I am often accused of being “unChristlike” because I take a vocal stand against Mormonism. I recognize heresy in Mormon teachings and stand against it for two reasons. One is the call in Scripture for followers of Christ to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). The other, also found in Scripture, is the call for “the Lord’s servant…to teach…correcting his [spiritual] opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will” (2 Timothy 2:24-26). Whatever one thinks of my position in regards to Mormonism, these two mandates from Scripture compel me to confront what I understand to be false teachings.
This confrontation of heresy is nothing new. It is present in the pages of Scripture, coming from the apostles and Christ Himself. It is present in the early church, such accounts preserved for us by those early church leaders and historians. Some years ago when I read Eusebius’ Church History, I was struck by the strong language and public denunciations Christian leaders employed against false teachers. It should have come as no surprise since I was familiar with Jude’s description of the heretical “hidden reefs” of his day:
“These are…waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever…
“These are grumblers, malcontents, following their own sinful desires; they are loud-mouthed boasters, showing favoritism to gain advantage.”
Nevertheless, when Eusebius included a certain passage from Irenaeus’ Against Heresies, it caused me to sit up and take notice. Irenaeus reported:
“In the time of Anicetus, he [Polycarp] visited Rome and converted many among these heretics to the church of God, proclaiming that the one and only truth he had received from the apostles was that transmitted by the church. And there are those who heard him tell how John, the Lord’s disciple, went to take a bath at Ephesus, but, seeing Cerinthus inside, he rushed out of the bathhouse without bathing, crying, ‘Let’s get out of here lest the place fall in: Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is inside!’ Polycarp himself, when Marcion once met him and asked, ‘Don’t you recognize me?’ replied, ‘I do indeed: I recognize the firstborn of Satan!’ So careful were the apostles and their disciples not even to converse with any mutilators of the truth, as Paul also said, ‘After a first and second admonition, have nothing more to do with anyone who causes divisions, since you know that such a person is perverted and sinful, being self-condemned’ [Titus 3:10-11].” (Eusebius: The Church History, translated by Paul L. Maier, page 146)
The first time I read this, the picture that formed in my mind of the apostle John running from the bathhouse while warning everyone to flee seemed almost comical. It made me laugh. But in truth, heresy is no laughing matter. John was serious in his warning to the people at the baths in Ephesus. And he was serious when he warned believers in what is now known as 1 and 2 John. Some believe it was this same heretic (Cerinthus) that John referred to as an “antichrist,” a “liar,” and a “false prophet” who “tr[ied] to deceive” followers of Christ.
The early church did not remain quiet in the face of false teaching and false teachers. Church leaders did not subscribe to the ancient advice of Gamaliel, who said under different circumstances, “…I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or this undertaking is of man, it will fail” (Acts 5:38). In the early church, believers spoke out–clearly and loudly–against heresies. Apologists for the true faith wrote and circulated books to expose false teaching and confirm sound doctrine. In the preface to one such book, Irenaeus’, Against Heresies, Irenaeus explained:
“Inasmuch as certain men have set the truth aside, and bring in lying words and vain genealogies, which, as the apostle says, ‘minister questions rather than godly edifying which is in faith,’ and by means of their craftily-constructed plausibilities draw away the minds of the inexperienced and take them captive, [I have felt constrained, my dear friend, to compose the following treatise in order to expose and counteract their machinations.] These men falsify the oracles of God, and prove themselves evil interpreters of the good word of revelation. They also overthrow the faith of many, by drawing them away, under a pretence of [superior] knowledge, from Him who rounded and adorned the universe; as if, forsooth, they had something more excellent and sublime to reveal, than that God who created the heaven and the earth, and all things that are therein.”
Followers of Christ are to have this same attitude – expose error; never for the sake of winning an argument, but always for the sake of truth and for the love of others (see Philippians 2:3-5). This was further reflected by Irenaeus:
I…have spared no pains, not only to make these doctrines known to you, but also to furnish the means of showing their falsity; so shall you, according to the grace given to you by the Lord, prove an earnest and efficient minister to others, that men may no longer be drawn away by the plausible system of these heretics…”
This is my hope and my prayer.
