I talked to the missionaries and they asked me to read the Book of Mormon (BOM), especially Moroni 10:4 and pray about it. They were so excited that I actually agreed to read the book, I couldn’t let them down. Besides, they said that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was the one true church on earth today. If it really is true, I needed to know about it. I decided to read the last chapter first, Moroni 10 because they had already pointed out verse 4. Sounded good, until I got to 10:32, I was a little concerned with what it said, but I decided to read the introduction.
The intro says that Joseph Smith told the brethren that the BOM is the “most correct book on earth and people will get closer to God by reading it than any other book.” Wow, I really wanted to know God, so I decided to read the entire book. It’s written in King’s English, just like my King James Bible so it took a little getting used to, but I managed. I didn’t know the Hebrews in Egypt knew 17th century English, but I had faith and the missionaries were so darn eager for me to read it.
It didn’t take me long to get to 1 Nephi 3:7. It says that God will not give me a commandment that I can’t keep. Really? I know that I can’t keep every commandment every day. I started thinking that I wasn’t worthy enough for God. I hoped that there would be some way to get closer to God because I was really struggling with sin. I kept reading.
Soon, I got to 1 Nephi 13 and 14 and learned about the great abominable church and that there were only two churches on the earth, the church of the Lamb of God and the church of the Devil. The missionaries already told me that the LDS church was the one true church, so I knew what the Lamb of God church was. I grew up Catholic and I knew that the Catholic Church wasn’t my favorite church, but it says that everyone that is a member of any other church is of the Devil. I don’t think that I am of the Devil and I don’t think that my family and friends are of the Devil. That sounded pretty harsh for a loving God. I continued to read.
I read about the trip that the family of Lehi took to the Americas and the trials and tribulations that followed them. I read 2 Nephi 9:27 and it says woe to me for my awful state. I transgress commandments. Transgress means sin. That is why I needed to find God, I am a sinner and the BOM says woe to me. I read up to 2 Nephi 25:23 and had a question. What does “after all you can do” mean? Does it mean that I need to stop sinning, or does it mean that I need to join the LDS church; does it mean that I need to see all my family as the devil? I don’t understand what that means do you?
I continued to read about wars and peoples, cities and prophets, coins, horses, elephants, steel, glass, etc. It was a great story. Plenty of action and bible verses. It sounded great. I had never heard about this history of the Americas before. I was reading in Alma and there was another verse that really weighed down on me. I know that I must always do what God says, and Alma 11:37 seemed impossible to me. It says I couldn’t be saved in my sins. I need to be saved. But it says God can’t save me in my sins. I always thought that God could do anything, but I guess that He can’t save me in my sins. I know that I am a sinner. I started to feel doomed. But I listened to the missionaries and they said that the BOM was true. If it is true, I’m in real trouble.
It didn’t take long to reach Alma 34. The missionaries told me that I could repent and I would be saved. Great! I could repent and my sins would be forgiven. But I sin every day. I would need to repent every day to make sure that I would live with Heavenly Father again if I died unexpectedly. I read in Alma 34:32-35 that I needed to repent of all my sins before I die or I will be sealed to the Devil. But the missionaries told me that I would be sealed to my wife and children and be a family for eternity. But if I’m sealed to the devil, are my wife and kids sealed to the devil also? Again, I always sin. It may not be a big sin, but it is still a sin. There must be something more.
That something more better hurry, because I read Alma 42:30. I can’t excuse myself from any of my sins. Big, little, any sin. But maybe teeny, tiny sins are OK. I hoped there was a loophole for people like me.
I finally got back to Moroni and continued to read. There was 10:4 again saying that I must pray about the truth of the BOM. By this time, I was really depressed. Then 10:32 hit me hard.
“Yea, come unto Christ and be perfected in Him,”
Sounds great! I really needed to be perfected because I am a sinner
“and deny yourself of all ungodliness,”
I still can’t do this, what’s next?
“And if ye shall deny yourself of all ungodliness, and love God with all your
might, mind, and strength,”
I will try, but sometimes I will question things and sin occasionally.
“then is His grace sufficient to you.”
If I deny myself of all ungodliness then what am I? I’m perfect. But only Jesus was perfect. If I am perfect, why would I need grace? But what if I can’t deny myself of all ungodliness? I still need His grace! I’m a sinner. I really need grace. But it won’t be sufficient for me. God loves me, I need His grace. But the God in the BOM can’t save me in my sins. But I again listened to the missionaries and they told me that there was always repentance and the atonement. Good, there must be something more. I prayed about the BOM, but I didn’t get that “burning in the bosom” that the missionaries said that they felt. I decided to look deeper into the LDS church because the missionaries were adamant that the church is true. I went to engineering school and research comes naturally to me. I decided not to judge the church on just the BOM, even though it does say that it the “most correct book of any on earth, and the keystone of our religion.”
I bought a quadruple combination from LDS.org. It contains the KJV Bible with Joseph Smith’s changes in the footnotes, the BOM, The Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrines and Covenants (D&C). That’s a big book! Tons of commandments, laws, rules, etc. The missionaries referred to D&C a number of times. Maybe I would start to feel better about my salvation and eternal life by reading that book.
I was wrong. Right from the start, in D&C 1:31-32, I knew I was in big trouble. There was no way I could even get by with tiny little sins. Remember Alma 42? No more little white lies, looking at a pretty girl, covetousness, hatred, are there more? I’m sure there are. God couldn’t look upon ANY sin with the least degree of allowance. Again, I thought God could do all things, but I guess not. But wait, there may be a way out of my predicament. In verse 32 it says, “He that repents and does the commandments of the Lord shall be forgiven.” I need that forgiveness, desperately.
I looked up repentance in the index and it says “requires” with D&C 58:43. I needed to know how to repent because I needed to be saved. The only way I could be perfect is by grace and that requires repentance. I read, “By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins, behold, he will confess them and forsake them. What does forsake mean? I looked it up in the dictionary. It says I can’t do it anymore. Forsake means abandon. Abandon means stop. Again, I need to stop sinning. I CAN”T. It’s too hard! There is no way I can do it! But remember 1 Nephi 3:7, it says that I can do it! Will I ever be worthy enough?
I wanted to find out what happens if I sin again after I repent. Back to the index and under SIN, it says D&C 82:7, “former sins return…” I looked up the verse. I shouldn’t have done that.
“And now, verily, I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge;
go your way and sin no more;
There it is again, I can’t sin again, ever!
“but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God.”
Great, I’m right back where I started from. Will I ever be worthy enough?
Now I really needed forgiveness. Again, the missionaries said that all we need to do is try our best and God will know that we are sincere and enduring to the end. That sounded good, but I couldn’t find where trying was enough in the scriptures that I had read. The missionaries to the rescue again! They said that is what modern day prophets were for, to clarify the scriptures and provide guidance to the people of this dispensation.
I tried deseretbooks.com. Bingo! I was looking for modern day prophets and their teachings. I bought “Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith” and “Miracle of Forgiveness”, by Spencer W. Kimball. These two guys were supposed to be God’s prophets on the earth, so I had better listen to them. Plus, I needed that miracle that Kimball’s book talks about. I really needed that forgiveness. My sin just continues to happen.
