Did Mormons really strike the first blow?

[Cow Poke]

Well, Cowie/Pokee/Preachee, then I think you thought that when someone makes a point you don't like, you could facilely brand it "drama" as if that makes it seem like an invalid point.

You're SO easy.

[Bill the Cat]

But wouldn't all the hot air your produce provide some buoyancy?

Not nearly enough to overcome the voluminous turds you drop.

I meant it metaphorically, as in "becoming less and less edifying."

Those who fight truth are seldom edified.

[nrajeff]

Not nearly enough to overcome the voluminous turds you drop.

Sorry about dropping you--hope the impact didn't hurt much.

Those who fight truth are seldom edified.

In a forum where the majority has decided that edification is WAY down the list of priorities (if it's even on the list at all), NOBODY is going to be edified.

[One Bad Pig]

In a forum where the majority has decided that edification is WAY down the list of priorities (if it's even on the list at all), NOBODY is going to be edified.

Do you consider yourself a part of the majority?

[nrajeff]

Do you consider yourself a part of the majority?

Yup. Do you consider yourself to be part of the minority assuming one even exists here?

[Bill the Cat]

Sorry about dropping you--hope the impact didn't hurt much.

Sorry, I'm far more intelligent than anything you could drop.

In a forum where the majority has decided that edification is WAY down the list of priorities (if it's even on the list at all), NOBODY is going to be edified.

We have several areas where edification is TOP priority. This sub-forum is for debate, which is edifying to those who love the truth. Regardless of the mud slinging and insults (all biblical by the way), we provide refutations of the lies of Mormonism. There is little higher edification than exposing error.

[nrajeff]

Regardless of the mud slinging and insults (all biblical by the way),

Good to know that the next time CP and the Gang accuse me of such holy activities, you will be there to provide a Bible-based defense of what I did.

There is little higher edification than exposing error.

Thanks for the encouragement for us pro-LDS to keep exposing any erroneous assertions that might be made against the LDS church or its leaders/members/doctrines. I already started to expose the error in accusing LDS soteriology of being works-based, so I am off to a good start.

[Cow Poke]

Good to know that the next time CP and the Gang...

I think Jeff is in love with me.

[Cow Poke]

I already started to expose the error in accusing LDS soteriology of being works-based, so I am off to a good start.

You might want to work on "your gang".

Yes, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has always been a works based religion. This is because the The Church of Jesus Christ in former days was also a works based religion.

And your "salt based" analogy was peppered with nonsense. Do you deny that we (humans) are commonly referred to as "carbon based life forms", even though the carbon content of the human body is LESS than 20%?

[rogue06]

I think Jeff is in love with me.

I thought it was Kool & the Gang not CP and the Gang.

[nrajeff]

You might want to work on "your gang".

Sure--I have no problem trying to convince 141 that the more correct description of LDS soteriology is "saved by efficacious grace through obedience, which obedience includes obeying the commandment to have faith in Christ."

I am up for that debate with 141 anytime, since I am confident that we already actually agree.

Do you deny that we (humans) are commonly referred to as "carbon based life forms"

No

, even though the carbon content of the human body is LESS than 20%?

No, I don't deny it. Of course, that's easy for me to say since the carbon issue hurts your "faith, not obedience" argument as much as anyone's, since it opens the possibility that just like carbon in humans, your faith may not be the predominant ingredient in your salvation--it could be your (shudder) WORKS that are the majority ingredient. Or, as I like to more accurately say, your OBEDIENCE.

So continue to say "works-based" if you must, but it can now be used to describe YOUR soteriology, too, since you have "proven" that works aka obedience/submission to God might make up 90% of your recipe for salvation, and your belief only 10% of it, and yet you can still "legitimately" claim that you have a faith-based soteriology.

Wanna go with that scenario?

[Cerebrum123]

Sure--I have no problem trying to convince 141 that the more correct description of LDS soteriology is "saved by efficacious grace through obedience, which obedience includes obeying the commandment to have faith in Christ."

I am up for that debate with 141 anytime, since I am confident that we already actually agree.


No


No, I don't deny it. Of course, that's easy for me to say since the carbon issue hurts your "faith, not obedience" argument as much as anyone's, since it opens the possibility that just like carbon in humans, your faith may not be the predominant ingredient in your salvation--it could be your (shudder) WORKS that are the majority ingredient. Or, as I like to more accurately say, your OBEDIENCE.

So continue to say "works-based" if you must, but it can now be used to describe YOUR soteriology, too, since you have "proven" that works aka obedience/submission to God might make up 90% of your recipe for salvation, and your belief only 10% of it, and yet you can still "legitimately" claim that you have a faith-based soteriology.

Wanna go with that scenario?

The problem is is that you were essentially arguing that carbon was the primary ingredient, so no, it doesn't hurt a "faith based" soteriology, but it certainly hurts your argument. You are essentially trying to reverse your argument, and it's not working. If you do set up a debate with 141, could you send me a pm with a link? I would like to see it, especially since he said that the Church during the time of Christ was works based.

[Cow Poke]

Sure--I have no problem trying to convince 141 that the more correct description of LDS soteriology is "saved by efficacious grace through obedience, which obedience includes obeying the commandment to have faith in Christ."

I am up for that debate with 141 anytime, since I am confident that we already actually agree.

Cool. Maybe he'll make an appearance in your "nonsense" thread.

No, I don't deny it. Of course, that's easy for me to say since the carbon issue hurts your "faith, not obedience" argument as much as anyone's, since it opens the possibility that just like carbon in humans, your faith may not be the predominant ingredient in your salvation--it could be your (shudder) WORKS that are the majority ingredient. Or, as I like to more accurately say, your OBEDIENCE.

No, Jeff... your argument was that we can't call humans "salt based" just because there is a TINY amount of salt in us.
My counter is that we DO call humans "carbon based" in SPITE of the fact that we are not made up wholly, or even primarily, of carbon.

So continue to say "works-based" if you must, but it can now be used to describe YOUR soteriology, too, since you have "proven" that works aka obedience/submission to God might make up 90% of your recipe for salvation, and your belief only 10% of it, and yet you can still "legitimately" claim that you have a faith-based soteriology.

Is soteriology the word of the week, Jeff? GENERALLY, Jeff, Salvation is referred to in religious circles as either "works based" or "grace based". Mine is the latter, yours is the former.

[eudyptes]

Sure--I have no problem trying to convince 141 that the more correct description of LDS soteriology is "saved by efficacious grace through obedience, which obedience includes obeying the commandment to have faith in Christ."

I am up for that debate with 141 anytime, since I am confident that we already actually agree.

"...grace through obedience, which obedience includes obeying..."

What else is included in that obedience?

[One Bad Pig]

Yup.

Then why are you complaining that 'this place' is becoming "less and less edifying," hypocrite?

Do you consider yourself to be part of the minority assuming one even exists here?

The only reason I am in this forum is for edification regarding the LDS faith. Unfortunately, that's proving to be rather elusive - in part, it turns out, because the most active LDS poster at the moment cares little, or perhaps not at all, about edifying people concerning his faith.