The two fastest-growing church bodies in the United States and Canada, according to a newly published report, are ones whose beliefs are known to conflict with traditional Christian teaching.
Jehovah's Witnesses and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, regarded by many Christians as cults, reported the largest membership increases in a year, according to the National Council of Churches' 2008 Yearbook of American & Canadian Churches.
Although Jehovah's Witnesses currently rank 25th in size with over 1.06 million members, they reported a 2.25 percent increase in membership since the publication of the 2007 Yearbook. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – also known as the Mormon church – grew 1.56 percent and is listed by the NCC as the fourth largest “church.”
Notably, however, both Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormon church are not accepted within many Christian circles as part of the larger Body of Christ over a number of controversial beliefs that the two religions hold. Identification of the former religion as Christian, among other controversies, is debated largely due to their rejection of the Trinity, which most Christians regard as a fundamental doctrine. Latter-day Saints, meanwhile, are often criticized for their belief in “divine” books of scripture, aside from the Bible, including the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.
Mormonism was formally listed under “cults and sects” by the Southern Baptist Convention – the largest Protestant denomination in the nation – but was more recently categorized among “newly developed religions” on the North American Mission Board apologetics page.
Other bodies in the newly published top 25 largest churches list that reported membership increases include The Catholic Church with a 0.87 percent increase; the Southern Baptist Convention with a 0.22 percent increase; the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church with a 0.21 percent rise; and the Assemblies of God with a 0.19 percent growth.
The greatest losses in membership were reported by The Episcopal Church, which dropped 4.15 percent in members, and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), which decreased by 2.36 percent. Both denominations are currently wracked by theological differences and the issue of homosexuality.
American Baptist Churches in the U.S.A. and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America also experienced large losses in membership, dropping 1.82 percent and 1.58 percent, respectively.
"Some will wish to argue that the slowing growth rate is evidence of an increasing secularization of American postmodern society," said the Rev. Dr. Eileen W. Lindner, editor of the Yearbook. "While such an explanation will satisfy some, caution in drawing such a conclusion is warranted."
Lindner also observed that churches are feeling the impact of the lifestyles of Millenials – people in their 20s and 30s – who attend church but resist becoming members.
The United Methodist Church saw a 0.99 percent decrease but the mainline group remains the third largest church body with nearly 8 million members.
Only three of the top 10 largest churches are mainline Protestant churches; three of the top 25 are Pentecostal churches; and six of the top 15 are historic African American churches.
Largest 25 Churches (ranked by membership) Continue >>
1. The Catholic Church â
I have to admit that the Jehovah witness is out and spreading the word. But they are a cult, and so is the mormons. Grow? they are leading people in the wrong direction.
Straight to hell.
The CHurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has a membership of over 13 million which was incorrectly reported in this article.
It is the only one I know of after all my investigating that best adheres to the Christian teachings from the Bible, Debra
Que
I appreciate the thought and study you put into the subject, it was also very nice that you shared a part of that journey. God bless you all.
God's plan is that all would hear the gospel before He returns. You may think that's impossible, but we are very close. The world is a lot smaller today. Mass media, and even more and more people being called to the mission field and reaching distant and previously unknown tribes, cultures, and people.
Vince,
Regarding your comment: “I see a just and merciful God with a plan for those who have never heard the gospel”.
What does scripture have to say about this matter? Well to be frank, I hadn’t previously looked into it closely. Certainly I had heard certain vague references to men’s own consciences convicting them that there is a God, but I hadn’t followed that to its logical conclusion. But after a very long night of intensive bible study I can say that it’s rather plain what the “plan” is. Care to follow along with what I’ve learned?
Rom 2:11-16 “For there is no partiality with God. For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; For when Gentiles who DO NOT HAVE THE LAW do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.”
Those without knowledge of the Gospel and the Law are judged by their conscience. If they violate their conscience then they have rebelled against their creator who gave us all the knowledge of right and wrong. (Conscience = literally “With knowledge”) Conscience is actually the Law written in our hearts. That their “thoughts” can “defend them” in the day of judgment,would certainly indicate that such is possible!