Sharon,
Once again, you demonstrate that you are Spirit-filled and gifted by the Spirit to write the way you do. I appreciate your approach to this topic. Thank you for intimating what I feel in a way that I might struggle to express because of my proclivity to become passionate. You demonstrate the control I still struggle with. You mention the charge that we are not behaving as Christians. The charge that really hurts is that we don’t care for the Mormon people. How far from the truth that is. My dad, brother and his family, my children, their mother, all her family, and all the beautiful LDS members I have know throughout my life, especially my last ward, I respect and love more than I can say. These people truly love God, but they worship the god created by JS and not as revealed by the Bible. Unfortunately, I have been guilty of personal attacks while on this blog, and such attacks are usually out of frustration. As I have done self-examination regarding the attacks for which I admit I have been guilty, the LORD asked me: “Are you responding out of frustration or out of love?” Naturally, I can’t be responding out of both, so I had to admit that I was operating more out of frustration than love; with that, I apologize to the Mormons whom I have offended, especially to Cluff and FOF. So, for a season, as I allow the LORD to mold me even more, I am going to dismiss myself from commenting and take this blog site into a prayer ministry. I will be praying for all those who contend for the faith to do so boldly and in love. And, I will pray for all the Mormons that they will ask questions and truly seek to know the truth that is found in the Bible, and trust that it is the measuring stick against which all new teachings and purported revelations should be measured. May God’s grace overwhelm everyone!
In Christ,
Jackg
jackg, I don’t see where she said that. I don’t get the impression that her post is at all a rebuke of fellow Christian commenters. Trust me, Sharon really appreciates the involvement of you and others on this blog, and knows that you do it out of love.
May God bless you in whatever ministry endeavors you pursue!
Grace and peace in Christ,
Aaron
jackg, I think everyone who comments at (and perhaps even everyone who reads) Mormon Coffee struggles with frustration. Sometimes we might get so passionate that the love that compels us is hard to detect. Nevertheless, the love is there. When we are accused of being “unChristlike” because of our passion to defend God’s truth and rescue the perishing, that accusation is not founded on biblical principles or on the example of early church history. Jesus, the apostles, and early church leaders recognized the importance of contending for the true faith, and sometimes they did so with harsher words than we might employ today. But they were not “unChristlike,” and neither are we when we speak the truth in love.
Aaron,
“I don’t get the impression that her post is at all a rebuke of fellow Christian commenters.”
Sorry if I didn’t express myself clearly enough. I didn’t take the post as a rebuke of fellow Christian commenters. I know the post addresses what Mormons charge against Christians whenever we present apologetics they deem to be negative propaganda against Mormonism. I know this is where Sharon is coming from. I took it a step further. I addressed an issue Sharon didn’t address, and an issue I believe to be more personal, which is how I feel about Mormons. It seems that Mormons want to challenge our motives, that we are just trying to destroy their faith, and that we don’t understand their beliefs. I always find this interesting because they judge our hearts. Furthermore, their charge that we don’t know anything about their religion is usually unfounded because many commenters on this blod, including myself, have been members and know exactly what they teach. (So, I guess I’m taking this another step further than the post by including my thoughts on their charge that we don’t know anything about their religion. 🙂 )
As I said before, Sharon’s post is beautifully and concisely stated. Sorry for any misunderstanding I may have caused. As I said, I will not be commenting here for a season, but will take this into a prayer ministry.
Thanks for all you do, Sharon and Aaron. Keep up the good fight! And, I hope this misunderstanding is cleared up.
In Christ,
jackg
This was a loaded post, I think. I can see how folks might think we act unChristianly and without love. I also think, that it can quickly get out of love and into “I’m right and you’re wrong!” pretty quickly. As Christians, we ought to be careful about not letting our minds get there.
But, we have to stand for the truth, and we have to state the truth. And sometimes, stating the truth must be done strongly and what may seem rudely.
