Posted on 09/03/2010 5:27:36 AM PDT by Paragon Defender
Glenn Beck has been in the news lately and, not surprisingly, so has his religion. Some have warned Christians to be wary of Beck, not because of his political views but because of his religious affiliation. He is, they say, not a real Christian.
I'm betting, though, that he is. I don't know Mr. Beck personally, but he belongs to the same church I do, and I'm a pretty mainstream member. I'll wager that his beliefs resemble mine.
I believe in God, the Father Almighty, the creator of heaven and earth. I also believe in Jesus Christ, his only-begotten Son, the Lord of all humankind, who, before being born to the Virgin Mary, was the Jehovah of the Old Testament. I believe that Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate, that he was crucified, died and was buried. While his body lay in the tomb, he descended into the realm of the spirits of the dead and preached the gospel there. On the third day, Jesus rose, physically, from death. He ascended into heaven, where he sits at the right hand of the Father. He will return, however, in power and great glory, to judge the living and the dead. In the meantime, we can receive guidance from the Holy Spirit, the third member of the Trinity.
I believe that Christ founded a church in order to teach his doctrine and administer the ordinances of salvation to all humanity and that the fellowship of the Saints, Christ's disciples, transcends not only all ethnic, cultural and national divisions but even death itself. I believe in the forgiveness of sins and the resurrection of the body, which are made possible only through the gracious Atonement of Jesus Christ, in whom we have our only hope of salvation. And, finally, I believe in everlasting life.
Some will have recognized that the structure and phrasing of the two paragraphs above were modeled, quite consciously, on the ancient "Apostles' Creed" — a text dating to roughly the late fifth century. In the modern translation favored by the Church of England, the Apostles' Creed reads as follows:
"I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried; he descended into hell. On the third day he rose again; he ascended into heaven, he is seated at the right hand of the Father, and he will come to judge the living and the dead.
"I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen."
Now, obviously, I've changed the language a bit. Mostly, I wanted to use more familiar or more typically Mormon terms. For instance, the word "catholic" is rarely used, nowadays, in its original sense of "universal" — it should be obvious that Henry VIII's church isn't announcing its surrender to the pope when it recites the Apostles' Creed — but Latter-day Saints do most definitely believe that the church established by Jesus has a universal mission.
More significantly, where the original Apostles' Creed says that Christ was "conceived by the Holy Spirit" ("conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto"), Latter-day Saints will want to insist that Jesus is the divine Son of God the Father. The scriptures are completely silent as to the mechanism of Christ's conception, and they do say that the Holy Spirit came upon Mary (Luke 1:35), but they also plainly declare that Jesus was and is "the Son of the Highest" (Luke 1:32). And emphasis on the fact that Jesus is the Son of God the Father scarcely seems a plausible basis for claiming that Latter-day Saints aren't Christians.
Believing what we do, because we agree so closely with the traditional Apostles' Creed, either Glenn Beck and I (and, for that matter, Mitt Romney and Harry Reid) are Christians, or those who formulated the creed and all those who have affirmed it during the centuries since then haven't been, either.
OK, OK, maybe I'm slow, but lets give it one more college try, OK? I absolutely agree to you that Satan tries to emulate God and deliver messages in his stead. I absolutely agree we have to test messages to see if they are from God.
Point 1 - satan can (including his demonic minions) hear our prayers and react to them. Agreed on by both of us.
I don't recall ever being shown in the Bible where Satan can answer a prayer to god as if he was God and God can't answer you because Satan is answering.
Let me refer you to a popular verse you like to cite to me:
1Jo 4:1* Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
If the demonic could not answer prayers to God, there would be no need for warnings like this in the Bible because EVERY spirit would be from God. Are we to agree that satan can take the appearance of an angel of light and by doing so represent a true angel bearing God's reply. If the Bible warns us about spiritual counterfeits (complete with miracles), then counterfeit answers to prayer are also in the mix.
Point 2 - Recognizing God's answer versus satan's
You state . . God is consistent, unchanging. . , I agree wholeheartedly. Regarding spiritual truth God does not contradict, and is consistent and unchanging. Isaiah 8:20 says, “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” Thus, a person cannot excuse away physical evidence against a certain belief simply because he or she thinks the “feeling” received was “from God.” The Holy Ghost does not contradict Himself by giving revelation inconsistent with His revealed Word.
You see DU - you didn't answer what precautions you took to ensure your 'answer' was valid. Were your feelings/emotions your precautions or something else.
Have you gotten your check yet Zilla?
Me neither...
Well, we know THAT Delph. You are speshul!
