The difference between life and death

Katrina Marti is an ex-LDS friend of mine. She and her husband, Steve, are currently serving with New Tribes Mission as Christian missionaries in Mexico. In mid-December (2008) Katrina read a blog article written by Baptist pastor Tim Wade titled, “Are Mormons better Christians?” Originally posted on Pastor Wade’s own blog on December 2nd, Katrina found it republished on the MormonTimes.com blog.

“Are Mormons better Christians?” praises several aspects of LDS society, taking today’s Protestant churches to task for a general lack-luster approach in some areas of their faith. Mormons love it. At TimWade.com you’ll find comment after comment from appreciative Latter-day Saints.

But Katrina left a different sort of comment, getting, I think, at the heart of the matter. I reprint it here for your edification – and discussion.

Katrina Marti // December 19, 2008 at 4:41 am

Tim, I haven’t the time to read all the comments here, so maybe what I have to say has already been said. . .if so sorry for the repitition. From what I’ve seen however, I have a bit of a different take on it–the perspective of someone who has been on both sides of the fence.

Yes, I’m an ex-Mormon who is now a Christian. My family goes back to the beginnings of the Mormon church, and about 10 years ago I went from being a temple going, active Mormon to knowing Christ, and the power of His work in my life (and attending Christian churches)–and honestly the contrast couldn’t be bigger.

While I was LDS the focus of my life was on myself, on what I could do, and what I had to do to “please” God. I loved Jesus Christ, or thought I did anyway but didn’t really know the Jesus of the Bible. The Jesus I knew was a far different character, a man who was better behaved than I, and further along in his progression towards becoming God. He was my older brother (as [is] Satan), and as such that’s kind of what I thought of him–like you would an older brother whose somewhat of a hero to you. And, my relationship to him was always based on my performance–had I done some good thing to please him (like wearing my sacred underwear faithfully, going to the temple, fulfilling my calling or job in the church, not smoking, drinking, etc., and more).

Since becoming a Christian I’ve come to know Jesus who IS God and is so amazing and awesome that I’m left without words when I think about Him. I honestly can’t describe Him–not that He can’t be described, but that my words seem puny and insignificant when I try. And, my relationship to Him is on such a different basis–it’s on the basis of a God who did all that needs to be done for my salvation, and who I am eternally grateful to, but not just grateful, but who I owe my very life to–in fact, He IS my life. And, of course because He is my life I do certain things–many things like I did as a Mormon–and many more things I wouldn’t have even considered as a Mormon, like giving up all the world has to offer to become a full-time missionary–devoting my life to reaching the lost.

But, my focus is far, far different. My focus is on the God of the Universe, and not on myself and what I can accomplish (I’m afraid if that was my focus I’d have gone home by now! :{ ). . . and what a difference that makes. I no longer serve a God who was once a man, and who wants me to learn to be a God myself, but instead serve a God who ALWAYS was God, and who loved me enough to do everything necessary for me to come to Him in faith, be adopted as His own dear daughter, and have free access to Him, and not only free access, but the right and priveledge to come into His awesome presence anytime–even when I’ve really messed up and to have the confidence that He’ll forgive me because He loves me, and loved me enough to die for me while I was STILL His enemy. . .

So, in the end, for me, I can see so clearly that there’s a wide, vast gap between us and them, and it’s not just in doctrine, it’s the difference between life, the Vinelife, or the life of a Christian who’s walking in a faith relationship with God–doing as He says, learning from Him, being corrected by Him, and walking in faith day by day as opposed to a religion that’s focused on man, on what man has to do, on what he has to achieve, and on what man can become with help from god of course. . .

It’s my sincere desire that people can see that difference. In my opinion it’s the difference between life and death. Feel free to write me if you have any further questions. I’d love to help you see, from an insiders perspective what it’s really like.

About Sharon Lindbloom

Sharon surrendered her life to the Lord Jesus Christ in 1979. Deeply passionate about Truth, Sharon loves serving as a full-time volunteer research associate with Mormonism Research Ministry. Sharon and her husband live in Minnesota.
This entry was posted in Christianity, Personal Stories and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

117 Responses to The difference between life and death

  1. gundeck says:

    It is quite clear the men who wrote the New Testament spoke to Christ, so
    your point is?

  2. gundeck says:

    MDavis

    Thank you for the explanation that LDS theology separates the terms saved and exaltation. I agree that we use much of the same terminology with differing definitions.

    Your comment, “that the whole issue of grace vs. works is an unnecessary argument” shows how we can talk right past each other. The orthodox Protestant view is that “good works” are a result of Faith, “good works” are only possible because of the Grace of God and the power of the Holy Spirit. Frankly, Faith itself is a gift of Grace. While it is the elect that believe it is only the Holy Spirit that makes this possible.

    Something that is often missed in discussions about Justification is the lifetime process of sanctification that necessarily follows regeneration. Christians are called to take up the cross, we cannot do this without the Holy Spirit. This is not done to earn anything, it is done in thanks and only for the Glory of God (Soli Deo Gloria).

    While I am sure that we disagree completely on all of this thank you again for your explanation of a complicated subject.

  3. gundeck says:

    SteveH,

    How would a Mormon answer this question, “What is the chief end of man?”

  4. mobaby says:

    SteveH,

    I think I need more explanation of what you mean by “orthodox Biblical Christianity.” Do you mean the “Orthodox Church?” I disagree that Eastern Orthodox = Biblical. Those who follow in the footsteps of the Reformers (John Calvin, Martin Luther, John Knox) follow the teachings of the early Church and the Bible – they did just what the name implies, reformed the Church and brought it back to Biblical roots. The Reformed Church certainly share many beautiful and wonderful truths with the Orthodox Church, but there is a separation on some important doctrinal matters – nothing even close to the chasm that separates Mormons from Christians, but there are important truths that the Christian reformers preached. I do not believe in a great falling away, but rather creeping false doctrine. However, there has always been a true Church on earth, trusting in the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross – preaching Christ crucified and resurrected with salvation through Christ alone. We preach and awesome and transcendent God of All Creation, besides Him there is no other god. I trust that this mighty Creator come in the flesh as Jesus is more than able to save my soul and bring me from the death of sin to life. On my own, I do not have the ability to get one inch closer to God and righteousness. Jesus has already purchased my salvation with His blood.