Truth must be upheld at all costs. Sure, it is best to rebuke falsehoods without geting angry, but if the party doesn’t get it, sometimes it takes more than being polite.
Paul said we are to be all things to all people, and this fits. In Matthew, also, we see a pattern to deal with those people who bring in such issues– we start with politeness, and raise the bar. In Matthew, we first go to the person, then involve a few more people, and finally to the church. If they still don’t “see the light” they are to be thrown out.
Throwing them out is a big step, and surely it is safe to assume tensions rose in that process. Within reason, getting angry is sometimes needed.
And some will see this as acting outside of Christ. But he, too, showed an example of getting angry.
I could probably go on, but must ask this practical question: is it realistic to sit nicely without saying a word to someone who perverts what is true? The answer, of course, ought to be a resounding no!
Michael P said “I …must ask this practical question: is it realistic to sit nicely without saying a word to someone who perverts what is true? The answer, of course, ought to be a resounding no!”
I think this is exactly the point Aaron was trying to make with lipstick lady just patting his hand and saying “well isn’t that nice”. The truth must be upheld at all costs, even when it’s not what someone wants to hear.
Excellent post Sharon. Christ Himself showed righteous anger against the Pharisees at times. If Christlike behavior is asking “what would Jesus do?” then being confrontational about what’s right and what’s not is not “unChristian” at all.
I don’t know if I get another post today or not, but I’ll give it a try. I personally am not offended by your efforts. I actually admire your dedication. I would rather associate with someone who is passionately wrong any day, than the lukewarm.
Hello Sharon,
This is an interesting topic for discussion. As a long-time reader and first-time commentator I must state that all too often I find the discussion thread and ensuing comments posted here transgress common decency and mutual respect.
Is it “un-Christian” to stand up for one’s faith? – of course not.
Snipped. Accusations of “bord[ering] on… hate speech” are over-the-top and not constructive. That kind of rhetoric isn’t welcome here. Also, if you are going to accuse Mormon Coffee of “deliberately misrepresent[ing] LDS doctrine”, you should substantiate your claim with specifics. That kind of vague accusatory rhetoric isn’t constructive.
Given the shaky and dubious theology of “Evangelical Protestantism” one would hardly consider such to be the final arbiter of what is and what is not “Christian” In other words, those living in theological glass houses should not throw stones.
Just some food for thought…
As far as I can remember I have not made the comment that anyone is being UnChristian by trying to point out the falisies/problems with the LDS church. We LDS, as has been pointed out many times, do the same with Traditional Christianity. The two things I think are UnChristian are the personal attacks, especially when they become too harsh, and when anyone, either LDS or non-LDS, makes fun of the others’ sacred beliefs, whether they are right or wrong. Just to back up why I feel this way here is a scripture used in the above article, “the Lord’s servant…to teach…correcting his [spiritual] opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will” (2 Timothy 2:24-26).” I know I have made a few crack comments in the past and afterwards when I reread my post I regret I wrote them. But the easiest way to make someone feel you do not ‘love’ them and then have them turn away is to make fun of something they hold precious/sacred. I do believe that most (not all) of the times other LDS do charge you with being UnChristian is when you do one of these 2 things. Yes, its OK to use strong language, like saying someone’s view point is heretical, or will lead to damnation, but its not OK (at least in my view) to make fun/light of anything another holds sacred.
I don’t think it’s as simple as saying, “You must never make fun of what other people believe to be sacred.” The reason I say that is because we have the godly example of Elijah mocking the idols of Baal. But (to address what might usually be denoted by “making fun” of something) I assume that Elijah did not do this out of trivializing the importance or stakes of theology. If anything, it was his expression of the bigness and realness and holiness and power of Yahweh in comparison to the laughable idea of Baal.
Psalm 2 paints a picture of God himself laughing at the puny forces that are postured against the Annointed, and at the same time expresses a just wrath. At the end it calls for wisdom and for receiving blessedness in taking refuge in the Son. That a loving warning and beckoning to blessedness, and an escape from wrath, can be expressed in such close proximity with scoffing at the vain efforts of the rebels, along with expressions of fierce power and justice, amazes me. It reminds me of Jesus in Mark 3:5 being compassionately grieved and angered at the same time. The range of godly emotions and expressions of those emotions is surprising.