(continued below)
(continued from above)
It is also made clear that God has made Himself obvious to man through the general revelation of creation:
Rom 1:18-22 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools”
The general revelation of God through creation spoils any possible excuse man may have in saying that he never knew there is such a thing as God, even without the benefit of specific revelation.
So who are these that “do not honor God” and whose own “consciences accuse them”? They are by nature “children of wrath…dead in trespass and sin…walking according to the course of this world” (Eph 2:1-3) And what is to become of these?
Rev 20:11 speaks of the Great White Throne Judgment of the unrighteous dead; of the great and small that are judged from the books according to their works. Rev 20:15 “And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.”
How does one’s name appear or not appear in this book?
Exd 32:33 “And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.”
ALSO
As the Lord said to John in Rev 3:5 “He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.”
< Overcome = GREEK “Nikao” meaning: come off victorious - of those that hold fast their faith even unto death against the power of their foes, and temptations and persecutions>
Certainly God is merciful, but He is also just. “And there shall in no wise enter in…any thing that defileth.” Rev 21:27
I apologize if I misunderstood you. I read your quote to telling me what I and the LDS believe. Your words--"This is absolutely contrary to your belief that a just and holy God might bend the rules and allow the "ignorant" or "deceived" into glory. "-- I see a just and merciful God with a plan for those that have never heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I know of no evangelical doctrine that allows for His mercy to be extend to those that would have accepted Christ had they had the opertunity in this life.
Again I am sorry, for the misunderstanding.
Our faith assures us that we are saved.
Our works prove we are saved.
Vince,
Back up there on both points.
I am only responding to your own words wherein you said: " But to say that God doesn't save the individual that never knew Christ and never had the chance to, is to take away from His Love and mercy."
As for being "judged by our works", I've not said not ever will say anything of the sort.
I think you are getting me confused with BigOnDrums who said ;" If works were not important, why would we be judged according to our works?"
RE: the former quote - please elaborate. By your most recent response you are either backpedaling from said quote, or it has been misunderstood.
Que - wrong again -
"This is absolutely contrary to your belief that a just and holy God might bend the rules and allow the "ignorant" or "deceived" into glory. God is absolutely holy and as such can abide no sin. It is ONLY Christ's blood covering us that makes us "as white as snow" before Gods eyes. If you don't have Christ's blood, you can't enter in. And not just ANY "Christ", but the one, true Christ. Simple as that."
I don't believe nor is it LDS Doctrine what you just said. In fact the Book of Mormon teaches that one can't be saved in ignorance. So I don't know where you got that thought from. And like some one with only part of the truth (cause you only have part of the scriptures given to man by God) I can agree with alot of what you said, but again you haven't explained how the bible can say Eph 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast." and then say that we are judged by our works. if that isn't a contradiction then I don't know what is. You need further revelation and inspiration from God. see prophets.
It is possible to be deceived.
Luke 21:8 And (Jesus) said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am [Christ]; and the time draweth near: go ye NOT therefore after them.
Following the TRUE Christ is of utmost importance. Jesus is saying don't follow these other "Christs".
Jesus further says:
Mat 7:21-23 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will (Christ) profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
<Iniquity - GREEK "anomia" to trangress the law either by willful contempt or by ignorance of it.>
Mat 25:41 "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels"
This is a sobering thing! These that say but "Lord Lord!" would appear to be people that thought that they were right with God, doing works in His name and prophesying (teaching) in His name and all. But he says they've worked "inquity", which would be in this case ignorantly transgressing the law and they did not know HIM and are thus condemned.
This is absolutely contrary to your belief that a just and holy God might bend the rules and allow the "ignorant" or "deceived" into glory. God is absolutely holy and as such can abide no sin. It is ONLY Christ's blood covering us that makes us "as white as snow" before Gods eyes. If you don't have Christ's blood, you can't enter in. And not just ANY "Christ", but the one, true Christ. Simple as that.
bigondrums,
You said "Prophet, We believe that Jesus is the God of the Old Testament" So the God of the old testament is a different God? The same God that said "I am the same yesterday, today, and forever"?