  5. falcon says:

    I guess all of the exMos that concur with the points I made above were living a different form of Mormonism or were living in a Mormon parallel universe within their wards. What we see happening here are Mormons writing to disagree with the points made by the exMormon featured in the article Katrina Marti. According to our Mormon friends posting here, Katrina really didn’t understand Mormonism. The points I’ve made above come right from exMormons who I guess didn’t understand Mormonism either or their experiences can be invalidated because…….choose anyone of the standard Mormon rationalizations. I’d be more than happy to supply a list of resources from those who’ve worked their way out of Mormonism as to the points I’ve made. Perhaps some of our exMormon posters could share their personal stories as Katrina has in the article.

    The bottom line is that Mormonism repudiates Christianity. That includes the nature of God, the inerrancy of the Bible, the means of salvation and have accepted any number of strange and aberrent practices and beliefs that could be listed here. Now what does that sound like if not a scheme of the evil one? The Bible says “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers against the powers against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.” People like Katrina Marti figured it out. Our Mormon posters here, under the shroud of a deluding spirit that they have given themselves over to, have rejected the God of the Bible and the salvation He offers for a false god and a false gospel which will lead to eternal distruction. Katrina had it right when it comes to Mormonism and so do all those other who have found their way out of this deception.

  6. mobaby says:

    Thank you Katrina, for sharing with us. I understand your testimony. I was never a Mormon, but I understand – for everyone is in a fallen and in sinful state apart from Christ. I was caught up in trying to be righteous yet being unable to account for my sin, despite my best efforts, before I trusted in the finished work of Christ upon the cross. Knowing that God sent His son to die a horrible death on the cross for me and loved me despite my sin is a glorious wonderful truth. God loved me enough to allow His only son to die, so that I could be adopted as His child as well – amazing. Everyone is under a delusion or caught up in some kind of distraction before they come to Christ – yours was false religion, others are ensnared by materialism, some are even kept from the cross by good things, such as family and tradition. But apart from God all these things just leave us empty. I know I was empty and depressed until God got a hold of me and drew me to Himself. And He has forgiven and forgives my sin – He has already paid the price. Jesus promised rest for all those who trust in Him, He offers relief from our heavy burdens if we will but place our hope and faith in Him. Thank you for being willing to share the work God has done in your life.

  7. SteveH says:

    Gundeck,

    Depending upon the context I would say that there are many ways of answering the question “What is the chief end of man?”. However, basically I would answer that the chief end of man is become like Christ and to emulate His example.

  8. SteveH says:

    Mobaby,

    The vast majority of Christendom (as measured by the number of adherents) follows an apostolic tradition (Roman Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Marionites, Coptics, and to some degree Anglicans) in which they claim authority through the priesthood of Jesus Christ who conferred it to Peter, James and John and His Apostles. Even Martin Luther recognized the importance of the priesthood and it is found in Lutheranism. Apostolic Christianity proclaims the absolute necessity of priesthood ordinances and covenants as being essential for one’s salvation (ie baptism).

    In contrast, fundamentalist Protestant sects by and large reject the whole Christian doctrine of the priesthood of Christ, the necessity of ordinances, ecclesiastical structure, etc. Thus the Protestant notions of sola fide and sola scriptura are by no means embraced by most of Christendom. Indeed, the fundamentalist Protestant sects constitute only a small minority of the whole of the Christian world.

  9. SteveH says:

    Falcon,

    Most Christians would state that your particular faith is not Christian and not Biblical. [Remainder of comment deleted. Steve, ad hominem comments like this one (and the one I deleted yesterday) are not allowed here. Please discuss issues rather than personalities. Thanks.]

  10. mrgermit says:

    AARON: the short paragraph you have about teaching merit and being WORTHY of this or that is right on the money and a great summary statement of the gist of the works/faith debate. Granted, some LDS may not (happily) internalize this teaching as much, but it explains the conflict with the real NT gospel quite well, or at least it does for me.

    Good work. GERMIT

    PS to SteveH: I can readily see that much of protestantism has lapsed into some kind of easy believism, and could use a healthy jolt of biblical theosis. It’s good for we Protestants to hear a good Catholic, or Greek orthodox message on works now and again…….but the idea of MERIT and WORTHINESS is still not there for these catholic groups, as far as I know, so AARON’s message remains, even if your point is made.

  11. falcon says:

    Well to our Mormon friends I will just say that spiritual warfare is not bean bag. Joseph Smith set the tone when he called the creeds of Christianity an “abomination”. What is that friends if not a clear spiritual shot over the bow of the Christian faith? TBMs are living in a deluted state of thinking that presents a Norman Rockwell view of Mormonism where everybody is fat and happy and on their way to the Celestial kingdom where they’ll get to be a god and live happily ever after ruling their spiritual kingdoms. I really don’t take kindly to folks that reduce the living God to the status of an exalted man and claim future godhood for themselves. We had one of our TBMs tell us here, in the past, that he would kill or steal if ordered to by the “living prophet”. That pretty much revealed to me all I needed to know about the Mormon mind-set. You can characterized my presentation anyway you want, but the bottom line is, it’s accurate. You need to get your heads out of the sand and deal with reality.

  12. mrgermit says:

    Come on FoF, complete the sentence, it should read

    FALCON, are you an alien FROM KOLOB, be honest……..

  13. mrgermit says:

    To FoF and others,

    there is no getting around the animus that JS (or the LORD Himself) started with his (or HIS) statements back in the early 1800’s. This is in NO WAY unique to the LDS church by the way……it’s no different than Eckhart Tolle and a host of others saying that the main (and plain) teachings of historic christianity have been “horribly mistinterpreted and misunderstood for thousands of years……..” That’s the standard New Age party line, and there are MANY others like it. My point being: the line in the sand was drawn (perhaps at God’s own direction, I’ll grant the possibility) by JS himself, and he did NOT mumble, not did any of your earlier Prophets.

