Galatians 1:6-9 [Archive] - TheologyWeb Campus

Janice

March 26th 2007, 03:58 AM

That assumes that your interpretation is correct. Many "Christians" tend to have an inability to intelligently peruse the Bible objectively without their preconceived interpretations biasing them. From a convert perspective, as I converted to the LDS Church, on Mormonism and the Bible, I must tell you that their interpretation of the text is a possible interpretation. Regardless of one's position, a proper and intelligent position must admit when from a purely objective stance the possibility exists. IMO, if you cannot admit the possibility of error, you are most definitely in error.

If you are willing to consider anyone's teaching correct just because you yourself might be wrong, you really don't have any faith at all. We are to compare the message or interpretation of others (who just might be false teachers) to scripture. This is the noble thing to do.

For instance:

Isaiah 43
10Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

11I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Joseph Smith said, "You have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves..."

Being familiar with the gospel of Christ which is presented in the Bible, we are not open to the possibilty of another or a perverted gospel presented to us by others. If we are unfamiliar with the gospel of Christ, we will be tossed to and fro and not know a false teacher from a true teacher.

Jesus said, "...But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:" He had opportunity to say that you must be married for time and eternity if you want eternal life. He never said that.

Ezra Taft Benson said, “Understand that temple marriage is essential to your salvation and exaltation.” (Ensign, May 1988, p. 51.)

Do Christians need to follow a dietary law to have eternal life?

The Bible says that justification comes through faith in Jesus Christ, not through obedience to the law of Moses, submission to circumcision, or through keeping dietary laws.

Jesus said, "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."

Joseph Fielding Smith said, "... my brethren, if you drink coffee or tea, or take tobacco, are you letting a cup of tea or a little tobacco stand in the road and bar you from the celestial kingdom of God, where you might otherwise have received a fulness of glory?" (Doctrines of Salvation Vol. 2, p. 16)

The Bishop

March 26th 2007, 01:36 PM

If you are willing to consider anyone's teaching correct just because you yourself might be wrong, you really don't have any faith at all. We are to compare the message or interpretation of others (who just might be false teachers) to scripture. This is the noble thing to do.

No, I only consider the possibility of their interpretation. This must then be studied and prayed over in an unbiased manner, open to the possibility that one may be wrong in one's position, that the Holy Spirit may guide one without impedence of personally held position.

For instance:

Isaiah 43
10Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

11I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Joseph Smith said, "You have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves..."

I take references such as this one "before me there was no God formed" as referencing God as a being to be worshipped, and given the relative context (Man on Earth), God is the only god that is in such a position as to be worship and revered, this does not delimit other gods.

Your Joseph Smith quote is misquoted in adding a capital to the term "gods". "Gods" with the capital impies reverence and thus, a form of worship.

Being familiar with the gospel of Christ which is presented in the Bible, we are not open to the possibilty of another or a perverted gospel presented to us by others. If we are unfamiliar with the gospel of Christ, we will be tossed to and fro and not know a false teacher from a true teacher. Or, are you merely familiar with a gospel of Christ which has evolved from the original into another gospel? Have you only been led by false teachers into an erroneous belief?

Jesus said, "...But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:" He had opportunity to say that you must be married for time and eternity if you want eternal life. He never said that. Do you understand the context of the reference cited here? Christ is referencing a widow and her late husband's brothers. Let us assume the LDS are correct and the couple were married in an eternal marriage in the existing temple. She is then widowed and remarries to the brothers in succession. This is the context, the Sadducees then ask, who is she married to in the hereafter? Now, the answer given by Christ is this: they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead [of these eight individuals] will then neither marry, nor are given in marriage. It is not a commentary on a gospel principle, it is an answer as to which of the eight will be her husband. It states that in heaven these eight will be bound as they were on earth, Christ introduces no new doctrine and leaves the Sadducees frustrated in their attempt at trapping Christ.

Ezra Taft Benson said, “Understand that temple marriage is essential to your salvation and exaltation.” (Ensign, May 1988, p. 51.) We see then that Christ did not comment on the nature of marriage because such was unnecessary at the time.

Do Christians need to follow a dietary law to have eternal life?
If God states such, yes. Did the Jews prior to the Biblical passage you quote below need to follow a dietary law to have eternal life? Yes.

The Bible says that justification comes through faith in Jesus Christ, not through obedience to the law of Moses, submission to circumcision, or through keeping dietary laws.
James 2: 21, 24-25
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
• • •
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? And then you forget the previous portion of the sermon:
Romans 2:11-16
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. It is not stating the law is unnecessary, only that keeping a law, such as circumcision, only justifies if one keeps the entire law.

Jesus said, "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man." quote][quote]Matthew 15:11-20
11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?
17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?
18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.
Thus we see, Christ is speaking a parable. Christ is saying that which defileth a man is what is in his heart. If a man eats the unclean thing because he is being disobedient to God's word (which is evil is it not?), he is defiled because he is being disobedient to God's word, not because he is eating the unclean thing. This is what Christ stated.

Joseph Fielding Smith said, "... my brethren, if you drink coffee or tea, or take tobacco, are you letting a cup of tea or a little tobacco stand in the road and bar you from the celestial kingdom of God, where you might otherwise have received a fulness of glory?" (Doctrines of Salvation Vol. 2, p. 16)
Thus, if God has made a command, that is currently in force, and one willfully disobeys, thus he is entering into "evil thoughts" and becoming defiled.

Bill the Cat

March 26th 2007, 02:34 PM

That assumes that your interpretation is correct.

I'm sure the Apostle Paul got that argument as well.

Many "Christians" tend to have an inability to intelligently peruse the Bible objectively

As do many "Mormons"

without their preconceived interpretations biasing them.

Everyone comes at the Scriptures with preconceptions. It is a fact of life and study.

From a convert perspective, as I converted to the LDS Church, on Mormonism and the Bible, I must tell you that their interpretation of the text is a possible interpretation.

That was a sweeping statement. Which part? Which doctrine? Interpretation can not trump exegesis.

Regardless of one's position, a proper and intelligent position must admit when from a purely objective stance the possibility exists.

I can confidently say from proper and intelligent position with certainty that Satan is not the God of Heaven, but some people say he is. Can you really say that you accept that position on the possibility of an interpretation?

IMO, if you cannot admit the possibility of error, you are most definitely in error.

So, back at you, can you admit the possibility that Satan is Heavenly Father? Why not?

The Bishop

March 26th 2007, 02:55 PM

I'm sure the Apostle Paul got that argument as well. I believe we were discussing current interpretations of Paul's words. I cannot state to his position as we are debating what it was.

As do many "Mormons" Mormons are "Christians" in my estimation of the term, which I will not go into as it is off the topic at hand.