As for my grandmother. I can only pray. I can't judge the condition of her heart, but I can see her actions and perceive what she appears to place greatest emphasis upon, which gives me reason to be concerned as to her true condition.
Has she placed her hope of salvation on her works or on Christ's blood? Does she depend on a eucharistic piece of bread to maintain her fellowship with God or does she believe Christ's words when he said "It is finished!"?
Jer 17:10 But I know! I, the Lord, search all hearts and examine secret motives. I give all people their due rewards, according to what their actions deserve."
Vince,
You are making the assumption that the liberty derived from grace alone gives rise to license. It may for the deceived half-hearted pew-warmer hoping for fire insurance, but not for the truly obedient Christian who "studies to show himself approved"
He would find that Paul writes in Romans 6:1,2,4: "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid!... even so we also should walk in newness of life."
Also in Acts 26, Paul also testifies to King Agrippa that Jesus had commanded him: ".. I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both, of these things which thou hast seen...(and Paul) shewed first unto them (the Gentiles) that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
Paul preached "repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ."
What you call the "evangelical view" is actually no such thing. "All you need to do is accept Christ" is ALSO NOT the gospel. Saying a little prayer at an altar call with no change in your life avails nothing. This is what Jesus speaks of in Matt 13:5,6 in the parable of the sower; "..Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth, And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away."
A contrite and broken heart over one's sin is what repentance is; a turning from one's separated-from-God ways, placing our faith in Christ's redeeming work on the cross, Eph 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast."
Do you realize what this REALLY says? (and this was laid bare to my own heart only last year) that even our faith is the gift of God. It's not about us struggling to believe. HE gives us the faith, so I can't boast that I'm super faith-filled. What faith I have was granted to me by God! What's more, I don't have to give in to doubts, but place my trust wholly upon God to give me the necessary faith. (continued)
(CONTINUED FROM ABOVE)
But having been justified and brought in to right relationship with God, we aren't to stop there!
Jesus says in John 14; "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father....If ye love me, keep my commandments....And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever."
If we believe on Him, we will love him and if we love him we will keep his commandments and what's more, we WILL do works! But these works are NOT THE BASIS OF OUR SALVATION - but merely an outward sign of our inward condition!
This is what James refers to when he says "and I will shew thee my faith by my works."
And our works is not all. As we leave behind these first principles regarding our redemption having been acccomplished, we are to "go on to perfection". Paul adjures us in Hebrews; "THEREFORE, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, LET US GO ON TO PERFECTION, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment..."
Don't keep rehashing the basics; We are to "grow in grace, and [in] the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" 2 Pet 3:18.
Does all this sound like laziness to you? It sounds more like being "careful to put into action God's saving work in your lives, obeying God with deep reverence and fear." Phl 2:12
If works were not important, why would we be judged according to our works? Why would we be told faith without works is dead?
We are to follow the commandments of God. These are called works. We will be judged accordingly. We are not saved by our works, we are saved through faith in Jesus Christ. However, this does not negate our responsibility to follow His commandments.
Even satan and his dominions believe in Christ. They are not saved. You can say you accept Christ and believe in him, and then murder 5 innocent people in a shooting rampage. Are you still saved? If so, and works don't matter at all, then why do we do anything good after we've accepted Christ as our Savior?
I would also submit that it is the evangelical view of Grace that takes away from Christ's Atonement and Power. I do works to glorify Him and His Father, I keep the commandments to show my Love and Faith in Him. (I am not perfect in my faith or works and must for that repent daily). But to say that God doesn't save the individual that never knew Christ and never had the chance to, is to take away from His Love and mercy. To say “I am saved by Grace alone”, takes away from the Grace He gave provides me to do good works. To say “All you need to do is accept Christ” opens the door to being lazy and not doing works of righteousness(Christ taught “that we should let our good works be seen, that we may glorify the Father which is in Heaven-Matt 5:16)
It is through the grace of the Lord Jesus, made possible by his atoning sacrifice, that mankind will be raised in immortality, every person receiving his body from the grave in a condition of everlasting life. It is likewise through the grace of the Lord that individuals, through faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ and repentance of their(not Adam’s) sins, receive strength and assistance to do good works that they otherwise would not be able to maintain if left to their own means. This grace is an enabling power that allows men and women to lay hold on eternal life and exaltation after they have expended their own best efforts.
