It continually amazes me how you have come to know more about what I believe than I do.
Wait... Who are you, really...?
| 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
~”How do you all have the time?”~
I don’t. I just skim past Elsie.
~”Right, but it is seldom used.”~
Anecdotally, I was in a meeting with the leaders of my ward (PEC, for sevenbak’s sake), and we were doing some scripture study. We turned to John 1. We read through the first few verses, then I reminded them that the Joseph Smith Translation clarifies it a great deal.
Point being, yes, we have access to JST, but in practice we don’t use it much. In my opinion, the primary reason that Smith was commanded to retranslate the Bible was to give us many of the great sections of the Doctrine & Covenants. Some of the greatest doctrine in there was given to Joseph as he was pondering the Bible during the retranslation process.
Good passage, Sevenbak. Time for another round of introspection, I suppose.
~”Find out the generation where Gods began to be?”~
Umm... Read the rest of the verse.
CONTEXT, my friend. It changes all KINDS of things. It also helps the reactionary look less foolish.
‘Retranslated’? ... Amazing! And you claim to be bright!
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.
But God has said (are you listening ?) that the gospel shall never change from that which was received by the New Testament christians ...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."If Joseph SMith had come along and preached that same gospel (as it is presented in the New Testament documents) ... there would be no problem.
However ... Jospeh's gospel is changed, i.e different (however so slightly) ... from what we find in the New Testament documents ... for which the scriptures say ... he is accursed.
~”Does that make it impossible for you to answer simple questions?”~
The point, Narses, is that ALL these questions have been answered before. And NOBODY listens to the explanations. So the SAME questions come from the SAME people the next time around. Well, guess what? We Mormons are learning from past experience.
If you are truly interested in the answers from the LDS perspective, I’m going to really help you out. Go to http://www.onlymormon.com and run the question through the search engine. It’s a filtered version of Google. You’ll find LDS answers to these questions mighty quick.
If your objective, instead, is to somehow trap or trick us, then I expect you will continue to demand answers to these questions. Either way, your intentions will be quite clear after you read this post.
~”I will pray for your mind to have the darkness lifted, seven.”~
Sevenbak, I got the same prayers a few months back.
It hasn’t taken, yet. Must be the demonic inspiration. Better luck to you.
~”Tell us about Kolob.”~
Sure. It’s the name of the star closest to the throne of God.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob
Simple, wasn’t it? And they say we Mormons can’t answer questions...
Because of the Atoning Sacrifice of Jesus Christ, I can return to live forever with my Heavenly Father.
_____________________________________________________
RETURN where ????
~”I don’t see how those two statements can be reconciled.”~
You seem genuine. As you read on, you’ll see that I’ve answered this same concern. I’ll be happy to explain it you you.
We are speaking here from the point of view of LDS doctrine, which is what I was asserting.
Smith was a prophet. He taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We must accept the Gospel of Jesus Christ in order to receive salvation. Therefore, we must incidentally accept Smith, who taught the Gospel, as a genuine prophet.
This is not to say that salvation comes through Smith. Salvation comes only in and through Christ. Period. End of story, and I’m sure we agree on that point. But the Priesthood, prophets, and revelation - all point which intertwine intimately with Smith - are part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Thank you for the question.
~”You do exactly what you are accusing ... and that is an indicator of a not so good spirit directing your remarks.”~
While I appreciate your concern for my everlasting soul, I rarely quote from other people or works to advance my argument, and I NEVER do so in an effort to destroy the religion of another.
It is tough to take a quote out of context when you rarely use a quote.
I invite you to point out to me a post where I have taken a quote out of context, where I don’t later acknowledge my error. Otherwise, I anticipate your apology for the accusation.
From the LDS hymn book, “There Is a Green Hill Far Away”:
“There is a green hill far away,
Without a city wall,
Where the dear Lord was crucified,
Who died to save us all.
We may not know,
we cannot tell,
What pains he had to bear,
But we believe it was for us
He hung and suffered there.
There was no other good enough
To pay the price of sin.
He only could unlock the gate
Of heav’n and let us in.
Oh, dearly, dearly has he loved!
And we must love him too,
And trust in his redeeming blood,
And try his works to do.”
__________________________________________________
I’ve got news for you, kid
I sang that song 50 years ago
It’s not a mormon song
The mormons “borrowed” it from the Christians..
Welcome to my world...
:)
I sang that song 50 years ago
It’s not a mormon song
The mormons “borrowed” it from the Christians..
Welcome to my world...
++++++++++++++++
we use the good wherever we find it.
Yes. Due to insistent badgering, I have explained in the most simple terms WHY it is required. You know, A=B, etc.
You have ignored my explanations.
It still remains that salvation is -through- Christ alone.
I need faith to be saved. My faith does not save me. Christ does.
I need repentance to be saved. My repentance does not save me. Christ does.
I need good works to be saved. My good works do not save me. Christ does.
I need the Gospel of Jesus Christ to be saved. The Gospel of Jesus Christ does not save me. Christ does.
I need the teachings of Joseph Smith to be saved. The teachings of Joseph Smith does not save me. Christ does.
Are you seeing a pattern here? You are conflating two things: -requisites- for salvation (faith, acceptance of prophets, etc.) and the -source- of salvation (Christ). I am saying that they are two different things.
Why has it taken three hundred posts for me to get this through to you? Perhaps there really is none so deaf as he who will not hear?
~”On the other hand, care to tell us all exactly how many times since Smith has died that an LDS “prophet”...
(a)...heard someting from God... “~
Revelation is ongoing. It is operative continuously in the day-to-day direction of the Church.
But even disregarding that, and sticking with the most dramatic examples, I’m certain you are familiar with D&C 138. That came in 1918.
~”(b)...started the “canonization” process themselves...”~
1918. You might also check out sections 135 and 136, as well as both of the Official Declarations (canonized into LDS scripture despite your object below).
~”(c)...called it a “revelation” from God (and not some major social issues “declaration”)?”~
As I said, it happens all the time. One major example is the establishment of the Perpetual Education Fund. Another is the concept of “mini-temples” - which is actually quite a bit more interesting of a story than it sounds. Most recently is the calling of President Monson as the new Prophet. This is a calling that is made by revelation.
~”I think the “answer” is 0 times, is it not?”~
Correct. It is not.
~”(Wow! Some great importance it is to have that Amos 3:7 man @ the helm, eh?)”~
Darn tootin’!
Well, thanks, Colo. I really am a cheery person in real life.
~”‘Retranslated’? “~
Umm... Perhaps my language skills are escaping me. What do you call it when something is translated again?
Fortunately, Joseph had revelation to help him this time. Perhaps, given that fact, a better term might be “restoration,” or “uncorruption,” or “clean up of the hell-of-a-hash Christianity has made of scripture over the last two millenia-tion?”
How, do you think, might one go about conjugating that last verb beyond its gerund form?
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.