Everyone comes at the Scriptures with preconceptions. It is a fact of life and study. Yes, but one needs to drop them to objectively assess an interpretation being disputed.
That was a sweeping statement. Which part? Which doctrine? Interpretation can not trump exegesis.All of it. An analysis is not an exegesis if it is analized with a belief that one is correct and unable to acknowledge the possibility of prior error on the part of the examiner. Following my exegesis prior to conversion, I believe the Bible can be held as without contradiction to the Mormon belief.

I can confidently say from proper and intelligent position with certainty that Satan is not the God of Heaven, but some people say he is. Can you really say that you accept that position on the possibility of an interpretation? Does the Bible actually hold some portion which states such? If so, please enlighten me so that I may study such thoroughly to allow me to reassess my position.

So, back at you, can you admit the possibility that Satan is Heavenly Father? Why not?Not without some Biblical reference to such, as I believe in the Bible. If the statements are Biblically backed, and a complete exegesis supports such, I would be forced to admit the possibility, it may not be the possibility I support as the Bible tends to state Satan is not, but it would then be a possibility. Now, if it something disagreeing with the Bible a complete assessment of the validity of the Bible would need to be in order.

Bill the Cat

March 26th 2007, 03:33 PM

I believe we were discussing current interpretations of Paul's words. I cannot state to his position as we are debating what it was.

Right. Which is why we can't just isolate a single passage and declare every interpretation of that passage valid. They must be weighed against the whole of the context, letter, corpus of Paul's work, and last the Bible as a whole.

Mormons are "Christians" in my estimation of the term, which I will not go into as it is off the topic at hand.

And Montanists, Sabellians, Gnostics, etc. were "Christians" in their estimation, but their heretical beliefs disqualified them from that term.

Yes, but one needs to drop them to objectively assess an interpretation being disputed.

Sure, but one must not drop what the Bible says elsewhere, as context and consistency are crucial

All of it. An analysis is not an exegesis if it is analized with a belief that one is correct and unable to acknowledge the possibility of prior error on the part of the examiner.

When plain statements of fact are made, then interpretation is very narrow. Not all interpretations deserve validity.

Following my exegesis prior to conversion, I believe the Bible can be held as without contradiction to the Mormon belief.

Following my exegesis in the past several years, I believe Mormonism contradicts nearly every Biblical doctrine. Both of our "interpretations" can not be valid. The rules of logic dictate that opposing arguments can not be both true.

Does the Bible actually hold some portion which states such? If so, please enlighten me so that I may study such thoroughly to allow me to reassess my position.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible6.htm#god-and-satan-the-same

"AND Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel." (I Chronicles 21:1)

"AND again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah." (II Samuel 24:1)

Thus you must consider it valid based on your earlier comment.

Not without some Biblical reference to such, as I believe in the Bible. If the statements are Biblically backed, and a complete exegesis supports such,

There's the rub. Unique Mormon doctrine can not stand up to proper exegesis and must be excused as "latter revelation"

I would be forced to admit the possibility, it may not be the possibility I support as the Bible tends to state Satan is not, but it would then be a possibility. Now, if it something disagreeing with the Bible a complete assessment of the validity of the Bible would need to be in order.

So, you have said that "Regardless of one's position, a proper and intelligent position must admit when from a purely objective stance the possibility exists."

And with that, you must admit the possibility that Satan is Heavenly Father, which shows the bankruptcy of acknowledging every interpretation as valid.

The Bishop

March 26th 2007, 04:10 PM

Right. Which is why we can't just isolate a single passage and declare every interpretation of that passage valid. They must be weighed against the whole of the context, letter, corpus of Paul's work, and last the Bible as a whole.

And Montanists, Sabellians, Gnostics, etc. were "Christians" in their estimation, but their heretical beliefs disqualified them from that term.

Sure, but one must not drop what the Bible says elsewhere, as context and consistency are crucial

When plain statements of fact are made, then interpretation is very narrow. Not all interpretations deserve validity.

Following my exegesis in the past several years, I believe Mormonism contradicts nearly every Biblical doctrine. Both of our "interpretations" can not be valid. The rules of logic dictate that opposing arguments can not be both true.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible6.htm#god-and-satan-the-same

"AND Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel." (I Chronicles 21:1)

"AND again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah." (II Samuel 24:1)

Thus you must consider it valid based on your earlier comment.

There's the rub. Unique Mormon doctrine can not stand up to proper exegesis and must be excused as "latter revelation"

So, you have said that "Regardless of one's position, a proper and intelligent position must admit when from a purely objective stance the possibility exists."

And with that, you must admit the possibility that Satan is Heavenly Father, which shows the bankruptcy of acknowledging every interpretation as valid.
As to the "heretical" beliefs disqualifying them, such would then necessitate that I must then assume beliefs that are heretical from a Mormon stance disqualifies another as "Christian". Thus, those that believe Trinitarian Doctrine are disqualified from being "Christian", if I were to take or accept such a position.

Now, admitting the possibility is not admitting the truthfulness of such a possibility. You seem to take the stance that possibility is held as fact. Such is not so, I do not have a perfect knowledge, I have faith.

Human evolution is possible, but I hesitate to state that it is fact as it appears to conflict with the creation account and is still evolving in its exact nature. Does this then mean that I disbelieve creation? Or that I absolutely deny evolution? No, it only means there is something I may not know.

Now, Paul's statements taken to mean that Mormon position on the gospel of Christ being "another gospel" requires a complete understanding of the gospel, each perceived conflicting belief from the Mormon's to Bible text. Then a complete assessment as to whether the possibility of the fact of conflict must then be made. I believe that the Bible does not necessitate that the Mormon position conflicts.

Yes, one of our views is wrong. From my perspective and study it appears to me that you are in error, thus your gospel is "another gospel", you hold the opposing view, also due to study. It is a personal decision based on an exegesis, resulting in a stance dependent on faith, defined as:
Heb. 11: 1
1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. My faith is the substance of my hope that the gospel according to Mormon beliefs is true, my evidence of things unseen.

It is alive and visible to the world that my Heavenly Father may be glorified.

Janice

March 26th 2007, 04:44 PM

No, I only consider the possibility of their interpretation. This must then be studied and prayed over in an unbiased manner, open to the possibility that one may be wrong in one's position, that the Holy Spirit may guide one without impedence of personally held position.

I have studied and prayed over scripture. When you consider the LDS perspective, anyone who disagrees with Mormoniosm, disagrees with truth. There is no salvation outside the LDS church. We teach for doctrines the commandments of men. All our creeds are an abominatiuon to Joseph Smith's followers. We have no authority from God according to LDS. We are denied the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost because we aren't worthy of that companionship. Protestant ministers are hirelings of Satan. Any answer to prayer that a non-LDS receives that contradicts Mormonism is to be considered not an answer from God. Mormonism doesn't allow the possibilty of other interpretations being correct.