    NOW, we are into the age of mumbling , concession, and quasi-ecumenism. But all that is specious, and ignores the plain theological differences ……and “differences” just does NOT do the situation justice. The divide was, and IS, as wide as those beautiful canyons Utah is known for…..no amount of Mr.Millet or Coke Newll mumbling can undo it.

    In previous ages, one side of an argument like this would get an untimely, and unhealthy , punishment…..thank God we live in a different age and time, I would not wish that on my LDS co-posters…..but that does not mean that our agreement is any more likely or possible with more understanding. HENCE: (FoF, listening in??) the perpetial animus between us………hopefully, and paradoxically, while charity is displayed to INDIVIDUALS, not beliefs. GERMIT

    that very charity, to individuals, not beliefs, is in fact the very substance of the message, that is a snapshot of love, I believe, to respect and treat with dignity someone with whom you could not possibly disagree with more, over the most important truths ever……to me that is Jesus before Pilate….and those beating him horribly , asking HIM to prophesy…..yet without a word.

  14. MDavis says:

    You are shifting the scope here. First off, Christ said that, not Joseph Smith. I know you do not believe that, but to say that Joseph Smith said this is not accurate. Second, Christ said that the creeds were an abomination, not the people.

    You have shifted scope from “creed” to “individuals.”

    That’s like saying mathematics is an abomination, therefore let’s lynch the mathematicians.

    Same thing with the phrase by many, “Hate the sin, love the sinner.”

  15. faithoffathers says:

    Martin,

    You make good points, but in John 17 Christ discusses not only His relationship with the Father, but how His servants (and we) can have a relationship that is similar to His relationship with the Father: “That they may be one, as we are.” This seems very clear to many people. Neither the disciples nor any of us can be fused together into the type of being the trinity describes. We can be “one” in spirit- meaning focus, intention, desire, and mission- and this is what Christ was praying for.

    Thanks for your post.

    fof

  16. faithoffathers says:

    Sorry- my bad!

    fof

  17. mrgermit says:

    Not sure if I understand your post correctly, but we MIGHT just agree, not sure…..

    As I stated above: INDIVIDUALS are to be treated with respect and charity. I would also add the right to hold those beliefs, within some package of civility (Satanists sacrificing my dog, shudder at the thot, etc……)

    The BELIEFS themselves are another matter, but there will, perhaps be SOME unavoidable conjoining: wasn'[t it JS who said that THEIR creeds are an abomination ?? Meaning: the creeds held by a group of living breathing people….creeds are not JUST words on paper, there are PEOPLE attached to them (probably not news to you…) JS was not just railing on paragraphs of words: he no doubt had in mind (or the LORD HIMSELF did, I admit the possibliliy, as I did in the above post) actual groups of Baptists, Prebyterians, and Methodists. And others, perhaps, those three at a minimum come to mind. I am NOT faulting JS for directing his or HIS (God’s) comments toward actual people, so in this we are alike. Like I said, realistically unavoidable, and it seems biblical/scriptural as both the Bible and BofM lump BELIEFS and the people who held them together.

    My main point , to recap, is that this is to be done with FULL CONVICTION yet with CHARITY toward those who are “chastened” or whatever stronger word you want to put in there. Easier said than done, ehhh?? any talk of “lynching” and someone has gone seriously wrong, and of course theire seem to be a thousand , more subtle , ways to lynch someone, and regrettably, sometimes christians (or alleged christians) have used those methods. GERMIT is on record as being AGAINST any of this “lynching” or any of its forms. I live in a glass house, and its sugar pained glass at that, if you know what I mean.

    hope this helps GERMIT

  18. Sharon Lindbloom says:

    I’m all for the accuracy MDavis calls for.

    It might be most accurate to say “Joseph Smith claimed Jesus Christ said all the creeds were an abomination and all those who profess those creeds are corrupt.”

    So it’s perhaps a bit like saying “mathematics is an abomination, and the mathematicians should be lynched.”

  19. MDavis says:

    I guess where I was trying to get at is that “war” is an action of force, or compelling an individual or group of people into submission. So when the comment that was stated implied that there is a spiritual warfare going on, I have to disagree because I believe the Gospel is not an action of force on an individual or group of people.

    I think we can all agree that it is spiritual warfare in the sense of the very end of all things, seeing that Christ will put people into submission and all will acknowledge that He is the Savior.

    But to say that Joseph Smith is taking that role, or a Latter-day Saint is apart of the forces of that submission is where I take criticism. That’s just not our job or role. Or role is to peacefully offer and if rejected, move on.

    So the comment about abominable creeds that is mentioned in Joseph Smith History, to me, is a reference from the Savior about the end of all things and in no way applies to the role of Latter-day Saints in their missionary efforts to dispense the Gospel to all the world. To Christ, they are abominable and will be put into submission by Him, not the Saints.

    If this practice was actually put into place, we would have a lot less contention between faiths and a lot more acceptance of the individual as a human being and child of God. We may differ in our beliefs, but that does not override charity.

    That’s one of the issues I have with people of many Christian faiths. They speak to me as if they were Christ and pronounce judgement on me as if it was the last judgement itself.

  20. mobaby says:

    SteveH,

    I think you have a lack of understanding of the Reformed Church. We absolutely believe in Communion and Baptism as a means of grace and practice these Biblical forms of communing with God. God reaches down to us through these means of grace – and is present with believers in both baptism and the Lord’s supper. Are they necessary for salvation? In other words, are these works saving? Is God keeping a scorecard on how many times you participate? Absolutely not. If one is not able to be baptized for any reason despite their true transforming faith, does God banish them from his presence? Absolutely not. (Jesus said to the thief on the cross when he asked to be remembered when Christ came into His Kingdom – Luke 23:43 “Today you will be with me in paradise.” In Christian theology, this means this man, because he trusted and believed in Christ will be with God in “His Kingdom,” the highest heaven, and yet he had NO chance to do good works or even get baptized) Does baptism play any role in salvation? How could it? Christ said “it is finished” when He died on the cross – the work done for our salvation was completed by Christ on the cross and sin was crushed. The resurrection is the evidence that He overcame death and defeated Satan. Baptism is the outward sign of the new covenant God has established with His people. Through the Lord’s supper Christ is present with His people in a special way as we remember and rejoice in His sacrifice on the cross.