Joseph Smith was the man who brought about the restoration of the Gospel, so I decided to read his book first. Pretty boring, not much that told me about my eternal life, until page 150. What did the missionaries say, “We repent every day.” But Joseph Smith, the Prophet Himself, says that daily repentance doesn’t please God. God is already mad at me and can’t save me in my sins, so now I can’t even repent every day! What happens if I die on my way home from work? Remember Alma 34, I’m sealed to Satan. But God only wants us to try our best, I hope.
“The Miracle of Forgiveness.” What a great title to a book. I was sure that in this book I would have all my worries put to rest. Forgiveness is a miracle. I needed a miracle to forgive a sinner like me. I started reading.
The title of the first chapter already had me worried, “This Life is the Time.” I already knew what that meant. Remember Alma 34. The second chapter’s title wasn’t much easier on me, “No Unclean Thing Can Enter.” I know that I’m unclean, but I didn’t know how dirty I really was until I got to pages 23-25. Remember that I asked if there were more sins I needed to know about? Spencer Kimball found them for me! I’ll be honest, if this is the list of sins that I need to repent of, and be finished with by the time I die, I have no hope. The church is true and the BOM is true, Joseph Smith was a prophet, and Spencer Kimball was a prophet, and prophets don’t lie (I don’t think), and the church teaches this information. But all I need to do is try. Trying is enough for God, right? I can’t find it anywhere in the books I have read, but the missionaries are certain trying is all that needs to be done. I better not trust the scriptures and the books the church publishes, only the missionaries. They really know their doctrine!
I read further in “Miracle of Forgiveness.” Now I’m really praying for that miracle it talks about in the title. I need grace, forgiveness, salvation, sealing to my family, exaltation, worthiness, etc. I’m trying my best. I have all the desire in the world to please God. That is all that God asks for, trying and desire. I have all the blessings, or so I thought. Chapter 12 sealed my eternal doom.
Again, the title was familiar, but not comforting, “Abandonment of Sin.” Where did I hear that before? I remember, D&C 58:42-43. Abandon means forsake, forsake means stop. I asked myself how well I was doing with abandoning my sins. Not good. I really want to abandon them, really! I didn’t even get off the first page of the chapter before I knew I had a problem. “Desire Is Not Sufficient.” Great! “The saving power does not extend to him who merely wants to change his life.” I sincerely want to change my life. Am I saved if I really, really truly want to change? Nope. I agree that wanting to change is different from trying to change. At least that is what God wants us to do, right? Work! Spencer doesn’t stop with desire.
“Trying is Not Sufficient.” The final hammer fell. Those two missionaries didn’t have all the answers, did they? Up until this point, I truly believed that little saying, “We do our best, and Jesus does the rest.” Spencer Kimball, a prophet of God declares, “Nor is repentance complete when one merely tries to abandon sin.” “To try is weak.” “To ‘do the best I can’ is not strong.” We must always to better than we can.” What is better than we can? We can do anything (1 Nephi 3:7). Where is that miracle?
Now I knew what “after all you can do” meant in 2 Nephi 25:23. It is the complete abandonment of all of my sins before I die. I can’t just want to, I can’t just try. I must live up to the scriptures and teachings of the prophets. I must deny myself of all ungodliness, do all I can do, abandon every sin, not repent every day, endure to the end (end of what? I’m still unclear), and remain worthy. What happens to me if I don’t complete my repentance before I die? I’m sealed to Satan. Do I make it to the Celestial Kingdom? No. Do I have my eternal family? No. Can I progress in the post-mortality? No. I must be PERFECT.
No one is perfect, therefore, there is NO HOPE! There must be something more. A loving, caring, merciful, and just God would never teach that there is no hope. Fortunately, there is a God that understands the nature of His creation.
My journey through Mormonism didn’t end the way I thought, or the way the missionaries wished it would have. The missionaries were so happy (how I can’t figure out) and knowledgeable (well, somewhat) and certain (I heard their testimonies 5 times). They “knew” that if I only prayed about the BOM, I would have that “burning” and “know” that it is true. I sincerely prayed about the Mormon Church. The Holy Spirit clearly told me that it wasn’t true and guided me to the Bible.
"I have always interpreted Jesus statement "if ye love me, keep my commandments" to mean that, well, if we love Jesus we'll keep his commandments. I guess I've taken it pretty literally. Now you're imposing a standard that anyone who tries and fails therefore must not love Jesus, and I don't see that."
What i´m saying is that if you don´t keep Jesus´ commandments then you don´t love Him. Either you keep it or you don´t. You´re avoiding the issue by saying that you break God´s commandments all the time, but you repent of them because Christ said that was OK. That´s the point – us being corrupt in our nature and breaking God´s commandments all the time is the reason why Jesus had to die. It´s not a matter of interpretation of Scripture. It´s a matter of realizing our sinful nature and how doing our best means nothing before God. Besides i don´t know if you read Miracle of Forgiveness – if you go by that book you´d spend days just asking for forgiveness about sins you didn´t even know you committed, and the ones you´re committing while begging for repentance for the ones you already committed. You know, when you your heart is full of pride and demands God´s blessing supposing He owes you those blessings? That´s just one among thousands of examples.
"And so I'll follow the dictates of my conscience and follow the Spirit"
You can´t preach the dictates of your conscience on anyone as a rule that came down from God. That´s your standard, it is not universal.
"Imagine the kind of crazy person would I have to be to say "The Church makes me happy; stay away!"
The kind of person that loves people enough to know that certain things will do more hurt than help. The kind of person that has a friend who is a drug addict and know that person will be looked down by pretty much everyone who will make sure to stay away from him as much as possible, that knows that friend will be prevented of having the blessings of the forgiveness of his sins because he just can´t stop drinking coffee, etc.
Those "little differences" between your "true" gospel and the real Biblical Gospel make all the difference in the world.
"Your experience was different than mine, obviously"
What i was talking about is that when you have responsibilities in the Church you have more headaches than anything else because the majority of people are only causing trouble or avoiding work. So the church would be last place i´d go to to feel happiness. It was a job just like any secular job, not a place of happiness and joy and peace, etc. Well, when i didn´t have any callings and could just sit back and listen it wasn´t so bad – except for how boring it is.
With respect, there is a big difference between listening to a radio show by a Lutheran and reading the actual words of Luther. You are welcome to characterize all you want the beliefs of the guy who is doing the show, but if you're going to tell me what Luther said, you'd better actually tell me what Luther said.
I have read Luther. (Not all: that guy wrote and wrote and wrote and wrote. It would take years to work through his whole works. I've read all his major stuff, though.) And I've read Calvin. And I've read the works of dozens of others besides. I'm much more comfortable when we're dealing with quotations than with vaguely remembered, second hand paraphrases.
I was talking about how saying that you´re a nice guy and all doesn´t excuse you from being deceitful about your religion – trying to twist as as far as it is enough to start resembling Biblical Christianity. By saying that you´re saved by the Grace of God alone apart from works…
"Actually, I don't feel particularly trapped"
I´m glad you´re not – but the truth has come out already. You believe you´re saved by the Grace of God after all you can do – contrary of what your first arguments were. Actually what traps you is not any argument i´ve made – it´s your very own BoM. In 1 Ne. 3:7 says that God doesn´t give a commandment that we can´t do. In 3 Ne. Jesus commands you to be perfect as God is perfect. How´s that going for you?
"I should be worried because I'm happy"
You should be worried because of this – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gsmj5UWNwSQ
" So did He lie the first time? Of course not!"