"Now, I ask all who hear me, why the learned men who are preaching salvation, say that God created the heavenws and earth out of nothing? The reason is, that they are unlearned in the things of God, and have not the gift of the Holy Ghost; they account it blasphemy in any one to contradict their idea. If you tell them that God made thne world out of something, they will call you a fool. But I am learned, and know more than all the world put together. The Holy Ghost does, anyhow, and He is within me, and comprehends more than all the world: and I will associate with Him." - Joseph Smith as cited in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 350

I take references such as this one "before me there was no God formed" as referencing God as a being to be worshipped, and given the relative context (Man on Earth), God is the only god that is in such a position as to be worship and revered, this does not delimit other gods.

You have three Gods in your Godhead. Which one do you worship? When you become a God over your own kingdom, who will your spirit children worship?

Your Joseph Smith quote is misquoted in adding a capital to the term "gods". "Gods" with the capital impies reverence and thus, a form of worship.

Gods with the capital is used in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 346. Who are you to try to correct that? "...and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you..."

2 Our Father Advanced and
Progressed Until He Became God

President Joseph Fielding Smith said: “Our Father in heaven, according to the Prophet, had a Father, and since there has been a condition of this kind through all eternity, each Father had a Father” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:47).

President Joseph F. Smith taught: “I know that God is a being with body, parts and passions.... Man was born of woman; Christ, the Savior, was born of woman; and God, the Father was born of woman” (Church News, 19 Sept. 1936, p. 2).

President Wilford Woodruff explained: “[God] has had his endowments a great many years ago. He has ascended to his thrones, principalities and powers in the eternities. We are his children.....We are here to fill a probation and receive an education” (Deseret News Weekly, 28 Sept. 1881, p. 546).

How does it help to know that the basic elements of God’s life in a mortal world were the same as ours? President Brigham Young explained:

“He is our Father—the Father of our Spirits—and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are....

“...There never was a time when there were not Gods and worlds and when men were not passing through the same ordeals that we are now passing through....

“It appears ridiculous to the world, under their darkened and erroneous traditions, that God has been a finite being” (Deseret News, 16 Nov. 1859, p. 290).
(Search These Commandments, Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, Copyright 1984, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, pp. 153-154)

“...There never was a time when there were not Gods and worlds and when men were not passing through the same ordeals that we are now passing through...." emphasis mine

Or, are you merely familiar with a gospel of Christ which has evolved from the original into another gospel? Have you only been led by false teachers into an erroneous belief?

No, I have not been led by false teachers into an erroneous belief as Mormons like to claim.

Psalm 119
11Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.

I believed that I lacked wisdom, so I asked of God.

James 1
5If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

Do you understand the context of the reference cited here? Christ is referencing a widow and her late husband's brothers. Let us assume the LDS are correct and the couple were married in an eternal marriage in the existing temple. She is then widowed and remarries to the brothers in succession. This is the context, the Sadducees then ask, who is she married to in the hereafter? Now, the answer given by Christ is this: they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead [of these eight individuals] will then neither marry, nor are given in marriage. It is not a commentary on a gospel principle, it is an answer as to which of the eight will be her husband. It states that in heaven these eight will be bound as they were on earth, Christ introduces no new doctrine and leaves the Sadducees frustrated in their attempt at trapping Christ.

Yes, I understand the context. What you don't seem to understand is that there is no need for marriage in heaven and marriage is not a necessity for eternal life. His blood pays for our eternal life, not our temple recommends, Mormon priesthood, eternal companions, adhering to abstinence from coffee, tea, alcohol, tobacco, etc.

Jesus said, "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man." quote]
Thus we see, Christ is speaking a parable. Christ is saying that which defileth a man is what is in his heart. If a man eats the unclean thing because he is being disobedient to God's word (which is evil is it not?), he is defiled because he is being disobedient to God's word, not because he is eating the unclean thing. This is what Christ stated.

Thus, if God has made a command, that is currently in force, and one willfully disobeys, thus he is entering into "evil thoughts" and becoming defiled.

So man can either lose his salvation or help himself to earn it in Mormonism.

Ephesians 2
8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Janice

March 26th 2007, 04:59 PM

As to the "heretical" beliefs disqualifying them, such would then necessitate that I must then assume beliefs that are heretical from a Mormon stance disqualifies another as "Christian". Thus, those that believe Trinitarian Doctrine are disqualified from being "Christian", if I were to take or accept such a position.

Mormons have never considered non-Mormons as true Christians. If there were true Christians outside the LDS church, why would they be denied the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost? Why would they not be converted to Joseph Smith and his "superior" teachings? Why would they not have authority to baptize believers?

"Christianity is the religion of the Christians. Hence, true and acceptable Christianity is found among the saints who have the fullness of the gospel, and a perverted Christianity holds sway among the so-called Christians of apostate Christendom" - Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.132

"What is the church of the devil in our day, and where is the seat of her power? ...It is all of the systems, both Christian and non-Christian, that perverted the pure and perfect gospel ...It is communism; it is Islam; it is Buddhism; it is modern Christianity in all its parts" - Bruce R. McConkie, The Millennial Messiah, p.54-55

Yes, one of our views is wrong.

Undoubtedly!

freelight

March 26th 2007, 05:29 PM

I found this verse a few days ago and after hearing it, Mormonism (as well as some other religions and doctrines) popped into my head. Do you think this is relative to Mormonism? The part that really got me thinking was when an "angel from Heaen" was mentioned, since Mormons believe that Joseph Smith was given a revelation from an angel (correct?).

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel– which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

Hi Ross and all,

If we look at the context of Pauls letter to the church at Galatia,...such a statement was indeed an urgent emphasis of Pauls, perhaps spoken via extreme constrast, kinda of exclamatory. Evidently he was excited over what he felt was an important issue to him personally. The issue was some trying to be justified by the works of the law rather then essentially by the law of faith - this struck at the heart of his teachings, therefore his excitement and choice of words, about any being 'accursed' who taught different than his teaching. Remember Pauls personal opinions and mannerisms are laced thru-out his writings and must be noted as such. Also he is speaking to the specific situation happening in Galatia. (this isnt a blanket, universal statement necessarily. Obviously known to Paul was the fact that angels appeared many times in the OT and to others at the time of Jesus birth and they were not preaching Pauls gospel!)

As far as Moroni or Nephi(there are records that show JS and others knew the angel that appeared to him was 'Nephi' - later this was changed for whatever reason) appearing to JS - what did these personages preach? - besides just giving him instructions and leading him to the so called gold plates - we'd have to weigh the words and all the teaching in the BOM if we want to compare it to Pauls gospel, but then again, Pauls exclamatory statement was to the Galations during a unique times in their history, and its questionable if we could use Pauls singular statement as a general test for all angelic visitations/revelations. It becomes moot after awhile.