It is likewise simplistic to gauge whether one is a godly exemplar of gentleness based on whether he or she turns people away. We of course have Jesus who breaks that paradigm.
What we do have is a set of godly principles and heart-passions that God’s word tells us to have, a lot of godly figures in the Bible, and Jesus, God-in-the-flesh, the most dynamic and perfect example of what it means to be full of grace and truth.
God loves idolaters, but he hates idolatry. It makes sense for God to hate what contributes to the destruction of people he loves. God created human beings to be in his image and they have a sacred dignity and value, but he infinitely detests the idolatrously warped lies about who he is and what he has revealed. To follow suit, Christians should love Mormons, but hate Mormonism. We should aim to love the truth of the gospel and abhor Mormonism as a God-dishonoring, people-destroying system—while treating Mormons as sacred, special creations in the sight of God. Sometimes this means being sensitive to people’s feelings, other times it means loving people in ways they don’t want to be loved (contrary to their feelings). It’s a road filled with landmines. Anyone who endeavors to walk it (without resorting to oversimplifications) needs the free, gracious guidance and companionship of the Holy Spirit, received by faith alone. This even becomes more apparent when we consider our personality, disposition, strengths, and weaknesses.
Two books I recommend related to the issue of walking the tightrope of grace and truth are:
Speaking Truth In Love
by David Powlison
A Serrated Edge: A Brief Defense of Biblical Satire and Trinitarian Skylarking
by Douglas Wilson
Sharon, great post. What would be truly unChristian would be to see people living in opposition to God’s Word and yet say nothing. There is no room in the Gospel mandate to ignore people lost in their sins. It is a Christian imperative to declare the Gospel, not ignore the truth to “get along”. The only one we are to answer to is God, and He alone will judge our faithfulness to declare His Word.
Hi SteveH, welcome to the conversation. I would ask for some clarification: “However, when so-called “critics” of Mormonism and the LDS Church deliberately misrepresent LDS doctrine in order to paint a false a grotesque caricature so as to more easily attack it, that behavior is not only “un-Christian” but also bearing false witness”
What doctrines are being deliberately misrepresented? Many of us here, myself included, have first hand experience since we were mormons formerly. I don’t know that I have come across any consistent attempt to misrepresent mormon doctrines, other than the random comment.
It is easy to make blanket accusations, can you back them up with specifics? Otherwise that would also fall into the category of false witness. You may also find that evangelical protestant theology is not as muddled as LDS apologists make it out to be. The Gospel is clearly spelled out in the Bible. What people need is to prayerfully study God’s Word, not turn to a false prophet who contradicts that Word.
This is an excellent post, Sharon. I pray God continues to fill you and Aaron with His Spirit as He uses you to minister here on this blog. You are both such a blessing as you demonstrate consistently that you love Mormons and desire to see them set free from the bondage of submission to a false prophet.
I really appreciated your comments regarding the frustration that we all (LDS and non-LDS) often feel on this blog and how it can be challenging to refrain from anger while speaking the truth in love. I am personally compelled by a passionate indignation at the mis-representation of God’s nature in Joseph Smith’s teaching and subsequent LDS doctrines. I have to reign in my feelings often and sometimes I just can’t comment. Some of the discussion on this blog can truly become very frustrating and upsetting.
While some might consider this post hate speech, my definition of hatred is something more like this:
“True hatred hides the Gospel in beautiful words that upset no one, and therefore bring no conviction of sin.
True hatred stands in selfish silence as hell’s population grows” (Chick 1996)
SteveH, I’m going to have to second what Arthur stated. I have asked time and time again for specifics on what we evangelicals “misinterpret, misunderstand, etc..” and I have yet to receive an answer.
Now before we taint this blog with off topic posts, maybe there is an old thread you can post some of those specifics on that have more to do with that specific thread.