No, because He was keeping God´s Covenant – He wasn´t speaking to the Samaritans because He was promised to go to the Jews first, the children of Abraham first.
"He could give a provisional commandment and later expand it when the people were better prepared."
Of course, but in the Bible those commandments are rarely arbitrary, and concerning Christ they had been prophesied about in the OT, talking about how he was going to save the Gentiles also. Joseph´s word of wisdom? Well, Emma was upset about people spitting tobacco in her house… see the difference?
"And the statement "So if I have goodness in my heart, the rest doesn't matter. Right?" in not an interpretation of the Bible, but of what Violet was saying."
Sorry about that.
I'm not trying to sound like anything other than the honest, unvarnished truth of what I believe. And I, a mainstream Mormon, believe that I am saved by grace (or through the atonement, which I mean to be a synonym for grace). I believe that the atonement is a gift to me. I apply to the atonement the phrase Hugh Nibley used as the title of a talk he once gave, "Work we must, but lunch is free."
Hence, salvation is freely given–is already wrought!–by the Savior. That's not me twisting Mormonism into anything other than Mormonism. That orthodox Christianity (and, in this forum, non-orthodox too) uses the same concepts as Mormonism is, I think, evidence that we are all worshipping the same God.
You should note that things like church attendance,tithing, loyalty to church leaders, missionary work, and keeping the body holy by not drinking or eating certain things are things that some christians practice because somebody has taught them that principle and they feel the need to keep that principle. I mention this because some People believe that they should do this because they are saved.
Do you know who Luther,Zwingli, Calvin and Wesley are? They are men who were responsible for the reformation. They are sometimes quoted because their explaination is better than what others can say.
I like to observe. So I try to toss out ideas that are true to all religions. Such as weare allbrothers- We are all created by the same God. We just see him differently.
"Oh, I had previously imagined that Mormon doctrine taught that Mormons had to earn their way into heaven. Now I see that Mormons believe that they are saved through the atonement of Jesus Christ."
i add "… and in order to be eligible to its blessings i have to try my best to keep all of His commandments, such as paying 10% of my income, stop drinking coffee, going through masonic ceremonies, etc.,etc.,etc."
"Instead I keep getting told that I do not believe in grace/the atonement, and that I believe that I will achieve salvation only through my own good works"
Now you´re the one guilty of misrepresenting people here – we are saying that your are saved by Grace after ALL YOU CAN DO. So, you are saved by grace, but not grace alone.
"" If someone were to say that, I'd be overjoyed"
You won´t because it isn´t true.
"misrepresents my actual belief."
Maybe you actual beliefs but not the official beliefs of your Church.
"we preach that we are saved through the atonement of Jesus Christ when we perform certain tasks"
And that´s what we´ve been saying it here all along. We are debating the "when" part of your sentence – which is the focus of the article.
" Mormon doctrine mirrors yours for the first half? "
Glenn Beck got some people to acknowledge that – but Christians who actually know mormonism wouldn´t ever do it for hundreds of reasons. Did you participate in Glenn Beck´s rally?
"If you, f_melo, give me a list, I'll do my best to deal with them honestly. But I also have to get my work done!"
I´ve given you when we had few posts and you didn´t bother – but you did answer other posts. Even after asking the same questions several times you still didn´t answer. I´m not a clown, i´m not going to write them down for the 100th time in this post.
"I presume you're referring to Joseph Smith here, and then applying it to those who acknowledge him as a prophet"
I was actually answering Ralph about the churches who have ordained homosexual pastors…
"Must I suffer because of another man's sins?" We all suffer because of Adam´s sin – often times children suffer for their parents sin and that scars them for life… but that´s not the point i was making though.
"would you describe your beliefs as antinomian?"
Was Paul antinomian? I was citing him – what he said in Romans. I´m not antinomian – but according to Paul no one will be justified(declared righteous) before God by the law. Read Romans and the other epistles of Paul again before claiming i´m taking an antinomian position.
"With respect, there is a big difference between listening to a radio show by a Lutheran and reading the actual words of Luther."
I´ve never claimed what i learned from Luther was from a Lutheran in a radio show. What i said is that guy didn´t preach baptism as a condition of Salvation – and he said that isn´t a Lutheran position.
"but if you're going to tell me what Luther said, you'd better actually tell me what Luther said."
Fair enough – i´ll have to read that passage you cite in context, because it´s ridiculous to believe in Salvation by Grace alone and then say you have to be baptized by water as a condition to receive that, i strongly suspect that there´s more there to be read in context. So, i´m not taking your word for it, i did some quick reading a while ago of some of Luther´s writings but i have to refresh my memory.
"I'm much more comfortable when we're dealing with quotations than with vaguely remembered, second hand paraphrases"
You´re right, shame on me. I´m tempted to ask also though – why do you ignore everything Rick and Violet wrote about what your leaders said in precise quotations?
Ok, so let me correct your post so everything is clear and we can settle this:
"I'm not trying to sound like anything other than the honest, unvarnished truth of what I believe. And I, a mainstream Mormon, believe that I am saved by grace (or through the atonement, which I mean to be a synonym for grace) and that gift will become available to me only if i first do my best to keep God´s commandments as revealed by Joseph Smith and other modern Prophets in this dispensation. I believe that the atonement is a gift to me but i have to go get it. I apply to the atonement the phrase Hugh Nibley used as the title of a talk he once gave, "Work we must, but lunch is free." So, Jesus´sacrifice is the lunch that we´ll receive after the works of this life´s probations.
Hence, salvation is freely given–is already wrought!–by the Savior. He only requires that we keep His commandments to take full advantage of it. Actually the only way anyone can take advantage of it is through baptism in the Lord´s only true and living Church that has His authority to perform His ordinances as revealed by Him to the Prophet Joseph Smith! That's not me twisting Mormonism into anything other than Mormonism. That orthodox Christianity (and, in this forum, non-orthodox too) uses the same concepts as Mormonism is, I think, evidence that we are all worshipping the same God. That is, if Christians believe God is an exalted man who lives with His wives generating more and more spirit-children and giving them the same opportunities they had to become gods and enjoy a fullness of joy"
There you go, now we agree!
f_melo,
Did I participate in Beck's rally? Never in a million years. I don't exactly agree with Beck's politics.
I promise that I wasn't singling your posts out to specifically ignore them; I perhaps passed them over because you were bringing up meatier stuff than others and it was easier to deal with the lightweight stuff first. I apologize that I've given the impression that I have ignored your points. You're not clown, sir, and I am most sincerely sorry if I've left the impression that I feel that way.
The problem with telling me to read Romans and then I'll understand, is that people have been reading Romans for centuries and some have read Paul to be antinomian and some have read him to be anti-antinomian. I was asking about your personal belief regarding the law because, well, it isn't entirely self-evident. You've clarified, and now I know. Thank you.
Was Paul antinomian? Neither you nor I think so–so that's at least one thing we agree upon.
Ralph,
The only thing that will keep you out of Heaven is rejecting Jesus and His free gift. Now just because someone says I believe in Jesus so that means I am saved is wrong. No Works, But a false belief about who Jesus is, is the same as not knowing Him.
First off Go back to Job, Jobs three friends were harshly rebuked by God for getting Him wrong. Then you could say Me and Rick B I know him he's a good friend of Mine. Then you go onto say, Rick, He like the color pink, he like bunnies and loves to swim, he hates violence and loves tea, Boy you got me wrong. You only know my name but you dont know me.