By Pauls statement,.....Jesus may have been accursed. They taught different gospels per their unique revelation-dispensations. So this verse by Paul or saying is not the strongest to use against mormonism IMO. Mormonism can be shown inconsistent, problematic, 'unchristian' by traditional orthodox christians on many other obvious grounds as far as 'theology' goes, (lets not forget both lds and traditional xians hold to essentially the same virtue-ethics-laws taught by Christ. - most if not all the issues of concern for some are the technicalities of theological doctrine/ideology).

I really dont think God is too concerned over theological stringencies like some humans are,....so let people believe what they want or are enabled to(with whatever light is given),.....eventually if they are intellectually/spiritually diligent to learn, grow, expand in the light of divine wisdom, love and knowledge....they shall in the purity of their desire and sincerity of heart...come closer to Truth. Its a progressive journey....and each are where they are at, for whatever reason. We can only begin where we are at ......at any point in time and eternity....and expand consciousness from there :smile: . As we grow in Light we may find previous views/beliefs no longer serving us as we embrace more illumined paths. - thing is...this will not happen until more light is afforded in which to make such determinations, inspiring one to move on with respect to what such knowledge grants. Some of us have left mormonism in this respect. Others like Bishop have converted to it for whatever reason. I do wonder Bishops past religious affiliations - he can share if he'd like - will see if any info. is in his profile. Thanks.

paul

Chytraeus

March 26th 2007, 09:43 PM

Wow, I thought this was going to be an interesting thread, but I see that it has been hijacked by Mormons and Gnostics and has completely gone off topic. Mormons clearly preach another gospel than the one that Paul preached. It has nothing to do with the fact that Joseph Smith said he got his doctrine from an angel, it has to do with the fact that his doctrine is nearly the exact opposite of the doctrine of Jesus and Paul. There is absolutely no evidence that the Gospels as we now have them have "evolved from a different form." In fact, no matter how early the manuscripts we find, they always agree with the form we now have. In fact, there is no evidence for any of the historical claims of Mormonism. Since the doctrine of Mormonism is clearly contrary to the Gospel of the Bible, and the Bible has tons more historical and archaeological evidence behind it, I find no reason to abandon the Bible in favor of Mormonism.

The Bishop

March 27th 2007, 03:06 AM

I have studied and prayed over scripture. When you consider the LDS perspective, anyone who disagrees with Mormoniosm, disagrees with truth. There is no salvation outside the LDS church. We teach for doctrines the commandments of men. All our creeds are an abominatiuon to Joseph Smith's followers. We have no authority from God according to LDS. We are denied the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost because we aren't worthy of that companionship. Protestant ministers are hirelings of Satan. Any answer to prayer that a non-LDS receives that contradicts Mormonism is to be considered not an answer from God. Mormonism doesn't allow the possibilty of other interpretations being correct. Absolutely correct. This is my belief, although if evidence shows unequivicably otherwise I will accept such and change my belief.

You have three Gods in your Godhead. Which one do you worship? When you become a God over your own kingdom, who will your spirit children worship? We worship God the Father, through the Son.
John 14: 13
13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

No, I have not been led by false teachers into an erroneous belief as Mormons like to claim.

Psalm 119
11Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.

I believed that I lacked wisdom, so I asked of God.

James 1
5If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. Perhaps, yet I have done the same, one of us is wrong, we both hold that the wrong one is the other.
Yes, I understand the context. What you don't seem to understand is that there is no need for marriage in heaven and marriage is not a necessity for eternal life. Show some Biblical support for this.
So man can either lose his salvation or help himself to earn it in Mormonism.

Ephesians 2
8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Lol, learn the meaning of the colon and semi-colon, and include verse nine, as the colon continues the statement into the next verse.

Also, Paul is not the end all of the apostles. Does he disagree with James?
James 2: 20, 26
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
• • •
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. And himself?
Philippians 2:12-18
12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:
15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;
16 Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.
17 Yea, and if I be offered upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy, and rejoice with you all.
18 For the same cause also do ye joy, and rejoice with me.

1 Timothy 6:18-19
18 That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate;
19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.
and Christ?
Luke 10: 28
28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

Luke 6:35
35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.

As to the term "Gods" capitalized, I will have to doublecheck this. It appears I am wrong.

Janice

March 27th 2007, 05:10 PM

Lol, learn the meaning of the colon and semi-colon, and include verse nine, as the colon continues the statement into the next verse.

Why the rudeness? I understand colons and semi-colons.

Also, Paul is not the end all of the apostles.

Did anyone say that Paul was a better apostle than the others? Was the Bible inspired by God or Paul?

Does he disagree with James?And himself?and Christ?

They all agree. The Bible is inspired by God.

God justifies us by our faith which is a gift from Him. Without faith it is impossible to please Him and it is impossible to do works that glorify Him.

Paul explained how works can't save us. Jesus explained that we must be born again and that the Spirit gives us the new birth. Without the Spirit of Christ, we are not His. If we are not His, the works won't make us right with God. Yet men judge us and justify us by our works. So when men see what we do, they'll say, "Good job!" and pat us on the back. We may even get a promotion. Yet the day will come that we stand before God, and He'll say, "Depart from me... I never knew you." The Believers will stand before God and He'll say, "Well done thou good and faithful servant." It's about WHO you are serving and what kind of relationship you have with Him.

Luke 10
38Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house.

39And she had a sister called Mary, which also sat at Jesus' feet, and heard his word.

40But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me.

41And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things:

42But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her.

Here's another good story:

Matthew 9
11And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?

Luke 18
9And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:

10Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.

11The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

12I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

13And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

14I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

We are totally dependant on God's mercy:

Luke 18
35And it came to pass, that as he was come nigh unto Jericho, a certain blind man sat by the way side begging:

36And hearing the multitude pass by, he asked what it meant.

37And they told him, that Jesus of Nazareth passeth by.

38And he cried, saying, Jesus, thou son of David, have mercy on me.

39And they which went before rebuked him, that he should hold his peace: but he cried so much the more, Thou son of David, have mercy on me.

40And Jesus stood, and commanded him to be brought unto him: and when he was come near, he asked him,

41Saying, What wilt thou that I shall do unto thee? And he said, Lord, that I may receive my sight.

42And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: thy faith hath saved thee.

43And immediately he received his sight, and followed him, glorifying God: and all the people, when they saw it, gave praise unto God.

They didn't praise the blind man for his faith; they praised God.

