of the Church in a dishonorable manner.
I did step out of the pit and haven’t darkened the doors of a baptist church in thirty years.
No. I choose to retain the moral high ground, thank you.Really? How? By claiming that my faith is based on a litany of heresies? You did claim that you know.
I’m not here to tear your faith down, I’m here to defend my faith from your attacks.What attacks have I levied? I simply asked you to list the heresies YOU claim the rest of Christendom believes in.
Unlike the typical anti-Mormon, I do not find the defense of my faith to necessitate the deprecation of another.Then why did you make the claim of many heresies that you now 'decline' to enumerate?
I said: “acceptance of the Gospel of Jesus Christ”
You said: “The Gospel is Christ’s Gospel, not Joseph Smith’s, nor Moses, nor Abraham’s, not Paul’s.”
Umm... Duh. Where did I say differently?
You might have a reading comprehension problem. Many community colleges have remedial courses for such matters.
Unlike the bulk of Christendom, ...Which you claim to be apostate and heretical!
...we believe that God still speaks to His people, as He has always done.So why did the Great Apostacy darken the rest of Christendom from whenever it occurred (during the Arian controversy?) to the magik spectakles of Joe Smith? God was struck silent for 1,500 years? And now he speaks clearly whenever the US government threatens (the flip-flops on polygamy and negro 'priests' leap to mind) to force change?
I said: “The Gospel is Christ’s Gospel, not Joseph Smith’s, nor Moses, nor Abraham’s, not Paul’s.” Now you say: I said: “acceptance of the Gospel of Jesus Christ” It is YOU with the problem. You are stating that salvation comes through belief in Joseph Smith, as he is "part and parcel" of "accepting the Gospel." That's NOT what Christ says.
If you accept the fullness of the Gospel, acceptance of Smith is a natural consequence.Why? Especially since the Holy Writ specifically warns us against additions such as thos penned by Smith?
One who makes statements like this should expect to be called on them.
Galations 1:8-9:"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."
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.