    We also follow the Biblical model for the Church – elders and deacons – and follow the Biblical injunctions for their election. One requirement that would seem troublesome for Mormons is the requirement of “one wife.” (1Tim 3:12) We absolutely follow the Biblical model for the Church – with Jesus Christ as our great High Priest.

    I know “fundamentalist” is often used as a pejorative today, as something or someone to be feared. But in actuality it is something that any follower who believes that their faith is truth should ascribe to – believing the “fundamentals” of their faith. As a Christian I see this as holding fast to the truth that has set you free. If the fundamentals of your faith teach you to love and live in peace with all, what is there to fear? Yes, I truly believe and could be labeled a fundamentalist. The other option is to dismiss the fundamentals of your faith and then what do you have left? Your own opinions and thoughts – a god of your own creation that feels right?

  21. falcon says:

    I think what our LDS friends need to see is that I don’t go after them personally. But I do go after Mormonism, it’s doctrines, practices, attempts to change/alter the historic record of the religion and also the culture which (according to countless exmembers) controls and spiritually abuses people. Christians such as myself, don’t hold the bitterness and animis towards the Mormon church that exMormons do. Why in the world are there organizations like the Exmormon Foundation. Take a trip out to websites such as The Mormon Curtain. That’s just a couple of examples. Go out to YouTube and watch the presentation by Landon Lamborn. There’s a tag line Mormons like to use that goes “If you want to know about Mormonism, ask a Mormon.” I think it might be more accurate to say, “If you want to know about Mormonism, ask an exMormon.” Even Joseph Smith’s son and wife didn’t have any time for the SLC Mormons. They joined another branch which, as far as I know, doesn’t have a lot of exmembers founding organizations to gain emotional support and comfort.

  22. SteveH says:

    Aaron,

    It is curious how “critics” of Mormonism can make the most vile attacks against the LDS Church (ie saying that “Mormonism is a system hatched in Hell”; “One common denominator runs through Mormonism; ‘fear’ “; “Mormons forfeit their right to question authority” etc.) without censure but when I respond to these blatant lies I get yellow carded.

  23. SteveH, your small tirade about “perverse people” whom you called “The American Taliban” violated our comment policy. Take such comments elsewhere.

  24. Online religious discussion with varying degrees of sophistication and passion is messy by nature. Zero in on people you find good conversation partners and interact with them, ignoring trolls. People are watching (about three hundred unique visitors a day, plus a lot of RSS feed readers). Dialectic sharpens both sides. Also, be aware that a lot of this dialog is essentially passionate debate (without any ecumenism in sight). If that alone feels toxic, then forums like these aren’t for you.

    Also, those who want to change the way we do discussion should teach by example. Be a good model of what you feel to be constructive, substantive, restrained, but appropriately passionate conversation, and your example will affect the way others interact.

    The only Mormon here I actually take the time to read is Ralph. Some non-Mormons I enjoy are Gundeck, Berean, JessicaJoy, and David (I hope this doesn’t hurt anyone else’s feelings). I would encourage people to follow their general pattern of interaction.

  25. Okie says:

    MDavis

    I have been lurking around this site for the better part of a year and this is my first comment. Please be gentle. But the comment about spiritual warfare caught my attention. So I quote the following which seems to me to be to the point.
    Eph 6:11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
    12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
    13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
    14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
    15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
    16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
    17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
    18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
    19 ¶ And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
    20 For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.

    (Aaron,maybe you can help me out with this blogging stuff)

  26. SteveH says:

    Mobaby,

    Could you clarify what you mean the the term “the Refomed Church”. Are you referring to a specific sect or to Protestantism in general?

    My point is that the theology of fundamentalist Protestant sects rejects many of the basic foundational tenets of apostolic Christianity (Catholicism, Greek Orthodox, Anglican, Lutherism, Coptic etc.) and thus is a divergent religion. To pick a specific example, fundamentalists claim the baptism is not necessary for one’s salvation whereas Apostolic Christianity affirms that the ordinance of baptism is indeed vital to one’s salvation.

  27. GB said “Sounds like LDS doctrine to me!!”

    …except that to accept that Father, Son and Holy Ghost are co-existent and co-eternal, you’d have to jettison the idea that any of them were mortal human beings who were created by somebody before them. Of course, that idea fails because then, God would not be the “first and the last” (Isa 44:6 etc).

    Also, LDS teaching does not accept that the Holy Ghost is a person, so you’d have to exclude him from the Godhead. Perhaps this is why LDS don’t teach that the Holy Ghost was once a human being who got himself exalted too.

    The problem, I think, is that though there are many LDS teachings that sound “trinitarian”, they are just window dressing. The reality is that Trinitarianism and the LDS idea of eternal progression are irreconcilably opposed. You cannot have an eternal God who was created and you cannot reconcile a created god to the God of the Bible.

  28. GB says:

    Martin,

    Your logic is flawed!

    “…except that to accept that Father, Son and Holy Ghost are co-existent and co-eternal, you’d have to jettison the idea that any of them were mortal human beings who were created by somebody before them.”

    By your own logic Jesus is either “co-existent and co-eternal” or He was a “mortal human being”, because you are asserting that these are mutually exclusive states. Did Jesus not die? Was He not “fully man”?

    It is clear that you don’t understand LDS doctrine and likely don’t want to understand. You claim limitations, based on your theology, that don’t exist in ours, prevent certain conditions from existing. Mixing theologies will get you confused. As you obviously are.

  29. mrgermit says:

    Okie: first of all, if you are an OU fan, don’t be ashamed to ask for healing prayer….I’ll get Tim Tebow in on a conference call……. OK, tha’s probably not funny

    WELCOME to Mormon Coffee, and thanks for going beyond your comfort level and jumping in………small note: we dont’ (and I mean BOTH sides of the aisle) do GENTLE very well, but we are making baby steps. By the time we get the hang of that , K-State ought to be in the title game…….yeah, don’t hold your breath

    Your verses out of Ephesians are very much on target, now if we could just get the hang of these spiritual weapons…….like agape love…….. GERMIT

    ps to MDavis: how do these verses, and many many others apply to NOW, in THIS AGE ?? Just wondering ??