2 Timothy 2
25In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

Acts 11
18When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

The Bishop

March 28th 2007, 01:29 PM

Why the rudeness? I understand colons and semi-colons. I apologize, I err at times and should not have been rude. Thank you for the correction.

Did anyone say that Paul was a better apostle than the others? Was the Bible inspired by God or Paul?All scripture is inspired by God.

They all agree. The Bible is inspired by God.

God justifies us by our faith which is a gift from Him. Without faith it is impossible to please Him and it is impossible to do works that glorify Him.
I agree with you to a point. They all agree, thus James' statement that "faith without works is dead" defines works as a necessity for living faith. It appears you are stating works are merely a byproduct and thus unnecessary, I disagree. I believe that faith without works is not a saving faith. This is what James was stating, it is what Paul repetitively stated. Works are necessary: they do not save in themselves: because we cannot save ourselves. Grace saves us through our faith, our hope for this unseen salvation, but faith is not a saving faith without works.

Let us analyzie the passage:

Ephesians 2:8-10
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

First statement:

"For by grace are ye saved through faith."

Faith is the key to salvation by grace. This portion does not delimit the necessity of works, it only states that faith is the key.

Second statement attached via semi-colon to show that the two statements closely relate to each other moreson than had a period been used:

"and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

Not of ourselves. We do not save ourself, the grace of God does, which is a gift of God (grace), not the result of works. "It is the gift of God" and "not of works", separated being apositive as shown by the colon. Finally, "lest any man should boast" is a syntactical-descriptive colon, this describes why the previous statements were made. Works cannot "give" salvation or grace, if they could, man could boast. The passage does not state works are not necessary, only that they do not result in salvation, as it is the gift of God.[/quote]

Paul then clarifies in verse 10, God ordained that we should walk in good works. God has decreed that we should walk in good works. Are you stating that Paul says that we do not need to do works, and then immediately turns around and states that God states that we have to do good works?

If someone says, "Good job", or anything like it, it is irrelevant. Christ has stated that we are to show good works to men that our Father in Heaven be glorified in us. Many state, "Jesus was a great man", "Jesus did great mircales", etc. Do these statements then lessen what Christ did? Do they lessen the fact that the Father was glorified in the Son? No. Why then would you assume that such is not the case with man. People state that Moses was a great man, they in effect state, "Good job, Moses", does this then impact the glory God had in Moses? Once again, no, it does not.
Matt. 5: 16
16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Leroy

March 28th 2007, 03:06 PM

Paul then clarifies in verse 10, God ordained that we should walk in good works. God has decreed that we should walk in good works. Are you stating that Paul says that we do not need to do works, and then immediately turns around and states that God states that we have to do good works?

Either we are saved by grace or by works it can’t be a grace + works, IOW, God’s unmerited favor + a few things that merit his favor.

I think a couple points to consider are; 1)who prepared/created/ordained the good works and 2)we merely walk in them

God has prepared these good works and we simple walk in them.

master_mormon

March 28th 2007, 04:46 PM

Back to Galations 1:6-9, this passage is not a prophecy about some sort of angel coming in the future presenting a false gospel. Its a general statement

Galations 1:6-9: "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 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."

Paul is simply saying in general terms if someone comes with another gospel than the one that was preached to them, whether that gospel came from an angel from heaven or another apostle, that gospel should be rejected. There is no more prediction that an angel would do this than another apostle [the WE] would come to present another gospel.

Rejecting angelic visitations and revelations from them would be dangerous as Revelation is given to John by an angel. Now of course people claim that LDS teach a false gospel but LDS could respond by saying that its everyone else that is teaching a false gospel. Everyone believes their views is the right gospel. That is why when someone says to me that I believe in a false gospel being LDS and they cite this passage, I fire right back that "No, you are the one that believes in a false gospel and fire the passage right back at them." At the end of the day, each side uses the same passage to hit the other side with.

Janice

March 29th 2007, 02:28 AM

I apologize, I err at times and should not have been rude. Thank you for the correction.
All scripture is inspired by God.

Then faith without works is dead. What is dead faith?

Hebrews 11
1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Luke 7
50And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

Luke 18
42And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: thy faith hath saved thee.

I agree with you to a point. They all agree, thus James' statement that "faith without works is dead" defines works as a necessity for living faith.

No, living faith produces works.

Romans 4
2For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

3For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

4Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Without faith, Abraham would not have offered Isaac.

It appears you are stating works are merely a byproduct and thus unnecessary, I disagree.

They are not necessary for salvation. (Eph. 2:8) They are the result of it. They are necessary for men to see. God sees the heart. He already knows who will do the good works. God has ordained that believers should do the works.

Philippians 1
6Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

Romans 8
28And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

I believe that faith without works is not a saving faith.

Could you tell me what an unsaving faith is? I've never heard of that. Is that what Abraham had before he performed his act of obedience? How did it motivate him to obey God?

Paul then clarifies in verse 10, God ordained that we should walk in good works. God has decreed that we should walk in good works.

Are you stating that Paul says that we do not need to do works, and then immediately turns around and states that God states that we have to do good works?

God said through Paul's writing that we are saved by grace throough faith, not of works. We are justified by faith and therefore have peace with God. Would you have peace with God and still be unsure if you would someday qualify for salvation? Does your justification with God still depend on your works?

Paul did not turn around and state that we have to do the works to be justified or saved. The justified and saved humans are the ones who are to do and will do the works. The unsaved are debtors to the law if they try to do some works for salvation.

The Bishop

March 29th 2007, 01:49 PM

Then faith without works is dead. What is dead faith?

Hebrews 11
1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Luke 7
50And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

Luke 18
42And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: thy faith hath saved thee.Dead faith is faith without works. Dead faith is worthless and is not in fact faith.

No, living faith produces works.

Romans 4
2For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

3For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

4Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Without faith, Abraham would not have offered Isaac. If Abraham had not offered Isaac he would not have had faith.

Matt. 7: 20
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Faith produces works, but if it does not produce works, it is not faith.

Works are necessary for faith to be living, they are not faith, but they are the necessary evidence of such.

They are not necessary for salvation. (Eph. 2:8) They are the result of it. They are necessary for men to see. God sees the heart. He already knows who will do the good works. God has ordained that believers should do the works.

Philippians 1
6Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

Romans 8
28And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
Works are necessary for faith,
Faith is necessary for salvation,
Works are necessary for salvation.

But, works do not save, only God does.

Could you tell me what an unsaving faith is? I've never heard of that. Is that what Abraham had before he performed his act of obedience? How did it motivate him to obey God? No such thing, dead faith does not save, because it does not truly exist. If faith does not have works, it does not truly exist.

God said through Paul's writing that we are saved by grace throough faith, not of works. We are justified by faith and therefore have peace with God. Would you have peace with God and still be unsure if you would someday qualify for salvation? Does your justification with God still depend on your works?