I hate the color pink with a passion, I am opposed to any male wearing that color for any reason, even breast cancer research or other things, Guys should not were pink. I almost got lynched at color for not wearing pink during breast cancer awareness. I said I have no problem with giving money to a good cause, I have a wife so I understand, but if I wear pink women will not be cured, and if I dont wear pink women wont simply drop dead.
I love strong black coffee, not with cream or sugar, just straight up black as night, the darker the roast the better.
Jesus said not everyone who says Lord, Lord will be saved. Why is that, Because they claimed to know Him, yet He did not know them. Guess what else, Jesus goes onto say, They performed miracles in the name of Jesus, They cast out demons in the name of Jesus, they did GOOD WORKS in the name of Jesus. Guess what Doing good works, Casting out Demons and doing miracles in the name of Jesus did not save these people.
Jesus never said to them, No you never did these things, so they probably did do them, But Jesus said I NEVER KNEW YOU. Then what does Jesus say, He says, DEPART FROM ME into EVERLASTING FIRE. Wow Jesus cast people out of His presence that did works in His name and claimed He never knew them.
So no Ralph, just saying you know someone or something about them does not make it true. And works cannot save us/you.
I'm ignoring Rick because I simply can't respond to the thirty or so quotes and scriptures he packed into one post. I feel annoyed every time I have to split up a comment because the system tells me it's too long. And then it makes the conversation even more fragmented. And if I'm ignoring Violet it is simply because I haven't been able to keep up with everything in the conversation, that it required more time to respond than I had at the moment, and when I got back, there was something fresher to deal with.
I am feeling a little fatigued with the conversation, to be honest. I want to be fair and honest and I don't want to leave things hanging, but at some point we're going to have to move on. I hope that when I do you don't see me as taking some cowardly exit–even if I don't get around to answering every individual question. I hate to imagine how many words I've posted here in the past few days–I only wish I had as many to show for my research!
Good for Mr Luther, Just because you think he is smart or he sounds smart does not make it so. And again, what does Gods word say, Many people were wrong in the days of Noah, they figure 6 billion people died, while only 8 were saved. I bet their were many people who felt they were smart.
Also I'm not saying he was wrong on everything and everything, Just baptism.
f_melo said
This happens to me all the time, Ignore the questions that make sense and debate the stuff that you can twist.
Yes, I do see the difference, but I think it is wonderful that God is willing to give guidance for contemporary problems when a prophet asks. You are aware, of course, that Joseph Smith never taught that the Word of Wisdom was a commandment: it is literally a word of wisdom and an principle with a promise. It was not until the 1920s that the Church started treating it as a hard-and-fast rule. Joseph Smith had wine brought up to him in Liberty Jail, shortly before he was killed.
And I've just made someone's day, since they'll see that as even more definitive proof of the invalidity of the commandment. Again, I am nonplussed at the chronology, which is why I don't try to keep it secret. Old Testament prophesies were necessary to testify of the Savior of the world, but Moses didn't rely upon old prophesies to lead the children of Israel. The purpose of the Bible is to give God's word regarding his Only Begotten Son, who is the means for our salvation. But happily God continues to give direction that will bless his children for the circumstances in which they find themselves.
"Examples would be, when you say, I believe in grace, if you leave it at that, then you are lying or deceiving people, or you really are very ignorant since your BoM SAYS VERY CLEARLY, We are save by grace, PLUS WORKS, after all we can do. Now to leave off the plus works is a huge deal."
Conversely, when you ignore the part of grace, that is also a "huge deal." I apologize that I ever left the impression that there were no works required. I tried to be very clear about that (hence our discussion about baptism being a work. Remember that?), but I apologize that I wasn't clear enough.
But let's stick with the real facts. If you're going to quote from the Book of Mormon, then quote it without your editorializing. 2 Nephi 25:23 concludes "we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do." This is where our conversation started, and one area of our disagreement. I read it to mean that we are saved by grace even despite any good deeds we might perform.
According the an article in the March 2005 New Era magazine, "our works also include receiving ordinances, keeping covenants, and serving others. While these works are necessary for salvation, they aren’t sufficient…We don’t earn salvation."
Dallin H. Oaks said in the 1988 October general conference, "After all our obedience and good works, we cannot be saved from the effect of our sins without the grace extended by the Atonement of Jesus Christ." Note the wording of a current apostle: "We cannot be saved from the effect of our sins without the grace extended by the Atonement of Jesus Christ."
Oh, crazy me with my wacky non-mainstream Mormon beliefs. Off-kilter Terceiro who is preaching something other than mainstream Mormon doctrine. Oh, wait.
Now I'm not shunning away from the first line in the New Era quote above. I do not deny that there is a place for "works… [that] include[s] receiving ordinances, keeping covenants, and serving others" in the plan of salvation. I have argued all along that these are part of the system. BUT THEY ARE NOT THE MEANS BY WHICH WE GAIN SALVATION. Salvation comes via the atonement of Jesus Christ. We are saved by grace.
Violet, you'll find that reading the Articles of Faith in the scriptures is easier than in the Children's Songbook. Here: http://lds.org/scriptures/pgp/a-of-f/1?lang=eng.
The third article of faith was cited previously and then interpreted–poorly, I'm afraid–based on the punctuation. The honest truth is that the punctuation is slightly ambiguous. The two commas can be used for two different interpretations, and neither one is justifiably more correct than the other (based on punctuation). It's either
"We believe that through the Atonement of Christ all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel."
or
"We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel."
Of course, neither one is particularly damning, either. Let's substitute the words "laws and ordinances of the Gospel" with some (nearly) universally accepted sacramental practices–say "receiving baptism and the Lord's Supper."
Quiz: what denominations would agree with the following statement? "We believe that through the grace of Jesus, all mankind may be saved by receiving baptism and the Lord's supper."
I would answer that by showing (as I have above… or is it below now? I'm not sure anymore. But it's here somewhere) that this is doctrine of the Southern Baptist Convention, of the United Methodist Church, of the Catholic church, and in Martin Luther's writings. I haven't provided documentation but very well could do so for the Episcopalians…
This apparent paradox even shows up in the Bible (gasp!). Look at Titus 3:5 "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration [i.e., baptism], and renewing of the Holy Ghost."
Read that closely:
1. Not by "works of righteousness" (or, perhaps, good deeds)
2. "But according to his mercy he saved us" (Whoop! There it is!)
3. "By [baptism]" (… wait, what?)
The idea that we are saved though grace (or, more frequently in Mormon parlance, the Atonement) by obedience to the commandment to baptism is hardly novel to the Latter-day Saints.
Rick, you're correct that the ordinances of the temple are unique to the Latter-day Saints among contemporary religions. And you are of course also correct that we must adhere to a high moral standard in order to participate there. Spencer W. Kimball explains some of the standards that must be followed in order to receive the blessing of temple participation (by holding a temple recommend). You seem to have done some good research on the topic.
You miss the point, however, to which all that moral purity points. Let me recall to you the Savior's discussion with the rich young ruler. He expressed desire to gain eternal life and, we might presume from the final verse of the story, to follow Jesus and remain in his company. Matthew 19:16-22 describes this, and you are undoubtedly familiar with it so I won't quote it here. Why wasn't desire or belief sufficient for this guy? Why did he have the additional burden to sell everything before he could receive the blessing he sought?