Que, Again I love your passion and zeal, I am amazed at the knowledge of the bible and the misunderstanding of God's great plan.
To use your example if I may: your grandmother is not truly saved(definitions could be argued of what "saved" means), but is damned for eternity, because she takes the sacrament, and prays to her rosary etc? I would submit that God's Grace is sufficient for ALL. I would like to ask if your grandmother sees that these observiences are signs of her faith (James 2:18) in the Lord Jesus and she does them by commandment (If you love Christ you will keep His commandments) is the Lords mercy enough that she can be saved(using evangelical definition of saved)?
I know that God is just and merciful and since He will be the end all judge I fear not my salvation. And some day hope to say as Paul "I have fought the good Fight (works), I have finished my course (my part in Gods plan), I have kept the faith, (what I believe=I know that Jesus is the Christ, the messiah, my Redeemer, and only through Him can eternal life be gained)
Vince, It's not what I "think' of my own accord. It's what scripture declares. 2Peter2 speaks at length about false prophets and their fate, but also speaks of those who they "entangle", saying that "the latter end is worse with them than the beginning".
There is no soul more difficult to preach the gospel of grace to, than the one who believes himself to already be right before God because of his own works.
I can see this dynamic in my own Catholic grandmother. She has been Catholic all her life and will listen to no one regarding her religion because she thinks she has DONE everything that is REQUIRED of her. Sure, she believes in Jesus and believes that she's saved, but her faith does not rest in Christ's blood alone. She believes she MUST partake of sacraments, she believes she MUST pray her rosary to Mary, and MUST this, and MUST that and on and on. This is all useless works and to add these things to the blood of Christ is to diminish Him and His sacrifice; to in essence say to Jesus "No, I don't believe that what you did was wholly sufficient for my salvation." This is no gospel at all !! Christ plus anything is a false sense of hope.
The apostle Paul points out that it is possible for us to become enslaved again after we have been set free. How does that happen? Whenever we add an element of self-effort (works or faith plus works) as a basis for gaining God's acceptance (the essence of legalism), we subject ourselves again to the yoke of slavery.
The Gospel is Christ and Him crucified, faith in Him and His shed blood as complete sufficiency for salvation. Faith plus NOTHING is my justification. Certainly my faith will naturally produce works by a grateful heart, but these works ADD NOTHING to my justification and never can. THIS is the liberty of the true gospel.
2Pe 2:19 Speaks of false prophets, " While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage."
Gal 5:1 "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage (legalism; works-based salvation). "
Serious Wilderness, do you see the LDS faith and Faithful as a "Moral Menace"?
I can understand John Quincy Adams saying that in ignorance and with the lack of communication and understanding of that time, but I can't imagine any logically thinking human (much less a "christian") believing that in this day and age.
Preface
“IT is not necessary to burden the reader with a history of how this book came to be written. Its genesis was a paper prepared as a contribution to local history. It has grown with the years; it has made use of sources not ordinarily accessible and possibly no longer in existence; and it is believed that it presents more completely the story of the birth of Mormonism than any publication now in print. It is sent forth with the hope that it will help to arouse the American people to endeavor more energetically to remove this moral menace to and blot upon our country--the greatest religious fraud of the nineteenth century, if not of all time.”
John Quincy Adams.
Auburn, New York, 1916.
(The Birth of Mormonism by John Quincy Adams, 1916)
Que, I appreciate your prayers, I need all I can get. Let me ask you honestly.
You said "I can think of nothing sadder than a life wasted in the utmost devotion to a false religion." So you think that it is better for a non-believer or atheist then some one who disagrees with your interpretations of the bible?
All I can say is, we feel the same towards you.
Prophet,
Their eyes have been blinded by the principalities and powers of this world. They are caught up and deceived by the lies that have been woven throughout the false gospel that they cling to.
We can but speak the truth in love and lay the entire matter at the feet of the Lord, in prayer.
We can talk until we're blue in the face, but for all our effort, our prayers for VinceGrimm, Hesadanza and BigonDrums will avail so much more!