There is nothing of goodness here just put downs and an attempt of trying to annihilate showing the author intolerance!
I'm not asking the reason...I'm noting the disrespect.
Then try a different tactic Resty, start with no more put downs like calling a bunch of posters "nothings" as if they are dirt under your feet.
Then maybe a little truth and dropping that "poor little old me" victim act right after you insult everyone...
Then try a different tactic Resty, start with no more put downs like calling a bunch of posters "nothings" as if they are dirt under your feet.
Then maybe a little truth and dropping that "poor little old me" victim act right after you insult everyone...
the spirit whispers to you and it's like a warm blanket of comfort knowing God loves you.
You world relies upon 'feelings' and other subjective standards. Can you show me from the Bible where feelings and emotion from the heart are the true test of what is "true" from what is "false" and reliable that is.
Godzilla, I am just curious to know exactly how you expect Mormons to react to your assertions, assuming we actually do have faith and have received answers (If it helps to imagine that we are genuine, but deceived, great, imagine that, just tell me how you would respond.)
Perhaps if I lived in Utah I would probably know by experience eh? But thats ok DU, the Christians have faced those statements and accusations for nearly 2000 years.
The foundation of my faith is not based upon subjective feelings and emotions alone, as you have described yours to be. There is solid, physical evidence that the Jesus of the Bible was a real person and that the events and locations in the Bible are real, physical places, something the bom is unable to do.
The foundation of my faith is not based upon my works of righteousness to prove my own worthiness, but rest upon the completed work of Christ and the completely free nature of the offer of the forgiveness of my sins. I have no difficulty in seeing that you have been deceived, sinful man has that tendency to prefer the deception over the truth. Answers of feeling or answers of fact.
I did that for a reason, if people want I can re-post the links to the different versions, but for this comment, it does not matter what you actually said.
You may try, but then you'd end up with egg on your face again just like you did when you tried to paint me as a paid internet clergyman doing antimormonism as my job.
You told your story two different ways... Do I have to connect the dots for you? By the logic anti's have used on this very thread, I should be questioning your story, but you get really mad when I do.
The only way you can 'question' my story is to fabricate those portions from your fantasy world du.
Anti's on this thread, and I believe you are one of them have pointed to the number of times Joseph told his story with different details as evidence that the story is false.
Indeed, including the three accounts your lds link and you failed to reconcile.
Now if you combine the many times we Mormons have been told things by anti Mormons that turn out to be outright fabrications, fabrications that even the anti espousing it does not believe, and won't admit to when proven absolutely false, and then other anti's complain that their word is not good enough...
Long on words du, short on facts - just like the fabrications and repetitions of the shirts story about Lackish, based upon poor and out of date scholarship. Please, we've begged for mormons to prove these outright fabrications here - and only received nothing but crickets.
My purpose is to make you think about it from our perspective, if even just for a moment.
Ga 4:16* Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?
To state anything with certainty is to speak with more authority than is granted to mere mortals. (And don't give me that no really we are right, "honest" jive or you'll only prove you don't understand anything the scientific process has to offer about statistical model of reality. :-)
Thats ok du, since you've already told us you live in the world of hypothetical - reality doesn't matter to you, only your vested interest in becoming a god.
Then try a different tactic Resty, start with no more put downs like calling a bunch of posters "nothings" as if they are dirt under your feet.
Then maybe a little truth and dropping that "poor little old me" victim act right after you insult everyone...
The only reason for such a post is to mask the fact that they don't have any defense other than to defame, obfuscate and deflect from the truth. To actually put up would show them to be the posers in the situation.
The rel mod doesn’t even try to keep up with this garbage. Can we blame him/her?
Oh, I think the mod is smarter than that ;)
I noticed the word “flesh” was capitalized in that tome, but not God.....interesting since Mormonism is totally focused upon the world, accomplishments, attainments, and the flesh.
That is very funny the only is victim here is the slander when many meet the Lord someday!
I think that Godzilla has some good advice for you, DU. First, HRYK. No amount of word-twisting on your part is going to make it an issue. Second, the dog might be a female and you'd have a hard time talking about it.
Elsie wrote in 1484: Payback's a bitch. DelphiUser wrote in 1543: I grew up just south and west of the south side of Chicago, I never used language like that. Nice christian post there.
BTW if you get extra credit in your temple rituals for self-righteousness, I'd suggest you submit that post. It's one of the finest examples I've seen in awhile. ;-)
Very revealing.
Expect a few “but they really didn't answer the question!” or “All those words and nothing is really said” or a personal favorite “so they are using their own flawed material to back up the very flawed ideas and make them fact?”
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.