One interpretation might be that he was not, despite his keeping of the short list of the ten commandments, he was still impure in heart. Jesus' additional step would have ensured that the rich young ruler was sufficiently pure to receive the blessing of Jesus' company and to gain eternal life. I read this story as a metonymy of the kind of purity that Jesus asks from all of those who desire to follow him. The temple recommend, like selling all the rich young ruler's possessions, ensures sufficient purity to receive a blessing.
"I have pointed out to people before also, what if you convert to Mormonism, then die or get killed before doing all this?"
The practice of vicarious ordinances for the dead seems like the obvious solution here. I'm pretty surprised that someone like yourself who has apparently read so much didn't understand that dying before an ordinance is administered isn't really an issue–specifically because of the temple. It's why we Mormons don't also have the concept of "emergency baptisms" et al.
And before you go there, I understand how you feel about baptism. You feel it isn't necessary. I understand that you do not interpret the Bible as mandating baptism for salvation.You can cite from Acts 16 and someone else could cite from Acts 2:38-41 and around and around and around again. Please don't feel it is necessary to show me yet again.
You have no obligation to believe them or to accept my interpretation of scripture as correct. I'm not asking you to do so. I do not mean to imply that your beliefs ought to correspond with those of the orthodox Christian churches, just that the overwhelming majority of believers do, and that your interpretation is, by very many Christian churches, heresy.
I'm definitely telling you to join the Lutherans or the Methodists or the Catholics. I'm saying that they wouldn't let you join them–at least not if you expressed to them the doctrine that you're expressing here. But since you don't see the need for baptism (nor, presumably, the Lord's Supper) there is likely little need for a church at all, right?
you said- you have no need for Temple rites, secret handshakes, attendance at church, tithing, loyalty to LDS leaders, celestial marriage, missionary work, not drinking tea, coffee or alcohol.
but you noted that 'I'm not saying that some of these things are not beneficial.' Attending church is good, Paying a tithing to support the church is good, loyalty to church leaders is good, a strong marriage is good, and a healthy body is good. I believe these principles when correctly taught and put into practice will strengthen the members. I believe that people need these principles. You might see that when they practice these thing s that they are working for there salvation. They might say to you 'no I am doing these things to keep from falling'
I may have muddled things and I can't seem to find the right words. I am trying to say they do the stuff not to gain salvation but because they do not want to lose it. And that may not be right either.
The doctrine isn't confusing at all, not to me. But I speak the lingo, so maybe it is just a difficulty with the vocabulary not translating well. Let me give it a shot–and please rest assured that I'm not doing any injustice to either McConkie or Smith here.
The Holy Ghost (or the Holy Spirit) is a member of the Godhead (a term which was, in fact, used by Paul in the Bible a few times. "Trinity" never shows up. Jus' sayin'). The terms "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit" are synonymous.
When a person is baptized into the Church, they also receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost and the opportunity to enjoy the companionship of the Holy Ghost constantly. Before this gift is granted, however, all people on the earth–all of God's children–can feel the influence of the Holy Ghost in their lives. It comes as part of the "light of Christ which "lighteth every man that cometh into the world" (see John 19 and D&C 88). It is sometimes referred to as a person's conscience.
They are not differences in being but in presence. This is much clearer when you include one of the phrases you left out by ellipsis: "The Holy Ghost as a personage of Spirit can no more be omnipresent in person than can the Father or the Son, but by his intelligence, his knowledge, his power and influence, over and through the laws of nature, he is and can be omnipresent throughout all the works of God." Pay special attention to the phrase that begins "but by his intelligence [et al] he is and can be omnipresent…"
You also disparage the way that we Latter-day Saints refer to coming to knowledge by the Spirit. You say that it is nothing but emotion. I, on the other hand, vehemently assert that it is not emotion at all, but is indeed the power of the Holy Ghost. And I've got plenty of precedent from the Bible in this:
Look at Matthew 16:
"He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
"And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
"And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."
Or consider 1 Corinthians 12:3 "no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."
Do we use the language of emotion to describe it? Yes, and partly because I struggle to find language to describe it otherwise. If I say that I see the trees swaying and that I hear the leaves rustle you can know that it is the wind blowing, yes?
I have never asserted that you would not feel the presence of the Holy Ghost at your church services every Sunday. In fact, if you're talking about the Savior and are striving for truth, I would almost expect it. "Where two or three are gathered…" you know the rest.
I also know that I have prayed and had revealed to me through the Holy Ghost that the Book of Mormon is true and that Joseph Smith is a prophet. Most importantly, I have come to know not through flesh and blood but by divine revelation that Jesus is the Christ the Only Begotten Son of the Living God. It is revealed to me by the power of the Holy Ghost with especial clarity when I attend the temple. And you claim that it is a different God that you worship–but I have felt His presence and know whom I worship. My understanding of the mission of the Savior and of the power of His Atonement is not because it all makes logical sense (though it does when you put all the pieces together) or because someone told me that it had to be that way, but because I have "tested the spirits" (see 1 John 4) for myself. And I do confess that Jesus is the Son of God (see verse 15).
Martin, that's a great question. And believe you me, there's plenty that I would jettison from Mormon culture. I'd start with Glenn Beck (not the man himself, but the media persona. And the television show and the rally and the website and the radio show) and then Harry Reid (again, not actually him, but his shady politics) and then Mitt Romney (in the same style as before. From now on, let's just pretend that I'm following this pattern of separating the individual from his or her media presentation, can we?) and the Osmonds and Orrin Hatch. I get rid of the conservative politics generally.
I'd jettison food storage from the church (for exactly the reasons you'd mention) but I do think it's a wise practice, so I'd want someone to advocate for it somewhere. I'm sure there's more in that category, but I'm growing too tired to think about what doesn't really fit.
Here's what I'd keep: I'd keep missionary work. I'd keep the emphasis on attendance at meetings. I'd keep tithing. I'd keep temples–especially temples (the more I attend the temple the more I understand how everything in the temple points to, and encourages me to point to, Jesus Christ).
Now that I think about it, I think I might–in this purely theoretical example–get rid of the word of wisdom, too. I'll freely admit that the word of wisdom is really only tangential to my worship of Jesus Christ. It enables me to worship with a clear head and unencumbered by addiction, but it is not in itself worshipful. And I'll pretend that I would be able to control myself sufficiently that I'd avoid addiction, so the WofW could go. (That isn't to say that I don't support it or think it's important, but I do acknowledge that it's a supporting thing, not the thing itself.)
I could probably get rid of programmatic home teaching and visiting teaching–though they are also things which make showing brotherly love much, much easier. Still, making it easy is not the same as actual worship, and I could find my own ways to show brotherly love that is the mark of all followers of Jesus.
So why put so much effort into that stuff? It's a good question. We put emphasis on it because it helps me love Jesus more or enables me to love him more or it instructs me on how I can better reflect Christ's love for me. Because I have tasted of the joy of the salvation of Christ, I want others to enjoy it too. The Church helps me do more effectively what I desire to do anyway. It also provides a means for me to feel the reassurance of the Comforter more consistently in my life.
The stuff might not have a connection to Him, but I do, and the stuff of the Church helps me to strengthen that connection.