  30. gundeck says:

    Sorry for butting in on your conversation but I have been doing some reading on the Lutheran and Reformed views on Baptism.

    The Reformed Church generally refers to churches and denominations who have maintained historical protestant orthodoxy. Sometimes referred to as Calvinist this branch of Protestantism was unable to maintain unity with the Lutheran Churches over disagreements concerning the sacraments, sanctification and other minor issues. It is the second oldest tradition to come out of the Reformation.

    While there are many who claim the name Reformed, this distinction is generally given to Churches and Denominations that subscribe to the Three Forms of Unity, and the Westminster Confession of Faith with Shorter and Longer Catechism.

    I am not sure how you define fundamentalist, it has become a loaded term. The Reformed position on the Sacrament of Baptism is stated in the Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter XXVIII. Section 5 tells us that it should be considered a sin to neglect baptism, but that “grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it.”

    To explain this a little, the Reformed believe that we are to make use of the Ordinary, sometimes referred to ordained, Means of Grace prescribed in the Bible. These ordinary means are the Word, Sacrament (Baptism & Lord’s Supper), and Prayer. We believe that God administers His Grace and builds the faith of the faithful thru these ordinary means. This does not preclude the Sovereignty of God to give His Grace in extraordinary means, for example the Thief on the Cross (Luke 23:39-43).

    I am somewhat familiar with the Lutheran beliefs on Baptism and they are comparable to the Reformed. Luther’s Lager Catechism explains correctly that Baptism is not a work performed by us but a work preformed for us by God. They use the term “Visible Means of Grace” that I think fits well.

    I am sorry, I didn’t thank you for your answer to my question, “How would a Mormon respond to the question “What is the chief end of man?”” A Reformed person would reply, “Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.” This is the first question of the Westminster lesser Catechism used to help teach our children the Gospel.

  31. mrgermit says:

    FoF; this is just a “kill some time during a boring work day” type anecdote , so respond if you’d like, but no big deal if otherwise:

    you wrote:
    Bottom line is that something happens in these LDS as they leave the church. You and I cannot know with certainty what that is in the majority of these cases.

    maybe not with certainty, but of the dozens of testimonies (dont’ know exactly how many, but way over 60), I see dominant themes, and really all the themes that Katrina touched on, I hear over and over. Granted, I am certainly not an unbiased listener/observer, so maybe I’m just looking thru tainted ev. glasses……a possibility…. but the sense of being FREED from someone or something is palpable in these stories. I can’t get away from that. This consistency (according to me, of course, and all this is anecdotal, purely) works against a comment you made about Katrina’s story being “that of an isolated individual…” or something to that effect.
    This could be “sampling error” , I think stats geeks call it, but I thot I’d get this out to you. GERMIT

  32. mrgermit says:

    To all for whom PACKAGE/ATTITUDE is as important as CONTENT,

    I’d say a big AMEN to what AARON has posted, and would give RALPH and GUNDEK high marks for keeping a level head when others are losing theirs. I’ve used, and continue to use , both of these guys as models to follow…… at least for the package…sorry Ralph, I just have to have the dark roast and merlot……..

    Good post AARON and yeah, “passionate” and “messy” pretty much sums up our neighborhood

  33. falcon says:

    I see one of our Mormon poster took exception to my statement that Mormonism is a religious system that was hatched in hell. Now what would cause me to 1) conclude that and 2) to actually say it……outloud….right here where Mormons show up? Now least anyone think I’m a wild eyed fundamentalist standing on a street corner ranting out provocative slogans, let me explain.

    Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism was a well documented practitioner of, at the least, folk magic. Check out the writings by Quinn, Palmer and Bushman all of whom spent some time in the Mormon church. Granted, Quinn got excommunicated (I think) and Palmer got disfellowshiped and Bushman wrote in such a way as to say it without having the Mormon authorities wet themselves. The prophet Smith had his magic rock that he used for scrying, which in Christianity, is a real no no. When he tired of using it to find buried treasure he used it to “interpret” the magic golden plates, which by the way, he didn’t look at preferring to put his rock in his hat and burying his face in the hat WHALA the BoM is conjured. So what or who then, is the source of the prophets mystical experiences and powers? Joe and his buds also like to use second sight vision which allowed them to look into the spirit world. Again, what or who is the source of such practices and experiences. I believe we could produce pictures with occult symbols on at least one Mormon temple…..which Mormons appear to prefer over something like the Cross, the symbol of the atonement. Now what or who in the spirit world would prefer occult symbols over the cross? So Joseph Smith, the seer and revelator, also proclaims that God is not who these folks really thought he was. He is instead, a glorified man, who progressed to becoming a god. Now who’s interests, in the spirit world, does this blasphemy serve? Now add to this the hocus pocus that goes on in the temples and it’s not really that difficult to see where this religion had its origin. I especially like the comments of one of our former posters regarding the “veil” in the temple and that some have claimed to have seen the spirits of the dead through the veil. Real nice touch. It feels so spiritual but it’s spiritism. Very satisfying stuff. Who, may I ask, provides these wonderful experiences. They may as well haul in Oiji boards and crystal balls and really have a grand old time. And just as an aside, check out the symbol on your magic underware. This whole program is occult 101.
    Now why do I say this stuff right out loud where Mormons gather. Well there are Mormons who show-up here who are questioning the Mormon program. I say it out loud for them. Shock value? You bet! When people’s eternal souls are at stake, there really isn’t time to mince words and play smoochie smooch and group hug. What if someone gets offended? I’ll take the chance that they’re offended but that what’s been said is sticking in their brain and causing them to think.

  34. Okie says:

    mrgermit
    I didn’t even watch the game. I already knew the outcome.OU would clutch. Kstate, you from there? Just asking

  35. mrgermit says:

    OKIE: you ALREADY knew the outcome ?? Hey there’s this thing in our state called a LOTTERY, and I was wondering…….