God will redeem all His elect. We are allowed to be coworkers in His will by our prayers to Him on their behalf.
With God, all things are possible and Lord willing, we will see these folks in glory someday.
I can think of nothing sadder than a life wasted in the utmost devotion to a false religion.
I'm reminded of my time running track and field. It would be of little benefit to me to run the race of my life with all sincerity and put in an impressive performance, only to cross the finish line and discover that all alonog I've been at a stadium other than where the actual track meet had been taking place that day.
I missed a lot of posts it looks like, after I called it a day. Sorry about that.
Prophet, We believe that Jesus is the God of the Old Testament. We believe that under the Father's instruction, all things that we know of were created. We are subject to Him. He is subject to the Father, as He showed us when He came in the flesh. I noticed there were a lot of scriptures thrown back and forth trying to prove both sides. I don't think either side is giong to convince the other they are wrong. And it doesn't look like either side is considering the other's point of view very well.
Where do you guys see this conversation going? Can it continue? Or should we agree to disagree and wish each other the best? It's up to you, I can do either.
So far, I'm seeing overwhelming evidence that Jesus is God. But no evidence to the contrary.
Colossians 1:16-17 says "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist."
Well, if Jesus created all things. Then He must be God. Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning, God created the earth."
John 1 shows us that God and Jesus are one and the same.
John 8:58 shows that even Jesus speaks it.
And Genesis 1 shows that they are one.
Guess Who?
Members of the LDS Church are familiar with the charge that Mormonism isn't a Christian faith. They hear it often enough, but they really don't understand why people think that. "We are Christians," Mormon President Gordon B. Hinckley insisted. "We have the name of Jesus Christ right in the name of our Church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We follow Christ. We worship Him. We love Him. He is the center of all we do"("Inspirational Thoughts," Liahona, June 1999, 3; 2 Nephi 25:24-29).
In the summer of 2005 we asked Mormons in Nauvoo, Illinois to take a quiz we called "Guess Who?" The quiz consisted of 15 relatively recent statements made by LDS leaders; we asked the participants to see if they could determine who their Church leaders were talking about. We invite you to take the same quiz. The answers will be at the end; see if you can do this without scrolling down for the answers.
1. His teachings "are the foundation of our faith. Everything we have is a lengthened shadow of [him]."
2. "I pray we may learn from his example, that we might incorporate into our lives the great principles which he so beautifully taught; that we ourselves might emulate him;..."
3. "I honor and revere [his] name... I delight to hear it; I love it. I love his doctrine... I am his witness."
4. "He died for those he loved. He reigns in the realms above."
5. The more I learn of him, the more I love and revere him."
6. "I look to him. I love him. I seek to follow him."
Continued below…
7. "He not only gave us joy, happiness and opportunity here, but also a great hope in the life to come."
8. "Today, this Sabbath day, in many thousands of congregations, perhaps as many as twenty-one thousand, in many areas of the earth, our people have sung or will sing the praises of [him]."
9. "Of noble seed, of heavenly birth, he came to bless the sons of earth."
10. He was "a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief."
11. "Church members are interested in learning more about [him] because they love him and they love the gospel he brought forth."
12. "How great indeed is our debt to him. ...Great is his glory,... We stand in reverence before him... Let us not forget him. Let not his memory be forgotten in the celebration of Christmas."
13. "...and he shall stand in due time on the earth, in the flesh, and fulfill that to which he is appointed."
14. "The light, provided to the world by [him], illuminates the confusion, clarifies the principles of the gospel, and helps lead men and women to their own eternal reward, if they will but endure to the end."
15. The "work that has been carried out by President Young and his brethren [of the Twelve] has been in accordance with the plans, and designs, and Spirit, and instructions of [him]."
How did you do? Go here to see: http://www.mrm.org/topics/jesus-christ/guess-who
Disclaimer: “We asked Mormons” is not in reference to me (wilderness).
Jacob wrestled with a fleshly incarnate God.
Prophet about your last comment I would love an explanation of what you mean. email me. Sorry I must cut it short.