Paul did not turn around and state that we have to do the works to be justified or saved. The justified and saved humans are the ones who are to do and will do the works. The unsaved are debtors to the law if they try to do some works for salvation.

Romans 3:28
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

James 2:21,24
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
• • •
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Acts 13:39
39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Matt. 12: 37
37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

Rom. 2: 13-15
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

I believe that these do not contradict. I believe we are justified by Christ, because of faith, which requires works.

Given that you state the scriptures do not disagree, then the conclusion must be drawn that works play some role in the salvation and justification of man, but that they do not entitle one to such as that would deny that God could grant such, and would lead to boasting. I believe that men who claim to be saved are boasting, they claim they have done what was required and have salvation. It is God's gift and not one to be taken. I have faith that I am saved, but faith is a hope, not a knowledge, as such I try to better the life of all I come into contact with, I try to show my devotion to our Lord and Saviour in all I do. I hope that by doing such I may someday achieve a perfected faith as is promised in the Bible:

James 2: 22
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

And thus glorify my Father in Heaven by walking in the good works he has decreed that I should.

I perceive that your intent is not to gain knowledge but to belittle my position. I thank you for your time, but I may or may not continue this discussion as it appears that such may be wasteful.

Janice

March 29th 2007, 11:02 PM

Dead faith is faith without works. Dead faith is worthless and is not in fact faith.

If Abraham had not offered Isaac he would not have had faith.

Are you saying that the faith that caused him to offer Isaac would have been taken away? Or do you think he would have offered Isaac even if he had no faith?

Faith produces works, but if it does not produce works, it is not faith.

How can faith not be faith?

Works are necessary for faith to be living, they are not faith, but they are the necessary evidence of such.
God knows our hearts; men don’t. Men see our faith by our works; God gave us the kind of faith that produces works. He already knows what He has done and what He will do.

Works are necessary for faith,
Faith is necessary for salvation,
Works are necessary for salvation.

Works are not necessary for salvation. They are the result of it.

Ephesians 2
8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9Not of works, lest any man should boast.

John 15
5I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

Philippians 1

6Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

But, works do not save, only God does.

No such thing, dead faith does not save, because it does not truly exist. If faith does not have works, it does not truly exist.
You sure talk about non-existent faith a lot.

Romans 3:28
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

James 2:21,24
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

Only before men. He was justified by God because he had faith.

Matt. 12: 37
37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

Romans 10
9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

But who can tame the tongue?

James 3
2For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.

8But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
9Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.
10Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.

Rom. 2: 13-15
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

I believe that these do not contradict. I believe we are justified by Christ, because of faith, which requires works.

Faith produces works.

Matthew 16
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

John 6
65And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

2 Timothy 2
25In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

John 15
5I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

Given that you state the scriptures do not disagree, then the conclusion must be drawn that works play some role in the salvation and justification of man, but that they do not entitle one to such as that would deny that God could grant such, and would lead to boasting.

Works result from being made new creatures by God.

John 3
8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Romans 8
9But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

2 Corinthians 5
17Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Philippians 1
6Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

I believe that men who claim to be saved are boasting, they claim they have done what was required and have salvation.

God was expecting men to want to boast, but he took care of any possibilty in that regard. Man can’t do anything to save himself. If he could, he would not need a Savior. If he has a Savior Who truly saves, that Savior can do it without man’s help. He makes men into new creatures.

Ephesians 2
8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Titus 3
3For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.
4But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

It is God's gift and not one to be taken. I have faith that I am saved, but faith is a hope, not a knowledge,

When LDS say, “I know that this church is true, that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and that Gordon. B. Hinckley is God’s prophet today...” are they just hoping it is true?

...as such I try to better the life of all I come into contact with, I try to show my devotion to our Lord and Saviour in all I do. I hope that by doing such I may someday achieve a perfected faith as is promised in the Bible:

James 2: 22
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

And thus glorify my Father in Heaven by walking in the good works he has decreed that I should.

James 1
2My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
3Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
4But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

Psalm 73
26My flesh and my heart faileth: but God is the strength of my heart, and my portion for ever.

1 John 5
4For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.

I perceive that your intent is not to gain knowledge but to belittle my position.

That is an odd thing for you to say. Did I ask you to come and teach me about Mormonism? Do your missionaries teach people what you believe? If you want to teach someone, why not get a referral? I have disagreed with your position. You have disagreed with mine. So if you post at a Christian forum, do you expect the non-Mormons to agree with what you are saying?

I thank you for your time, but I may or may not continue this discussion as it appears that such may be wasteful.

Thank you for your time. Come back anytime. I may have some fresh squeezed lemonade ready on a hot day.

The Bishop

March 30th 2007, 05:47 PM

Are you saying that the faith that caused him to offer Isaac would have been taken away? Or do you think he would have offered Isaac even if he had no faith?

How can faith not be faith?

Works are not necessary for salvation. They are the result of it.

Faith produces works.

Works result from being made new creatures by God.

God was expecting men to want to boast, but he took care of any possibility in that regard. Man can’t do anything to save himself. If he could, he would not need a Savior. If he has a Savior Who truly saves, that Savior can do it without man’s help. He makes men into new creatures.

That is an odd thing for you to say. Did I ask you to come and teach me about Mormonism? Do your missionaries teach people what you believe? If you want to teach someone, why not get a referral? I have disagreed with your position. You have disagreed with mine. So if you post at a Christian forum, do you expect the non-Mormons to agree with what you are saying?

Thank you for your time. Come back anytime. I may have some fresh squeezed lemonade ready on a hot day.
You can argue with the Bible that is fine, I will leave you to it, myself, I will just accept that faith without works is dead as James stated and go on with my life.

I expect an honest appraisal of the text from any Christian. The statements I have made are concerning the text of the Bible, and the position of the Bible on works. The position I take is not a solely Mormon position, there are other Christian denominations which agree with my position, I believe that the Catholics agree with it as well as others.

I admit that salvation is by grace alone, through faith. This you state repetitively. But, you have not satisfactorily made the argument that faith can exist and be the tool through which salvation occurs without works. Explain James' statement of "Faith without works is dead" in relation to "Saved by grace, through faith." Does the Bible contradict itself here? The Bible isn't a majority of reference overrules the minority reference work. Defend your position when James himself states that faith requires works.

Is your position a possibly accurate position? It is. Is the position I present a possibility? It is. They are possible interpretations. I expect you to admit the possibility not that I am correct, only that both are possible, nothing more.

Did I ask you to come and teach me about Mormonism?
Topics and Guidelines LDS - Mormonism
This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the LDS - Mormons.

A debate or discussion is not a pontification from one side. If pontification is all you are interested in doing, I am not interested in participating, and if that is the attitude held in this forum I will probably consider ending my participation altogether.