    I was born and raised maybe half an hour from the Garden of Eden, yeah, the REAL garden of Eden, Jackson County MO, tho I’ve never visited that particular site. I grew up Catholic and dumber than a bag of hammers, so WHO KNEW ?? I thot it was just scruffy Missouri prairie land……. I still live within an hour of Paradise, but I’m willing to trade for year round moderate weather and a better job. All serious offers considered.

    I have several K-state fans as friends, some of them military or ex-military who TRY to act like it’s no big deal to wear purple……yeah, RIIIGGGHHHHHHHT.

    Your interest in things Mormon is……..?? In my case there is no physical family connection, at least not local and “causal” as far as my involvment here at MC.

    WELCOME ,, again. GERMIT

    you can learn a lot by posting, not only about the lDS faith, but your own, and also YOURSELF. this can be very valuable, tho sometimes troubling , information Grace and Peace

  36. Berean says:

    Defender and all our Mormon friends:

    Yes, I am referring to D&C 130:22, King Follet Discourse, institute manuals, conference reports…you know – the usual stuff. Somehow modern revelation on who the Mormon god is and what he looks like is far different then how he is described in the Book of Mormon (Alma chapters 18, 19 & 22). You asked, “How does the Bible refute D&C 130?” I am so happy that you asked and I’ll be happy to answer that for you. Open your Bible to John 4:24 where it reads: “God is a Spirit”. If you don’t like the English translation of the Greek we can go back to the original language in the ancient manuscripts where it reads: “Pneuma o’ Theos” – English: “Spirit the God”. We have the ancient manuscript of the book of John from A.D. 150 we can look at. It’s known as P52 (papyrus). Let me know if you’d like directions on where its located. Depending on where you live you may need to catch a flight. There are plenty of ancient manuscripts here in the United States to reference. Where can I go and look at the ancient manuscripts (plates) of the Book of Mormon? We can talk more about this in another on another blog thread.

    Nice spin on Jesus being an exalted man the same as the Mormon god. However, your statement is severely flawed. Jesus is not an exalted man. The reason? He was God before He got here an took on the form of man! (Isaiah 9:6; Matthew 1:23) The book of Mormon agrees in 2 Nephi 19:6 (plagiarized). You can’t exalt to something that you already are. For the Mormon god to once be a man, sinned, had a redeemer atone for his sins, eternally progress to what he is today – well, that just doesn’t make him the God of the Bible.

    Outer darkness is too strong language? Yes, it is. However, the situation that the Mormons are in is severe (spiritually). It is expected of me to warn the Mormons and others that are following false gospels, false christ’s and false gods to warn them of the impending dangers. The New Testament is full of examples of the disciples and even Jesus Himself warning everyone what is at stake if they make wrong choices.

    The LDS Church thinks it has the same responsibility. The feature article in the January 2009 Ensign (pages 5-9) says: “Let Us Raise Our Voice of Warning” with First Counselor Henry Eyring pleading the cause for the Mormon faithful to warn those outside of Mormonism. Likewise, I am warning those outside of Christianity and the teachings of the Bible.

    Yes, there are going to be all kinds of judgements. The Father has delegated all judgement to the Son (John 5:22). The disciples will judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Luke 22:30). Christians will judge angels (1 Corinthians 6:3). I won’t be judging Joseph Smith. Jesus Christ will because Joseph Smith will be at the great white thone judgement (Revelation 20:11-15). I judge now what I hear, see and what I read. I can tell you and other Mormons what is in store for them eternally if they don’t reject a false gospel. Jesus Christ is the one who will actually proclaim that eternal sentence on those that are not His and send you to outer darkness. I will only be there watching it with great sorrow and tears in my eyes (Revelation 21:4).

    When the Mormon Church teaches doctrines that are contrary to the Bible (as I outlined in post above and Katria alluded to in her statement), I judge those statements and state that they are false and let the Mormon people know where they are headed for holding to those teachings. By your words you are already condemned. See Matthew 12:37.

  37. gundeck says:

    SteveH,

    You have in the past shown a high regard for your own knowledge and understanding of Christian beliefs, piety, and practices, so I say this in the spirit of amity. The term “sect”, to a Protestant, much like the term “cult”, to a Mormon, can be taken as an affront and can be seen as a rhetorical annoyance. When referring to a different ecclesiastical assembly the widespread term is “denomination”. As your denomination has suffered many separations due to disagreement about doctrine, much in the same pattern as Protestant denominations, I am sure you can see how use of the term “sect” is not beneficial to a courteous dialog.

    I also forgot to mention in my post above that the term “Presbyterian & Reformed Churches” is not used to indicate that Presbyterians are not Reformed in their beliefs. It is used to acknowledge that the differing forms of ecclesiastical government coming out of the Reformation.

  38. Berean says:

    Defender and all our Mormon friends:

    Yes, I am referring to D&C 130:22, King Follet Discourse, institute manuals, conference reports…you know – the usual stuff. Somehow modern revelation on who the Mormon god is and what he looks like is far different then how he is described in the Book of Mormon (Alma chapters 18, 19 & 22). You asked, “How does the Bible refute D&C 130?” I am so happy that you asked and I’ll be happy to answer that for you. Open your Bible to John 4:24 where it reads: “God is a Spirit”. If you don’t like the English translation of the Greek we can go back to the original language in the ancient manuscripts where it reads: “Pneuma o’ Theos” – English: “Spirit the God”. We have the ancient manuscript of the book of John from A.D. 150 we can look at. It’s known as P52 (papyrus). Let me know if you’d like directions on where its located. Depending on where you live you may need to catch a flight. There are plenty of ancient manuscripts here in the United States to reference. Where can I go and look at the ancient manuscripts (plates) of the Book of Mormon? We can talk more about this in another on another blog thread.

    Nice spin on Jesus being an exalted man the same as the Mormon god. However, your statement is severely flawed. Jesus is not an exalted man. The reason? He was God before He got here an took on the form of man! (Isaiah 9:6; Matthew 1:23) The book of Mormon agrees in 2 Nephi 19:6 (plagiarized). You can’t exalt to something that you already are. For the Mormon god to once be a man, sinned, had a redeemer atone for his sins, eternally progress to what he is today – well, that just doesn’t make him the God of the Bible.