Fellow believers in Christ I would love to continue this and I appreciate your sharing your point of view and interpetations of the scriptures it has been very enlightening. I must go for now but I leave a blessing of Love and good will to you. If you would like to continue any of these discussions please email me at =vince4jesus@gmail(dot)com. Thanks and God speed.
And, with you being LDS, I'm sure of where this conversation is going.
Okay if you are going to take it Literally, you conveniently left out "Jacob was left alone, and there wrestled a man..." is the bible contradicting it's self? or could it be that Jacob was figuratively wrestling before God? and after come out of this wrestle choose God and His ways and that is when God spoke to him (literally) Face to Face and changed his name to Israel?
The answer to that is God incased in flesh.
Who did Jacob wrestle? A man? Or God?
Vince,
If you believe that the Word is God (and later in that chapter it explains that the Word is Jesus), then how can you argue that? Jesus is merely making a distinction between the manifestations of God. Jesus was the physical manifestation of God. He was completely human, but completely God. How can that be? Just like the trinity, it's a mystery that we may never be able to understand.
Again Prophet you assume that first John 5:7 is talking about one in body, person or being. Knowing this could go on for ever just as discussions like this can.
Can you see that 1 john 5:7 could be interpreted as one in Unity, Purpose, goal - like all are one in accord to bare record of the Son being Jesus Christ?
Vince,
Please dont bring in JS. If you want to be credible, that's going to shoot yourself in the foot.
Jacob wrestled with a man in Genesis 32. When they were done wrestling, Jacob named the place Peniel because he had seen God face to face. If God is spirit....then how could Jacob wrestle with a man? And, as many believe, if that man was actually Jesus, then why would Jacob say that he saw God?
Prophet, I agree, Jesus is the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word is God, but you assume that John is saying that Jesus Christ is God the Father. Man's understanding, if true than it would contradict other parts of the bible, so your assumption can't be truth, because the bible can't contradict itself, or are you saying the bible is errant?
Que again apples and oranges, The spirit they feared is equal to a ghost or demon, the spirit that is housed in our bodies and that of Christ is what we are talking about. take as an example Christ shows himself to Mary but has not Assended to the Father and requests not to be touched (John 20:17)
Oh, and First John 5:7 says "For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one." I think that pretty much ends the discussion.
Vince
John 1. In the beginning was the Word. The Word was with God, and the Word WAS God." So, yes, it does say that they are one.
Moses spoke with the LORD face to face -exodus 33:11
Paul said Jesus sat down on the right hand of the majesty on High - Heb 1:3
Stephen saw Christ on the right hand of God - Acts 7:55-56
John the baptist heard the voice of the Father - Matt 3:16-17
Joseph Smith saw and spoke with God the Father and Jesus Christ - JSH, D&C 131, & 76
John 4:24 saying that God is spirit is true too, I can say you are spirit, cause you are made up of a body with flesh and blood, and you are spirit. You are to let the spirit control the body and worship and serve God.
Jesus said in Luke 24:39 "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for A SPIRIT HATH NOT FLESH AND BONES, as ye see me have."
"The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s..." THIS is the understanding and teaching of a man. This is not found in scripture anywhere.
But Vince:
Jhn 4:24 "God the Father [is] Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth."
Show me in scripture where it is written that God the Father is corporeal.
Prophet that doesn't make any sense nor is that found anywhere in the bible or holy scriptures.
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Flesh, spirit, and soul.
All one, but separate.
Thus goes the enigma. The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit are one person, but three manifestations of the same person.
You said it yourself
"Yes, God is one person - ONE TRUE GOD
Yes, Jesus is one person - God's ONLY begotten Son,
Yes, the Holy Ghost is one person"
Together they are the Godhead, separate beings, one in goal, unity and purpose.
Isn't it great to have the heavens opened to reveal the true and living God, that we don't need to rely on the understanding of man but can get the TRUTH from a living Prophet called of God in our day (just as in ancient days) to reveal and teach His truths
"The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.
Most people skim over that scripture and think nothing of it. But they miss a deeper discovery of who Jesus is.
Yeah, see there's lots of little things that Jesus said and did, that would only be picked up by those who study the Word and are led by the Spirit.
precisely!