Or
Maybe there should be a thread in the near future about specific doctrine (God once being a man, heavenly mother, Blood atonement, Adam/God, Polygamy, Blacks/priesthood) and both sides can quote sources to their hearts content and see if there is some misunderstanding. *wink wink Aaron/Sharon, or ShAaron for short* haha
Actually the truth of something doesn’t change even if the delivery is nasty, confrontational and of the in-your-face variety of expression. However, that approach is really not very effective as a means of convincing or influencing someone. I believe it was Abraham Lincoln who counseled an associate to write out his venom and hate to someone regarding an issue. When the person brought the letter to Lincoln to review, Lincoln gave his approval. Then the person said he would go ahead and send the letter. Lincoln told him something like, “No, you don’t want to do that. Put it in a file and keep it there.” Lincoln’s reason for this counsel was obvious as was the technique. I was often in situations in my job (right before retiring) where I’d have an irate person standing before my desk ranting. My technique was to give them a “verbal enema”. When they started repeating themselves over and over and were pretty much out of wind, I knew it was time for me to intervene. The point is, a person has to make up their mind as to what their goal is in any interaction. It takes a lot of wisdom and insight to be effective. Anyone can unload the contents of their mind.
“. . . I am now convinced that we evangelicals have often seriously misrepresented the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community. Indeed, let me state it bluntly to the LDS folks here this evening: we have sinned against you. The God of the Scriptures makes it clear that it is a terrible thing to bear false witness against our neighbors, and we have been guilty of that sort of transgression in things we have said about you.” Richard Mouw, Fuller Theological Seminary President Nov 14, 2004.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/156/story_15656.html
GB, ironically, when Richard was pressed for specifics, he brought up the Lorenzo Snow couplet and King Follett Discourse theology. He said it had no “functioning place” in Mormonism. Bill wrote a response that blows this out of the water.
Still today most Mormons I talk to believe in the couplet, including the first half in some significant way. To remove Lorenzo Snow couplet theology from critical discussions on traditional and mainstream Mormon theology would, ironically, be a detriment to any effort to holistically represent and engage Mormonism. If you follow the Mouw/Millet crowd you actually end up having a warped view and unhelpful representation of Mormonism, as its primary lens is BYU academic neo-orthodoxy, not a more reasonable consideration of Church-published curriculum and General Conference talks and the effect they still have on members in light of long-standing oral traditions.
Just a couple of thoughts. I just happen (coincidence or inspiration depending upon your perspective) to be reading in 3 Nephi chapter 11 of the Book of Mormon this morning when I came upon a scripture which, at least for those of us who accept the Book of Mormon, is very applicable to the topic of this post. This is the section of the Book of Mormon in which Jesus Christ visits the Americas. One of the first topics He addresses is contention.
3 Nephi 11:29-30
“For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.
Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one with another; but this is my doctrine, that such things be done away.”
By sharing this scripture, I am not trying to label anyone on this site as “of the devil.” I share it on a personal level. I have found that in my life, when I feel this spirit of contention rising within me, the Spirit of the Lord departs from me.
I believe this spirit of contention is different from an honest debate. I believe the spirit of contention is when our underlying purpose is simply to create contention. Although, I don’t believe this is the case for most, if not all, on this site, it has been my experience that the line between honest debate and the spirit of contention can be very thin. For me personally, the line tends to be, am I honestly trying to make a point or am I just trying to win the argument. When I leave the honest search for truth and enter the “trying to win an argument” stage, I believe I have crossed the line over into the spirit of contention. Just my two cents.
Jeffrey,
Thank you for your post. I would like the chance to respond to your question, because it is at the heart of the discussions on this site. Unfortunately, it is not the topic of this thread, but I think your idea of addressing the topic on a more relevant thread is a good one. For this reason I will post my response in the “Is Mormonism Christian? Two Views” post.
LDS Members are always saying 3 Nephi 11:29, ‘He that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil. First off, I would like to say, this is not taught anywhere in the Bible. So for those who believe that the BoM is another gospel and basically a work of the devil, then we believe the Devil would teach this.