"a false belief about who Jesus is, is the same as not knowing Him"
Rick, this statement really helps me understand where you're coming from. I understand the logic of that statement and can see why you might feel frustrated at some of my comments, because I am simply asserting that I love Jesus and you feel that my interpretation of scripture has lead me to an incorrect understanding of who Jesus is. Have I got that right?
I'm curious, though. I have read the Bible and you have read the Bible and we have, you assert, different understanding regarding the nature of Jesus. Because I have already read the Bible numerous times, you cannot simply tell me to go back and read it again, because I will likely reach the same conclusions. So where can I go to find another description, outside the Bible, that helps me believe correctly? Put another way, short of sitting down with you over cups of strong black coffee, how can I be sure that I am correctly interpreting the Bible so I will have a correct understanding?
The difficulty here, of course, is in finding a source that gets it right. And how do we really know they've got it right? Luther thought he had it right, but Calvin disagreed with him. Zwingli disagreed with them both. And all three thought that Pope Gregory was wrong. Later Wesley came along and thought none of those guys had it right. And similarly Joseph Smith. And Mary Baker Eddy. We could even toss in certifiable crackpots like Jim Jones. They each read the words of Jesus and Paul in the Bible and each reached different conclusions.
I'm curious as to who you'll recommend.
All,
On the grace-works thing, there's a pretty good (IMO) article here…
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/januaryw…
In it, I particularly like Jason B. Hood's statement
Back on topic, the OP was all about one person's failed quest to find forgiveness in Mormonism (and his success in finding it in the Christ of the Bible).
Think about it. If you could work off your debt, you wouldn't need forgiveness. Forgiveness is what we need precisely because we cannot work our way into a position in which God's forgiveness can become effective. It's free, always has been, always will be. Shame on the Mormon Church for trying to sell you something that you can get for free.
terceiro,
Any discussion we might have is ancillary to the fact that we just don't worship the same God. To that end, we don't even acknowledge the same God. So any discussion on grace or baptism is mainly a distraction from this main point of "Who is God?" We are working at cross-purposes here. Mormons are like Hindu's who would try to apply the Bible to Hinduism. It won't work.
What you are doing is attempting to fit the Bible into a Mormon context instead of discovering what the Bible says and standing on it as your sole guide. To be blunt, Joseph Smith's revelations were false as are the continuing revelations by those in Mormonism who call themselves prophets. You need to go back and read what the Church fathers said about the nature of God. Smith's revelations have no more authority or insight than the random thoughts of someone who is searching and applying their own creativity and the religious experimentation of others.
This is serious business and your immortal soul depends on you getting it right. God led you to this site for a reason and he's speaking to your heart. You need to follow the promptings of the Holy Spirit who is the Spirit of truth and will lead you into all truth. Joseph Smith is a hidden reef that has been exposed for what he was.
It´s funny people who say Paul is antinomian- what he teaches is no different from what Peter, James and John taught. After his doctrinal presentation he always admonishes people to love one another, the basic dos and don´ts.
People who have a problem with Paul are usually hardcore legalists.
I told to read Romans because in my argument i was citing what Paul said in Romans, how he explains what the Law was for.
falcon,
I agree that this discussion of baptism is only tangential to the larger issues, but it does bolster my point that the requirement of certain works is standard Christianity, based on the doctrine of the various denominations.
And, honestly, I do appreciate you sincere concern for the well-being of my soul. Knowing that your motivation is a desire to help rather than a desire to simply tear me down means a lot to me. Thank you. I hope you will continue to persist with patience and love even as I continue to hold to my beliefs in the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith.
When we moved into our current home our neighbors came over to welcome us to the neighborhood. They were empty nesters who were happy to see a family with children move in. As the stood at our doorway, he told us that he was a Baptist minister (then retired from full-time work, but nevertheless still fighting the good fight) and, when he learned that we were practicing Mormons, he replied, "Well, we'll show the world that Baptists and Mormons can still be good friends!" And, you know what? He was right.
He has, alas, since passed away. His wife still lives alone across the street, still holds Bible study in her home for a whole crowd of delightful ladies on Thursday afternoons, and we're still good friends. She has not converted to Mormonism and we have not become Baptists, but we love each other and strengthen each other and we serve each other. I would like to hope that I could find that kind of experience here as well. Your comment gives me some hope for that.
"I'm ignoring Rick because I simply can't respond to the thirty or so quotes and scriptures he packed into one post."
We don´t have to and this conversion has been settled, when you said that you´ll be saved by Jesus´ atonement "when" you do certain things…
All this conversation was about was you saying that Mormons are saved by grace alone, while the truth is that mormons are saved by grace after all they can do = works plus grace. That was what had to have been made clear and now it has!
"But happily God continues to give direction that will bless his children for the circumstances in which they find themselves"
Well, when that continued direction comes from a man that denies almost everything the Bible teaches about the nature of God, priesthood, etc. and place the Bible as irrelevant and lie about it saying it has been corrupted and unreliable, i´d rather stay with the Bible, because i can´t trust a man like that to tell me the Words of God.
"BUT THEY ARE NOT THE MEANS BY WHICH WE GAIN SALVATION"
Ok, prove it. Can you be exalted as a god without doing them?
Baptism doesn´t save us. We do it after we are saved by Faith.
Here´s a good commentary on that passage:
" by—Greek, "through"; by means of.
the washing—rather, "the laver," that is, the baptismal font.
of regeneration—designed to be the visible instrument of regeneration. "The apostles are wont to draw an argument from the sacraments to prove the thing therein signified, because it ought to be a recognized principle among the godly, that God does not mark us with empty signs, but by His power inwardly makes good what He demonstrates by the outward sign. Wherefore baptism is congruously and truly called the laver of regeneration. We must connect the sign and thing signified, so as not to make the sign empty and ineffectual; and yet not, for the sake of honoring the sign, to detract from the Holy Spirit what is peculiarly His"
1 Peter 3:21 "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ"
Like it was said before it is an outward sign of a good conscience towards God. That´s how we are saved by baptism – not that baptism of itself saves us.
"that dying before an ordinance is administered isn't really an issue–specifically because of the temple"
Interesting that the temple in the Bible was never used for any such thing. It was the vicarious work of Christ alone that saves us.
"And I'll pretend that I would be able to control myself sufficiently that I'd avoid addiction, so the WofW could go"
There are so many people that drink without getting addicted, actually most people go drink with their friends after work on fridays and they are on monday again. but i´m sure you know that, because for a second it seemed you were showing the mormon mindset that those things will destroy everyone who touches it.
"We put emphasis on it because it helps me love Jesus more or enables me to love him more or it instructs me on how I can better reflect Christ's love for me" and you say that in the same as you say "Now that I think about it, I think I might–in this purely theoretical example–get rid of the word of wisdom, too. I'll freely admit that the word of wisdom is really only tangential"
So, Jesus is very capricious on how people should love Him… and you seem to agree with that.
Does that make you more righteous before God? Is that it? I can say i love Jesus just as much, not say more(how could i know that), and i don´t do those things. Those are just dead works(pretty arbitrary too).
"though they are also things which make showing brotherly love much, much easier"
Actually genuine friendship is much more effective.
"The stuff might not have a connection to Him, but I do, and the stuff of the Church helps me to strengthen that connection."