    Outer darkness is too strong language? Yes, it is. However, the situation that the Mormons are in is severe (spiritually). It is expected of me to warn the Mormons and others that are following false gospels, false christ’s and false gods to warn them of the impending dangers. The New Testament is full of examples of the disciples and even Jesus Himself warning everyone what is at stake if they make wrong choices.

    The LDS Church thinks it has the same responsibility. The feature article in the January 2009 Ensign (pages 5-9) says: “Let Us Raise Our Voice of Warning” with First Counselor Henry Eyring pleading the cause for the Mormon faithful to warn those outside of Mormonism. Likewise, I am warning those outside of Christianity and the teachings of the Bible.

    Yes, there are going to be all kinds of judgements. The Father has delegated all judgement to the Son (John 5:22). The disciples will judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Luke 22:30). Christians will judge angels (1 Corinthians 6:3). I won’t be judging Joseph Smith. Jesus Christ will because Joseph Smith will be at the great white thone judgement (Revelation 20:11-15). I judge now what I hear, see and what I read. I can tell you and other Mormons what is in store for them eternally if they don’t reject a false gospel. Jesus Christ is the one who will actually proclaim that eternal sentence on those that are not His and send you to outer darkness. I will only be there watching it with great sorrow and tears in my eyes (Revelation 21:4).

    When the Mormon Church teaches doctrines that are contrary to the Bible (as I outlined in post above and Katria alluded to in her statement), I judge those statements and state that they are false and let the Mormon people know where they are headed for holding to those teachings. By your words you are already condemned. See Matthew 12:37.

  39. SteveH says:

    Gundeck,

    I have always thought that the word “sect” was a neutral word with no stigma attached to it. Much in the way that the word “cult” was until the 1930’s.

  40. Hi OKIE,

    Welcome to MC and please post your thoughts

    I’m not sure why you posted the Ephesians passage on ‘spiritual warfare’, but here’s a thought…

    Its important that we notice that Paul opens these statements with “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood” (Eph 6:12, KJV). I interpret this to mean that we don’t fight against people, we fight for them. What we fight against are the paradigms and ideas that trap and bind them.

    I hope that this is what motivates posters on both sides of the debate – we’re not here to annihilate, abuse or humiliate the opposition, we’re actually here to redeem them because that is the mission of God.

    So, please say your mind, but please respect the fact that there are human beings on the other sides of all posts. It is plain that our experiences and expectations vary greatly. One reason I hang around this forum is because I get to see experiences of religion that are very different from mine and its refreshing and challenging to hear stuff that I would not have thought myself, even if I end up disagreeing with it.

    PS, being able to post a gravitar is a great idea because it reminds me that there is a human face behind every comment posted here.

  41. GB,

    I’m not sure why there’s no ‘reply’ button on your post, so I’m replying here.

    My “thesis” (gosh, that sounds pretentious) is this…

    1 God was never created; he was before all things (literally)
    2 Jesus is co-eternal with God, which means that he was not created
    3 I am created
    4 For Lorenzo Snow’s couplet (“As man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become”) to be true, Jesus would have to be created (because he is like me)
    5 If Jesus is co-eternal with the Father and Holy Ghost in the eternal (literally) Godhead, then Lorenzo Snow got it wrong.

    …so you cannot reconcile the idea of an eternal Jesus with Lorenzo Snow’s couplet.

    As for Jesus actually dying, yes I believe it because that is what the Gospels say. I don’t have an explanation as to exactly how God can die, other than that he limited himself to our humanity (see Phil 2:5-11 – note that the “Name above all names” and “every knee shall bow” themes are specifically referring to the one and only divinity of Israel). He voluntarily submitted himself to death so that we might be reconciled to him.

    Here’s a question for you. Why doesn’t the Bible say anything about God the Father’s Father?

    Why not say that the Father killed and ate his Father (to metaphorically sweep the evidence under the carpet). At least this would be pretty much in line with some of the ancient pagan creation myths that appealed so much to JS (see Book of Abraham). If you find this idea as repulsive as I do, I’d like to hear your argument from the Bible as to why its not true.

  42. FOF,

    Are you applying these verses to Katrina or to Joseph Smith?

    (No prizes for guessing to whom I think they should be applied to).

  43. jackg says:

    Falcon,

    I have to say that you are very forthright and spot on as usual. The fact that there are those who question whether or not you are an alien means you are making strong points that cannot be logically refuted. Spiritual warfare is indeed what we are engaged in.

    As I read Acts 2, it’s important to understand that Peter is not calling for a repentance of behavior, but a repentance of wrong thinking. His Jewish crowd needed to repent of what they thought about Jesus Christ. His sermon is Christo-centric, and not behavioral in nature. In the synoptics, Jesus asks His disciples at one point, “Who do the people say that I am?” He did not ask, “Are the people behaving better?” Behavior is a response to right thinking, correct theology, about the Person of Jesus Christ and His identity. Jesus was asking about who the people thought He was, and then He asked: “Who do you say that I am?” Unfortunately, Mormons will have the wrong answer to this question. The emphasis on behavior is actually a red herring when discussing what it means to be a Christian. It’s a red herring because behavior does not matter unless it is rooted in the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, which can only occur after one can correctly respond to Jesus’ question and say that He is the Christ, the son of the Living God! Answering that He is Satan’s brother and a created being is not the right answer.

    Just my two cents on why Mormonism is not Christianity with regard to this debate. I expect people to disagree with me. That’s the nature of spiritual warfare.

    Peace and Grace!

  44. faithoffathers says:

    “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” John 7:17

    “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” Matt 7:21

    (Yes I know what the verses that follow say- but what are “wonderful works?”- to me they are showy, flashy, self-centered, attention-seeking acts- these are not the things God commands).

    “blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.” Luke 11:28

    “Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.” John 15:14

    “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” John 14:15

    “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” John 15:10

    All of the history of God’s dealing with man have been marked by blessings upon them when they obey Him. Christ’s atonement didn’t change that principle, but augmented its power. I appreciate your though jackg, but I think some people overstate one principle to the detriment of others.