He is going to want you to believe this because then people will avoid answering hard questions that simply question their faith. The Idea of Contention being of the devil, if this were true, then I see a lot of problems in the Bible. Jesus and the apostles plus prophets in the OT did and said things that easily could be viewed as Contention.
John the baptist said
Notice here in these verses, the People were offended because of him.
Granted Jesus is both Perfect and Speaking the truth, they were offended by the Truth, but still People who claim they are Offended or I am being Contentions means nothing, It in my mind is simply a way to avoid the truth, by claiming it is not true but of the devil.
Here is two more things Jesus said, that Could be taken as a spirit of Contention.
Cont:
Jesus calls the leaders Blind, and says to His Disciples, Are ye also yet without understanding?
In today’s words, Jesus would be saying, Are you also Stupid?
Something Else Jesus said to his Disciples,
He called his Disciples, Fools and slow of heart.
Can you believe Jesus did this!
He whipped the people and overturned their stuff, if that is not mean and a form of Contention I don’t know what is.
Now lets look at this verse,
Notice in this verse the word SALT. I have been in the restaurant business for around 20 years. We use salt to draw blood out of meat, and it draws impurities out of food, it helps slow the growth of yeast in bread, and in the Scripture the use of yeast always refers to Sin and false Doctrine. We use the salt, (Truth) to slow down or kill doctrinal error, when salt is poured on a cut on it, it hurts.
We read in Scripture:
BornAgain, you said ” I have found that in my life, when I feel this spirit of contention rising within me, the Spirit of the Lord departs from me.”
Weird enough but I actually feel the opposite. Whenever I start getting feelings of contention, anger, etc, — I actually feel the Spirit of the Lord even stronger. Convicting me to basically stop acting in the negative way I am acting.
This is something I have noticed as a difference in belief between Mormons and Christians. Mormons say that when you read mormon-critic stuff, the Holy Spirit leaves the room. (I can quote an ensign article to source that if need be). – And that is a huge depressing thought. You get deserted once your sinful nature starts to get the best of you? How is that for an all loving God?
In contrast, the Holy Spirit is constantly with the Christian, through the thick and the thin. It is He who compels you to stop acting childish, to stop sinning.
My heart breaks for you guys, honestly. It all goes back to being “worthy” for Mormons in my opinion. You have to create situations worthy enough for the Holy Spirit to dwell inside you? Again it all comes back to YOU and what YOU DO, which is not the Gospel. Everything has to do with Jesus Christ. The companionship of the Holy Ghost is eternally yours to help guide you as long as you do not forsake Him. And by forsake, I don’t mean getting angry, our gracious Father knows we are susceptible and quick to anger. What I mean by forsake is to deny His existence and choose to live life without His help.
All I’m saying is that the Holy Ghost is nothing like Casper, who floats away from us when we get a little heated, instead he convicts us of our wrongs.
Jeffry said
If this really were the case, then the holy spirit could never dwell in us. the bible teaches we were born sinners, so if we were born sinners, then how could the HS enter us according to LDS logic. Rick b (lds priesthood holder).
Beautifully put, Jeffrey!
To take Jeffrey’s point one step further; “the Spirit leaving” concept within Mormonism is a way the religion keeps the member from considering anything that would challenge their faith and their testimony. Mormons are conditioned to avoid the hard questions. Let’s face it, many a Mormon has walked away from Mormonism when they discover the things about Joseph Smith and the history of Mormonism that don’t coincide with the Mormon church’s sanitized version of the “prophet” and his church. This also holds true with the overwhelming evidence that the BoA and BoM are indeed not what they have been promoted as being. “Keepem dumb” could be the motto of the Mormon church. It’s all part of the “feelings” base of Mormonism. If something is making you “feel” bad, that means the Spirit is not there. If you’re feeling good, then that means the Spirit is there. It’s really quite ingenious when you think about it. It’s right up there with the burning in the bosom as a confirmation of truth and the continuous, recurring and changing revelation as the means of truth (even if it disagrees with previously held “truth”).