Trout

March 30th 2007, 06:12 PM

Either we are saved by grace or by works it can’t be a grace + works, IOW, God’s unmerited favor + a few things that merit his favor.

I think a couple points to consider are; 1)who prepared/created/ordained the good works and 2)we merely walk in them

God has prepared these good works and we simple walk in them.

Excellent point Leroy.

This discussion is usually predicated on a preconception, since the LDS believe that works - at some level - merit salvation, the text in James MUST validate that notion.

They use James to interpret the rest of the didactic portion of the NT which clearly enunciates salvation by grace alone. They think that somehow their peculiar spin on James validates their church's teaching on - saved by grace after all you can do.

I believe it's called eisegesis.

master_mormon

March 30th 2007, 07:21 PM

Excellent point Leroy.

This discussion is usually predicated on a preconception, since the LDS believe that works - at some level - merit salvation, the text in James MUST validate that notion.

They use James to interpret the rest of the didactic portion of the NT which clearly enunciates salvation by grace alone. They think that somehow their peculiar spin on James validates their church's teaching on - saved by grace after all you can do.

I believe it's called eisegesis.

LDS simply have a different view of the what the New Testament teaches on this issue than you. You seem to think that the NT clearly teaches salvation by grace alone but many people don't agree.

1. 1.1-1.2 billion christians in the world (Catholics) would agree with the following:

"Where did it [Luther's doctrine of salvation] deviate from the orthodox? The Church teaches that God is "just" in the simplest sense of the term, that is to say, He distributes His graces to us all in an equitable manner, and not by virtue of a kind of incomprehensible caprice. She [the Catholic Church] teaches that salvation and eternal bliss are earned in the world through positive effort and good works. She does indead proclaim the indispensability of the love of God and union with Christ, but she asserts that they demand from man a positive effort to to acquire a supernatural resemblance. Faith is but the beginning of Justification. It is completed by reception of the sacraments, in the act of contrition or the act of charity. Salvation demands much more than mere belief." (Hardon, John "The Catholic Catechism" p. 288-289)

2. 300 million or so Christians in the World (Eastern Orthodox) would agree with the following:

"On this point [the importance of good works for salvation] we must state that we Orthodox greatly differ from the Protestants who, by wrongly interpreting certain passages from Holy
Scripture, reject good works all together," (Athanasios Frangopoulos "Our Orthodox Christian Faith" 1985 p. 184)

David Waltz who is a Catholic and has examined both LDS and Early Church Father positions on the issue of Grace and works concluded "...the fact that Mormonism on the doctrine of faith and works is much closer to the early Church Fathers than Evangelicalism".

The bottom line is you have one perspective on what the you believe the New Testament clearly teaches. There are a lot of other people through history who have their own perspective on what they see the New Testament to clearly teach and its not "grace alone".

The grace alone position is not the only game in town when it comes to New Testament interpretation. LDS simply have a view that does not conform to the grace alone view but our views are similar to other views out that are more widely popular and been around longer.

Bill the Cat

March 30th 2007, 08:53 PM

Janice

March 30th 2007, 10:01 PM

You can argue with the Bible that is fine, I will leave you to it, myself, I will just accept that faith without works is dead as James stated and go on with my life.

I expect an honest appraisal of the text from any Christian. The statements I have made are concerning the text of the Bible, and the position of the Bible on works. The position I take is not a solely Mormon position, there are other Christian denominations which agree with my position, I believe that the Catholics agree with it as well as others.

I am not a Roman Catholic and I don't agree with Roman Catholicism. I am not a Mormon and I don't agree with Mormonism. Who cares if someone agrees with your position? You have no problem saying that Catholicism agrees with Mormonism on works, yet LDS abhor most of Catholicism's teachings.

Our beliefs and actions may differ from those of others, but we, as good Christians, do not criticize other religions or their adherents. “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.” - Joseph B. Wirthlin, “Christians in Belief and Action,” Ensign, Nov. 1996, 70

If that becomes the doctrine of the Church we will be worse than the Catholics who believe that you can pray a man out of purgatory. But they charge for it and we don't, so we would be more foolish than they."- Melvin J. Ballard, Three Degrees of Glory (Salt Lake City: Joseph Lyon & Associates, 1975), 26.

I admit that salvation is by grace alone, through faith. This you state repetitively. But, you have not satisfactorily made the argument that faith can exist and be the tool through which salvation occurs without works. Explain James' statement of "Faith without works is dead" in relation to "Saved by grace, through faith." Does the Bible contradict itself here? The Bible isn't a majority of reference overrules the minority reference work. Defend your position when James himself states that faith requires works.

I have explained but you are ignoring my explanation.

Is your position a possibly accurate position? It is. Is the position I present a possibility? It is. They are possible interpretations. I expect you to admit the possibility not that I am correct, only that both are possible, nothing more.

One doesn't glorify God by saying it doesn't matter what you believe about the Bible or which doctrines you follow. Mormonism teaches that the only way to be saved is by faith plus obedience. There is no possibilty to disbelieve that and remain in good standing in the LDS church.

"We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel." If you have a temple recommend and doubt that obedience is required, why don't you turn in your temple recommend?

A debate or discussion is not a pontification from one side. If pontification is all you are interested in doing, I am not interested in participating, and if that is the attitude held in this forum I will probably consider ending my participation altogether.

I was willing to explain the scriptures and did explain. You weren't satisfied.

Chytraeus

April 2nd 2007, 04:11 AM

BTW, the verse does not specifically relate to Mormonism, in that it is not a prophecy that someone would come up with a new religion claiming to have received it from angles. Paul is merely making a point that regardless of the supposed authority a person claims, anyone who teaches a gospel contrary to the one Paul had taught them was teaching a false gospel. Of course, today we would have to string Paul up on the highest tree for being so arrogant as to believe he had the corner of the market on the correct interpretation of the Gospel. Paul was not arrogant, he was confident that His Lord had not lead him astray. He was doubly confident because he had checked what he was preaching with James, John and Peter and found them all to be in perfect harmony.

Therefore, either Paul is entirely mistaken, or there is no contradiction between James and Paul. In fact, James is just as much the preacher of salvation as a free gift of God not earned by any works as Paul. To go even further, since James wrote his letter first, he beat Paul to the punch. Those works righteousness theologians who claim James as their Apostle always only quote that one verse, leaving out all that comes before it. It was James who said, "Of His own will He brought us forth by the Word of truth that we should be a kind of first fruits of His creatures." You see here that James teaches that God brought forth believers by His own will, not by our will or by our good works. It is most certainly true that any faith that does not produce good works is a dead faith that cannot save, for true faith is always followed by good works. James is merely showing people one way of knowing that their faith was sincere, as opposed to those who claimed to have faith as long as it was convenient, but who would disappear as soon as trials arrived.