How can the church strengthen a connection that might or might no exist? Why do you do stuff that you´re not even sure it actually has anything to do with worshiping Christ? You´re just going with the flow…
"Shame on the Mormon Church for trying to sell you something that you can get for free."
That was awesome!! I´m keeping that, and i´ll definitely use it!
OK, I think I understand your problem with what you understand to be the LDS church stance on John 14:15, but I still don't understand your stance, probably because I'm being slow on the pick up here. I apologize, but could you walk through it for me?
"that friend will be prevented of having the blessings of the forgiveness of his sins because he just can´t stop drinking coffee…"
Your analogy works with the drug addict, but not in regards to coffee. You keep drinking coffee because you like coffee, but not because you can't quit.
But the drug addict is a useful example, so let's stick with that. What of the person who is deeply addicted to, let's go all the way and say it's heroin–what of them? Does the doctrine of the LDS church offer no hope for this person because they are physically addicted to a sinful substance? Of course not.
Let me quote from an article in the June 2009 Ensign specifically about dealing with addiction:
"Through grace, participants regain the hope they have lost. One participant, Edward, grew up in the Church, but his childhood insecurities left him feeling that he wasn’t as good as other people. He says, 'I didn’t understand the Atonement, and I didn’t love myself, so nothing really mattered.' When he was in his 20s, he started drinking and using drugs in an attempt to dull his negative feelings—a pattern that continued for 20 years.
"When he was arrested a second time for drunk driving, he was ordered to get treatment. In the Church’s program, he learned that receiving forgiveness and regaining a sense of self-worth were possible. He attended church every Sunday, studied the 12 steps, and applied these gospel principles and actions to his life. He became willing to turn his life over to Heavenly Father and, in the process, learned how to love himself and how to let the Atonement work in his life. 'I couldn’t overcome all these things by myself,' he says. 'The Savior can do for me what I can’t do for myself'" (Lia McClanahan, "Addiction Recovery: Healing One Step at a Time", Ensign, June 2009, 60–65.)
You might also look at M. Russell Ballard's most recent general conference talk (October 2010). Here's perhaps the most salient point for this discussion: "there is hope for the addicted, and this hope comes through the Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ and by humbling oneself before God, pleading to be freed of the bondage of addiction and offering our whole soul to Him in fervent prayer."
Even for the addicted, freedom and hope comes through the grace, through the atonement of Jesus Christ.
"What i was talking about is that when you have responsibilities in the Church you have more headaches than anything else because the majority of people are only causing trouble or avoiding work."
This has not been my experience at all. I have found that people who are experiencing difficulty do take the majority of my time, but I actually enjoy providing loving service and going out to minister with those who are suffering the most. I found that when I served as an elders quorum president, for example, most of the brethren in my quorum were diligently working to move forward the work of God. I loved their companionship because we were fellow-laborers in the Lord's vineyard.
When I served in a bishopric, it was even more work, but also more joy in and with those I served.
It seems that your experience does not match mine, but please don't pretend that your experience is somehow a universal standard and that it's all headaches and annoyance. I stand as at least one witness that serving in the Church has helped me to experience peace and love and joy.
Part 1
terceiro, Glad you asked the question you did. You asked how do I know if I am getting it right since so many people claim to know Jesus or the Bible and are wrong, like Jim Jones for example.
It's like this, Jesus told people they were in error of Scripture and so if Jesus can say people are in error of scripture that tells me that people who think they know the Bible can be wrong. Acts 17:11 tells us to search the scriptures to know if these things are true. The Bible and Acts 17:11 does NOT TELL us to pray about truth or seek out other sources about the Bible. As far as praying for and about truth,
Jer 17:9 The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?
. So if are hearts are deceitful, we cannot trust our hearts to lead us into truth.
Jesus told us that the scriptures testify of Him, So if they do and Jesus did not lie, then we do not need the BoM or any other source outside of the Bible.
Read the book of Job, Jobs friends counseled Job and were so far off base that God rebuked Job and his friend very harshly, and Job needed to intercede for His friends, Moses was not allowed into the promised land, do you really know why? God was setting up a type of Christ symbol, The Bible tells us that the Rock that was smitten by Moses was Christ. Moses needed to hit the rock one, Jesus was Crucified once, The second time Moses was only to speak to the Rock, Now that Jesus has been smitten for us we only need to speak to him, yet Moses did not do as God told Him, Moses Hit the rock again. We cannot smitten Jesus a second time, so Moses ruined the picture God was trying to make, so he was not allowed into the promised land.
Now The Bible also tells us, that God places His word above His name, Thats how serious He is about His name and who he is. Now You claim to believe the Bible, Yet you also believe the BoM and JS. JS made some seriously outrages claims about God. JS said he (JS) was the only person to hold the church together, not even Jesus could do it. That their, JS is saying he is better than Jesus. Mormons believe this stuff.
God says He is the Only God, Their is no gods before Him or after Him. JS claims we can be gods and their are millions of gods, Who lied God or JS. Yet when I ask that question every single LDS member tells me I am getting it wrong and what God really means is….
You mean instead of taking God at His word and believing as He said, That He is the only God I have to trust LDS members? You cannot support your view from the Bible only, so you need to seek outside sources, such as your Prophets and the BoM. I could go on, but this should make the point I am trying to get at.
Now f_melo said you are dodging questions I and Violet have asked, You I believe asked what questions, So let me bring them up. Why is it if you tell me, Luther, Calvin and others who claim to be really smart teach baptism is required for salvation, Then I simply must agree since other do. Yet when I point out BY and others teach Adam God, Blood Atonement, Plural Marriage, etc, and provide quotes, you dont reply. You do not need to debate those subjects, just tell me why I must believe some Guy I dont follow or care about and never meet, yet you dont have to believe your prophets and they, not me, said these things were taught by God and are laws that we must follow. This brings me back to my answer above, These guys teach things that even you LDS dont believe, but they claim it was God who spoke to them and told them these things. You guys claim they were only speaking their mere opinion, they were not and clearly stated we must believe this stuff since it is from God and God told them this.
Part 2
So if they are merely speaking their own opinion, and did not say, according to you, thus says the LORD….
Why is it when they do teach things that you like and agree with, but they did not say, This says the Lord….
You still believe it and call it scripture? What about the RLDS and the FLDS, I said they believe in the Bom, THE D and C, The Pearl, they claim to believe in JS and BY as Prophets of God. Yet we Believers do not believe in any of that, So you LDS want to be called Christians claiming to believe what I do, yet the RLDS and the FLDS believe closer to what you believe, Yet you guys will not allow them selves to be called LDS, You do to them as we do to you. You count them as false prophets and they are not brethren, yet you get mad at us for doing that to you. Thats a double standard.
JS gave 9 count them, 9 (NINE) I cannot say it enough 9 first vision accounts that spanned years, Not every Mormon agrees to which of these NINE are the correct first vision, and they all differ widely. So either one is correct and the other 8 are wrong, or they are all wrong. If they are all wrong, then maybe JS got other stuff that you believe wrong also. Yet if one is Correct, how do we decide which one is correct, and what about the LDS who hold a different first vision account to be true?