By the way, getting convicted of sin does not feel good. So that can’t be from the Holy Spirit, right?
In the way of clarification, let me explain what I meant when I said the Spirit departs. I in no was intended to convey the idea that the Spirit “abandons me”- although I can see how someone might interpret it this way. For this lack of clarification I apologize.
Let me explain what I really meant. When I contend just for the sake of contending (just to win the argument), the Spirit of Truth does not bear witness of my words. This does not mean The Spirit totally abandons me; it simply means I am not seeking the truth at that moment and therefore He cannot sustain my words.
When I or anyone else forsakes the spirit of contention and speaks the truth, the Spirit of Truth will bear witness of it.
Apparently many of you do not believe that the Holy Ghost can bear witness of truth. If this is true I genuinely feel sorry for you.
I highly doubt this is true of most Christians. As with other things, it is probably more for the sake of argument.
Now lets look at what the LDS prophets and Scripture teach.
Read
D and C 66:7 68:1,9 go into the church’s public or private to discuss this stuff. D and C 6:9-11 says convince us of our error if we have any.
Why do I get accused of being contentious for doing what the scriptures teach. Now let me add this, would you agree it is good to listen to the mormon prophets? If so then I am. Read
pg 188 of doct of salvation vol 1 I quote. “CHURCH STANDS OR FALLS WITH JOSEPH SMITH. MORMONISM, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. their is no middle ground. If Joseph Smith was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead the people, then he should be exposed: his claims should be refuted, and his doctrines shown to be false”.
Why if your president and prophet said to do this and I believe it, I am in the wrong?. Did your Prophet not read that verse about contention? Let me also add what the apostle Orson Pratt said.
The Seer pg 15. I quote ” if we cannot convince you by reason nor by the word of God that YOUR religion is wrong we will not persecute you”.
Notice he is speaking to people of others faiths. And he states he is trying to show they are wrong through talks, but says if we cannot convince you. Well I don’t feel I have persecuted anyone if they disagree. Let me add what else he said.
I quote Orson pratt still pg 15.
we ask from you the same generosity–protect us in the exercise of our religious rights–CONVINCE US of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds.
I am just trying to look at mormonism in a logical way and point out what I believe are problems. I find it interesting that mormons of old were willing to tell others they were wrong or be open to talks, But it does not appear to be that way today. Then even after what Orson Pratt said, he does and feels should be done with the LDS I am still accused of being Contentious for sharing.
Ok this is stuff your Prophets have said about Christians. And if this is true, how can you say your a christian. If it is false, then your prophets were wrong, so could they be wrong about other stuff? Also regardless of whether it is true or not, could this be taken as a form of contention?
Here is what some of the former LDS Prophets and presidents have said about christians and I Quote:
“B Young: “with a regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called christian world” (Journal of Discourses 8:199). I quote 3rd president John Taylor (Brigham Young quotes Mr. Taylor) “Brother Taylor has just said that the religions of the day were hatched in hell, the eggs were laid in hell, hatched on its borders, and kicked onto the earth” (J.O.D 6:176). I quote Heber C. Kimball “Christians-those poor, miserable priests Brother Brigham was speaking about-some of them are the biggest whoremasters there are on the earth” (J.O.D 5:89).” then we can add the first vision by Joseph Smith. If God really did speak to him then he said all the christian creeds are an abomination in his sight.
I would think the Prophets who said that, had the Devil’s Spirit of Contention. Rick b (LDS priesthood holder)
GB, I will ask you the same thing I asked SteveH. Can you provide any examples on this blog of someone representing a specific mormon doctrine or taking a comment from a mormon leader out of context in such a way as to distort the meaning? I am not even remotely interested in what Mouw has to say because the issue at hand is whether anyone here has misrepresnted mormonism, and if you can provide an example of that behavior.
BAM, it has been my experience that the “spirit of contention” line is normally sprung when mormons get backed into corners with the Word. Earnestly contending can be strongly worded, even sharply spoken at times. I know it is easy for me to stray into winning an argument for the sake of winning the argument, when my desire is to see souls won for Christ.