Now, although the verse does not specifically speak of Mormons, it actually condemns the Mormon religion, the Muslim religion, the Roman religion and all others who would claim that one must do something on our part to earn salvation, or even to remain in salvation. Salvation is the result of believing the fact that Jesus Christ died for our sins. So long as one believes that, he is saved. The only thing a person can do to lose his salvation is to loose faith in Christ Jesus. Unfortunately for those who want to have Jesus and keep on sinning, sin is detrimental to faith and ends in death. So, although abstaining from sin will not earn God's continued favor, persisting in sin will destroy faith in the saving work of Christ Jesus, so Christians must resist sin, not to earn salvation, but to avoid the risk of losing it.

master_mormon

April 3rd 2007, 01:49 AM

:snip: as I really don't care what spin Mormons put on the Orthodox and Catholic views, although Catholic Answers site (a lay group of Catholic apologists), says "…it would be better to say Mormons are even further from Catholicism than from Protestantism."

David Waltz CLAIMS to be a Catholic, but goes against basic Catholic belief on Mormonism. See Eric Johnson's summary of Mr. Waltz here: http://www.mrm.org/topics/rebuttals-rejoinders/mormonism-201/introduction-waltz

So are you suggesting that Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are "Grace alone"? I am also surprised that you did not follow me in the quote from Mr. Waltz and and how I was using it. I would be willing to say that overall, Mormons are farther from Catholic doctrine than Protestantism on the whole. This however was not the issue. I was responding to a one specific issue and that was the assertion that the New Testament teaches the grace alone view. It is on that issue, dealing SPECIFICALLY about faith and works where I made the comment from Waltz:

...the fact that Mormonism on the doctrine of faith and works is much closer to the early Church Fathers than Evangelicalism".

This however does not say that Mormonism is closer the Church Fathers than Evangelicalism and other doctrines as well. Clearly this is not the case when one gets into the issues about the nature of God. I don't think Mr. Waltz would make that assertion and I will not make it for him.

Bill the Cat

April 3rd 2007, 07:22 AM

So are you suggesting that Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are "Grace alone"?

Irrelivant to my point. I am showing a fallacious appeal to authority. Mr. Waltz is not a scholar, nor a spokesman for the Catholic Church (And in fact has only been Catholic for a very brief period of time). But, as we have seen so many times, Mormon apologists are unctirical in their selection of people to quote.

I am also surprised that you did not follow me in the quote from Mr. Waltz and and how I was using it. I would be willing to say that overall, Mormons are farther from Catholic doctrine than Protestantism on the whole. This however was not the issue. I was responding to a one specific issue and that was the assertion that the New Testament teaches the grace alone view. It is on that issue, dealing SPECIFICALLY about faith and works where I made the comment from Waltz:

...the fact that Mormonism on the doctrine of faith and works is much closer to the early Church Fathers than Evangelicalism".

And I was not making any specific comment on the validity of the quote itself, just the uncritical nature of the selection of this particular author.

This however does not say that Mormonism is closer the Church Fathers than Evangelicalism and other doctrines as well. Clearly this is not the case when one gets into the issues about the nature of God. I don't think Mr. Waltz would make that assertion and I will not make it for him.

What Mr. Waltz says is highly succeptable given his lack of scholarship and his recent conversion. This quote fits the classic definition of a fallacious appeal to authority to a T.

mountainman9235

April 10th 2007, 01:06 AM

{Tim}

April 10th 2007, 07:23 AM

H-m-mm seems to me if half the energy were spent doing something good and positive, rather than arguing over who is really a Christian then the world would be a lot better place.
Jeasus built no churches, no temples ! he passed amoung the people and helped them as he was able and they were in the presence of God and knew it!
Turn from this dissent , Give a homeless person a dollar tomorrrow, smile at a frowning person!
Apreciate what you have! Be blessed!
:lol: Good point, eh?

FWIW, AFAICT "the_bishop" was articulating what sounded to me like a pretty orthodox view of faith and works. :shrug: I don't doubt that some Mormons think they must do works to earn salvation, but then some (non-LDS) Christians think they can be saved without doing any works (ie exhibiting some change of behaviour), because they "have faith", which is equally false...

Bill the Cat

April 10th 2007, 07:48 AM

H-m-mm seems to me if half the energy were spent doing something good and positive, rather than arguing over who is really a Christian then the world would be a lot better place.

You assume that we don't do other things based on reading an internet forum? :huh:

Jeasus built no churches,

He built HIS Church.

no temples

We are the temples

he passed amoung the people and helped them as he was able and they were in the presence of God and knew it!

Yet He also exposed the false doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees. He had no current interest in the false gods of the Pagans, just the mistaken images of God built by the Jews.

Turn from this dissent

Paul did not hesitate to expose false doctrine among the brethren or among the heathen. He, Peter, and John wrote about the dangers of the Gnostics. Why should we be any different?

, Give a homeless person a dollar tomorrrow, smile at a frowning person!
Apreciate what you have! Be blessed!

Assuming that we don't do this already again? You have set up a false dillema. You have no idea what we do day in and day out to show Christ to others. Part of showing Christ is to expose the false doctrines of the Gnostic Mormons and their "higher truths".

Rev 2
1 "To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: The One who holds the seven stars in His right hand, the One who walks among the seven golden lampstands, says this:
2 'I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot tolerate evil men, and ou put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false;
3 and you have perseverance and have endured for My name's sake, and have not grown weary.

Janice

July 8th 2007, 12:47 AM

I take references such as this one "before me there was no God formed" as referencing God as a being to be worshipped, and given the relative context (Man on Earth), God is the only god that is in such a position as to be worship and revered, this does not delimit other gods.

Your Joseph Smith quote is misquoted in adding a capital to the term "gods". "Gods" with the capital impies reverence and thus, a form of worship.

Nice try, but It isn't misquoted.

"Here, then, is eternal life—to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 346).

"In this way both the Father and the Son, as also all exalted beings, are now or in due course will become Gods of Gods. " (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 322-323 )

"...and every man who reigns in celestial glory is a God to his dominions." (TPJS, p. 374)

Sons of God who exalt themselves to be Gods, even from before the foundation of the world, and are the only Gods I have a reverence for. (TPJS, p. 375)

What evidence do we have that God does not jealously guard his position and power, but rather seeks to see that his children rise up to his position of glory, knowledge, and power that he has obtained (see Moses 1:39)?
(Search These Commandments, Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, Copyright 1984, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, p. 155)

"The head of the Gods appointed one God for us; and when you take [that] view of the subject, it sets one free to see all the beauty, holiness and perfection of the Gods." (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 476)