Then JS said, A man cannot be saved in ignorance, what about all the ignorant LDS who dont really know what they believe, Was BY Right about Adam God? if he was, then everyone who says he was wrong is ignorant and cannot be saved. What about JS saying no man can see God with out the priesthood and live? JS saw God with out the priesthood and lived? Hows that possible, Did JS lie. I could go on with the surmounting problems, But I dont believe you really care or want to know. You will play the I'm Sorry card, I'm sorry you feel that way about me, thats not true, I know you will say or think that. But I know it to be true because you admitted many times already, you gloss over some stuff or figure it's not that important, or you claim I dont have time. I believe if your as serious as you say you are, you will make time, Since if your wrong, eternity is forever and hell will never end. Then you will be their with everyone you lead astray, and then have all the time you need to think about how you felt questions about truth and your eternal salvation did not matter at the time.
This is one statement that I really do believe you are being honest and sincere about.
I am sorry if I gave the impression that Mormon doctrine was that we were saved by grace without works. My intention was to stop people from saying that Mormon doctrine was that people earned salvation and that there was no place for grace at all. That you acknowledge even grudgingly that the LDS church teaches that salvation requires the atonement of Jesus Christ is good enough for me.
It would be best of all if you (collectively speaking) also acknowledged that grace+works is the same formula used by orthodox Christian churches. You need not acknowledge them as being correct, but at least acknowledge that anyone who preaches that baptism is required also teaches grace+works.
And it would be great if I convinced someone that Mormon doctrine teaches that while works are necessary, they are not sufficient. Works alone cannot provide salvation. We need grace; we cannot be saved without grace. It is only through the atonement of Jesus Christ that we are saved, after all.
So I'm glad we're clear. 🙂
Terceiro, The whole Word of Wisdom is hypocrisy at it's finest. First off, JS drank and made hard liquor after this word of wisdom was given.
Mormons define Hot drinks only as tea and coffee, but not HOT chocolate. LDS Claim it is some substance, some type of acid in the Coffee, but they drink Mountain dew and other drinks far worse than coffee. The WoW says Hot drinks, not Coffee and tea. Funny how it takes you guys to define what they are but not God.
Then it pretty much end their. The rest of the WoW is ignored. Do you eat meat only in winter or sparingly? Do you rub your animals down with tobacco leaves?
Do you wash your body with strong drinks?
I dont believe you follow any part of the WoW except the dont drink Coffee or Tea. Every Mormon I have ever spoken with, when I bring these issue up always gives some excuse why they only keep part of it, I have never once spoken with any LDS member who claimed they follow every part to the letter. Whats your excuse, I honestly want to know.
Terceiro said
Can you show me from the Bible, where all of these things about the temple are taught? No you cannot, The Bible is clear, The temple were for Jews only, not gentiles, and the Bible is clear about who could enter and when. anyone who was not allowed or brought in strange fire died. Then you read Hebrews, we no longer have need of temples, All this goes along with what I posted above when you asked me about how to know if your correct or not. These things have been addressed in scripture, you guys ignore scripture in favor of a false prophet who felt scripture was wrong.
You cannot lose your salvation because you dont attend a church or pay Tithes. Some people are beyond poor and have no money or job, so they cannot pay a tithe, some people dont go to Church because they work, or the church is so far away they cannot make it, or the church is so far off base they dont want to attend a false church. The only way you can or will lose your salvation it to reject Jesus and like Jesus said, Deny me before man and I will deny you before the father. Or as the Book of Revelation teaches, Start removing things from Gods word, And God will remove your name from the Book of life.
oh. I understand perfectly. When a non-mormon questions mormon doctrine, its always we don't understand or we are confused. Its never the lds church. Their doctrine is sacred, their people are pure and its the 'them' the rest of the world that is confused. Because if we really understood mormon doctrine, we would all be saved. Got anything else you want to sell? See Robert J. Lifton's eight signs of a cult.
"that people earned salvation and that there was no place for grace at all."
Yes but you do have to earn Christ´s grace. I remember learning in seminary, a teacher was explaining that you have to meet a standard of righteousness to be able to be exalted – like that scripture that says, "no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of God". So, because we are not perfect we are always going to fall short. Yet since Exaltation is not free, we have to work as hards as we can and the part the is missing to achieve God´s standard is completed by Jesus, and that´s is how grace works in mormonism.
So, you have to earn grace by you showing your faithfulness through your works.
"It would be best of all if you (collectively speaking) also acknowledged that grace works is the same formula used by orthodox Christian churches"
Nobody is going to acknowledge that because it isn´t true. It isn´t our righteousness that saves us. No grace and works, just Grace.
"And it would be great if I convinced someone that Mormon doctrine teaches that while works are necessary, they are not sufficient. Works alone cannot provide salvation. We need grace; we cannot be saved without grace. It is only through the atonement of Jesus Christ that we are saved, after all"
That was never the point of contention. The problem is that Mormonism has two types of Salvation. A free resurrection for all and exaltation into godhood – but Falcon already pointed that out and you avoided dealing with it, so it´s pointless to continue down that path.
"It seems that your experience does not match mine, but please don't pretend that your experience is somehow a universal standard and that it's all headaches and annoyance"
It´s not? There are some people with difficulties and i never had a problem with that either – i´m talking about trouble makers, that´s completely different.
"When I served in a bishopric, it was even more work, but also more joy in and with those I served."
Really? Never had people talking nasty things behind your back? Or people publicly saying they wanted a new leader in your place because you didn´t agree with them? Or all kinds of contentions with stake leaders who thought they owned the church and wanted you to kneel before them, because they were higher up in authority?
If not, where are you, in Edem?
"The Savior can do for me what I can’t do for myself"
In spiritual terms there´s nothing we can do for ourselves. That concept of grace is completely twisted. I´ve seen many, many people in my mission that were never members of the church that were addicted to tobacco or alcohol who were never able to enjoy the blessings of the gospel because they couldn´t get baptized – therefore they were not allowed that extra-help you call grace. All of them never were baptized and continued on with their lifestyles even though i remember one couple that tried the stop-smoking program and read the BoM more often than most – they still didn´t receive any extra-strength to change – so, that story you mention sounds more like a Paul H. Dunn-type of inspirational story that might work once or twice in real life, for people who already are members of the Church.
Terceiro, Said
Lets be honest here, I never said answer each and every one, I simply said, these are problems I see with your church, things dont line up, Are these problems for you, in not, briefly why not. That was along the lines of what I said, Your being a little dis-honest to say otherwise, or your not reading very well, but even if thats the case, then it tells me your really dont care what I say since you dont take the time to read what I say.
Terceiro said
Funny how you say the WoW is not a commandment, Every Mormon Missionary I meet claims it is one, So again this begs the questions of, Can these people be saved in ignorance? And if some Mormons are wrong on that, then what else are they wrong on? Also if it is not a commandment from God, why bother following parts of it and telling me in order to enter the temple I must?
Also either you are lying or you are very ignorant here, but you said
I cannot tell you how many times I have said, or heard other Christians say, if the Bible teaches God is not the author of confusion, and their is a lot of confusion between the LDS and Christians, we see major problems and question them, how come the prophet does not go straight to God and get answers once and for all to settle these issues? Like Adam God, Blood Atonement, the 4,000 plus changes to the BoM, the 9 first vision accounts, the JST of the Bible and many more. The prophet never has gone and never will because he is a false prophet and does not truly hear God. He just babels on and makes stuff up.
McCraney always refers to the Thief on the Cross and he was promised to be with Jesus in paradise. Jesus said, 'Today you will be with me in paradise.' No baptism, etc.