    Before Christ, the law of Moses was given to teach the people through symbolism the nature and importance of Christ’s atoning sacrifice. This was commonly referred to generically as “the law.” But I believe many misunderstand the reference to “law,” confusing the law of Moses with the general concept of the Law of God. While Christ fulfilled the law of Moses and the ends of the law of God for us, that does not mean that we have no concern for or obligation to the Law of God.

    Yes- the law of Moses is no longer. But obedience is still required, but in a different manifestation. We do not offer blood sacrifices, rather we offer a broken heart and a contrite spirit. We must make every effort to keep the commandments given to us by Christ. I must say here that it is Christ who saves us 100%, no questions. But we must do what He asks of us. And mere belief is not all He asks. I, in all honesty, cannot see another interpretation of the scriptures that makes any sense.

    Jackg- I find your statement that repentance has to do with wrong thinking, not behavior very problematic. I do not believe this is supported by the scriptures.

    To desire to obey God is not selfish, despite what LDS critics may claim.

    Christ did for us what we could not do for ourselves. But we still must do those things that we CAN do for ourselves.

  45. faithoffathers says:

    Aaron,

    We simply use terms differently. I have said this before- if the authors of such statements thought that people like you would claim that they were saying we can deserve salvation, or that we truly earn exaltation, they would cringe to no end. I truly feel you do not get what they are saying.

    They are merely using such words as “merit” and “earn” to mean “measure up” to what God expects of us. I am not saying He expects us to fulfill the end of the law or anything close to it. But He does have expectations for us. I am quite sure that if you viewed these statements in the context of all the writings and entire quotations of these people, you would see (or maybe admit to see) my point.

    You can use these phrases and brief quotations repetively all you like, but it does not accurately or honestly represent what we believe. Do you know this?

  46. faithoffathers says:

    Martin,

    Sorry for not being more clear.

    I said, “Again I will point out the propensity for critics to take a positive and turn it into a negative. This started with an article praising LDS for their service to others. Somehow this is morphed into criticism that their gospel is selfish.”

    In essence, critics are seeing a positive, selfless behavior in people and finding a way to criticize.

    I am therefore applying the verses to those performing such service and being criticized for it!

    Thanks,

    fof

  47. Berean says:

    Aaron,

    I see that FoF has played card no.1 – “we don’t believe those things”.

    FoF,

    How do we reconcile this quote:

    “Only in and through a family unit can we obtain eternal life.” (Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual Religion 430 & 431, page 78)

    …in light of what Christ said in John 6:47. By the way, please look at the footnotes in the LDS KJV Bible at the bottom where in this verse your church stated “Eternal life; Exaltation”. This is centered on belief.

    I don’t think you’re in any position to be interpreting or correcting anyone on the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve or the Seventy on something you think they really meant but didn’t say otherwise. Their statements are pretty clear to read. Your hope of obtaining eternal life is what you have to do as a family unit to get there (celestial marriage). What is that? It’s something you have to merit and work for – no basis for scripture on that in the Bible.

  48. GB says:

    The Apostle Paul said,
    Rom 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
    6 Who will render to every man according to his DEEDS:
    7 To them who by PATIENT CONTINUANCE IN WELL DOING seek for glory and honour and immortality, ETERNAL LIFE:
    8 But unto them that are contentious, and DO NOT OBEY THE TRUTH, but obey unrighteousness, INDIGNATION AND WRATH,
    9 TRIBULATION AND ANGUISH, upon every soul of man that DOETH EVIL, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
    10 BUT GLORY, HONOUR, AND PEACE, to every man that WORKETH GOOD, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: (emphasis mine).

  49. falcon says:

    One of the things that I’ve noticed is that Mormons have no idea what Biblical exegesis is and (they) tend to settle for a form of circular reasoning to interpret what the Bible says. If something doesn’t fit in with their revealed “testimony” then the scriptures are totured in such a way as to shoe horn it in to what they believe. It’s pretty tough, for example, to reconcile their belief that they are gods ready to be hatched and yet they’re stuck with this sinful nature. How frustrating that must be and totally inconsistent with their life experience to be a godwannabe who just isn’t making the grade.
    Now some Mormons hear the Word of God and get it! Boom, the light goes on. They recognize that by nature they are sinners and the only way out of the dilemma they find themselves in is to recognize (the fact of their sinful nature), repent and turn to God for their salvation. Not a god, but God…….and get cleansed in the Blood of the Lamb. Katrina Marti got it! It all started when she got it right about who Jesus is and what He had done for her. The old bumper sticker “No God, No Peace; Know God, Know Peace” applies to Mormons. Their biggest sin is spiritual pride. It’s what did Lucifer in and it’s what will do Mormons in.

  50. mrgermit says:

    FoF: hope you find this “response” because there was no “REPLY” option under your response to AARON>

    As I’ve said before , anecdotes or testimony does not prove anything in and of itself, BUT; here’s the big but:

    I find it interesting that the common, consistent refrain from those leaving your church is “we felt like we had to work our way to heaven…..” One lady author, I think it was a MRS. Robinson, put it this way
    “the Mormon god is a hungry god…….always asking……never satisfied…” that’s a paraphrase , but you get the idea. I’m not talking about an isolated comment here and there, the consistent refrain seems to speak against what you say the LDS truly teach and believe.

    I can believe that a whole lot of people “got it wrong’
    and or “didn’t know what we really teach” etc.
    OR, I can believe that your bias makes it difficult for YOU to know and accept what you really teach. I point this out to underscore that it’s not just AARON, BEREAN, or FALCON saying this or that , but more often than not they are quoting yuour own leaders, joined with the words of people who’ve studied and lived by those words for many years, and then come to the conlusion that it’s not the gospel. Can you FAIRLY see (no pun intended) where we’d get those ideas??

    PS: our sides continue to talk past each other on faith and works, and you are very right about using words in different ways……no doubt this is frustrating for both parties.

    blessings on you and yours…….GERMIT

Leave a Reply