He is the Great I AM, and oh, how the Pharisee's blood must have boiled! They knew exactly what title it was that Jesus was laying claim to.
Q,
Yes. Sorry. I shouldn't get frustrated with ignorance.
But I find it intriguing that in John Chapter 8, towards the end, Jesus is talking the pharisees about Abraham. And He comments in verse 58 saying “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” I am? Didn't He mean "I was"? Or is it that He was using the title that God used when talking to Moses in Exodus 3 "And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’”
I think that the reason why the pharisees were so upset, wasn't necessarily that He was comparing Himself to God (although that was a rather sore point with them), but that He used the title that God gave Himself. And the pharisees, being intense scholars of the old testament scriptures, knew exactly what He was implying. THAT is what really torqued them off.
( yes, the analogy to man falls a little short of revealing the mystery of God because we are not identical to Him, but rather His likeness-similitude. And not only that, but we are in a fallen state - hence the occurence of death. So yes, the analogy does fall short of fully revealing God's glory)
RE: separate-ness
It's an amazing truth, Vince!
Yes, God is one person
Yes, Jesus is one person
Yes, the Holy Spirit is one person
Yet according to scripture there is only one true God. How is this so?
Patience Prophet -
We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers....
2Tim 4:2 "... correct, rebuke and encourage–with GREAT PATIENCE and careful instruction."
BoD:
My point is simple logic...
1. Jesus is God. Yes?
2. Yet Jesus refers to the Father in John 17:3 as "the only true God"
So what is Jesus implying here about his own godhood?
I know you don't think that Jesus is saying here that he isn't a true God and if not what is the alternative?
bigondrums,
Sorry I took so long to respond. I was going through all my Bibles and removing John 1, since it is not scriptural.
But you never did answer my question...are you a body? or a spirit? or a soul?
And as far as Revelations is considered. Thanks for letting me know that all that has happened already. I thought I was going to have to endure the tribulation, but apparently it's already happened. So, we're in the new earth and heaven now? I hope not. If we are, it sucks.
This is what the LORD [Jehovah], Israel's king, says,
their protector, the LORD who commands armies:
"I am the first and I am the last, there is no God [Elohim] but me." Isaiah 44:6
"You have been taught that the LORD [Jehovah] alone is God [Elohim] - there is no other besides him." Deuteronomy 4:35
What do these verses mean to you?
Your argument makes no sense to me. John 17:3 proves that they are separate because Jesus prays to the Father. I don't see how you're making your argument that they are one and the same. The Son is subject to the Father.
Even your quote in Genesis proves they conversed with each other.
If I may interject:
Que you make a good point, BUT unlike the Godhead, your body can not survive with out you spirit. It is the spirit that is everlasting, obviously your body is going to die, at which point your spirit seperates it's self from the body. Not knowing your defination of the soul but again I believe the soul is made up of the body and spirit together.
God the Father is independant from God the Son and Jesus is independant from the Father (see previous bible quotes). No one comes to the Father except through the Son.
BoD - re: your comment about 'OT Times" and idolatry -
How then do you explain the NT verses that I gave you?
Jhn 17:3 (Jesus praying to God the Father) "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the ONLY true God.."
1Cr 8:6 "... there is but ONE God, the Father, of whom are all things.."
You as a human being consist of body, soul and spirit, yet no one would say you are "three". Why is this concept so difficult to grasp when used of the Godhead?
Even when you come to die, you are separated from your body, yet again no one would say that there is more than one of you.
Gen 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness... "
That was Jehovah speaking to a set of people in Old Testament times when idol worship was a huge problem. Jehovah is Jesus Christ, who we are subject to. To us, He is our God.
Not to be misunderstood, I believe that Jesus is our Saviour and Redeemer, and He was sent by God His Father to redeem mankind. How do you go against the bible when it clearly teaches the seperateness of the Godhead?
Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God.(John 20:17)
If the Father and the Son were numerically one, where would Jesus go?
Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.(Acts 2:33)
If Father and Son and Holy Ghost were numerically one, how could Jesus be at the right hand of God? How would He be exalted? And why would He need to have received a promise of the Holy Ghost? Let's look at Jesus' own words:
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? (Matthew 27:46)
If the Father is the Son, then how could he have forsaken himself?
BoD: Consider the following:
(single examples given in order to "keep the forum uncluttered")
In Phil 1:2 the Father is called God
In Col 2:9 Jesus is called God
In Acts 5:3,4 the Holy Spirit is called God.
To the natural man's mind this would indicate 3 persons.
However,
Here are a few (again not all, for the sake of space)
statements in scripture that state there is only ONE God:
Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8; 45:5,14,18,21,22; 46:9; 47:8; John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:5-6; Gal. 4:8-9
"I am the LORD, and there is no other; besides Me there is no God" (Isaiah 45:5).
“Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me," (Isaiah 44:6).
"I am the Lord, and there is no other; besides Me there is no God, (Isaiah 55:5).
How many Gods exist? one, not three.
Revelations is just that: a revelation. He was shown things from the past, and things that will happen in the future. I disagree with you that the war in heaven in which satan was cast out happened in the past. I know that Revelations is a difficult book to understand, but the evidence that satan is present now, along with his dominions, seems strong to me. In fact I don't know many protestants that take a stand on the war in heaven as far as when it occurred. Most preachers I've talked to believe that is how satan got to be on earth (in the past).
What I am seeing is that we must not be using the same KJV. Are you missing the many, many scriptures that Christ refers to the Father? Or that they are manifested to prophets beside each other?
I believe that Jesus Christ was with the Father before the creation of the earth. I believe that Jehovah was the God of the Old Testament. I believe that Jehovah is Jesus Christ. When Jesus came to earth in the flesh He taught us about the Father as well as Himself. I believe we are subject to the divinity of Jesus Christ as He is the mediator between us and the Father. But just as He taught us, He is the Son. The Son is subject to the Father. And so are we. Does that clear up what I've been saying?
Revelations is a book of the future, not the past. Revelations clearly shows that Satan and his demons had access to heaven. And the war was to finally remove him from there. Again, if you disagree, please remove such scriptures from your Bible.
Non-believers who refuse to acknowledge the Truth kind of annoy me. But I have patience, because they do not have the Spirit of God in them. But when a Christian refuses to acknowlege the Truth, especially one so blantant and obvious, now THAT annoys me. Whether Satan is allowed in heaven or not, will not determine a person's salvation. Whether Jesus is God....well, that's pushing the line. But I'm not as daring as you. I would rather not push that line.
It's like this, bigondrums, are you a body? Or a spirit? Or a soul?
bigondrums,
Why do you refuse to hear the scriptures.
John 1 says "1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
The Word was God. Yes, it say that the Word was with God. And then apparently your Bible stops there. But the Word of God goes on to say that the Word was God. Jesus is God. The only way you can deny that is by cutting out the scriptures.
And so far I've given you scriptural proof of Satan being allowed in heaven. All you've offered is opinion. Unless you can give me scripture that proves that Satan is not allowed in heaven, the overwhelming evidence says otherwise.
Job1:6-7 says "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
7And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it."
Does that, or does it not, say that Satan came with the sons of God into His presence? If you say it doesn't, please remove that scripture from your Bible.
bigondrums,
Sorry, I guess I mispoke. The man of perdition isn't Satan himself, but led by Satan. I was too wrapped up in my point that I typed that faster than I thought about it :)
lol - I have done the same thing; thanks for replying :)
Prophet,
"And that the temple will not be rebuilt, because it is an old covenant creation that was done away with, with the crucifixion of Christ."
Well said!
Deu 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one"
This phrase known as the "Shema" is the centerpiece of all morning and evening Jewish prayers. It is considered the most important prayer in Judaism, and its twice-daily recitation is a mitzvah (religious commandment). Jews believe that this confession is central to their monotheistic worship.
In Hebrew this is read:
"Shema Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Echad. "
The literal word meanings are roughly as follows:
Shema (A three part word) — listen, or hear and "act on"
Yisrael — Israel, in the sense of the people or congregation of Israel
Adonai — often translated as "Lord", it is used in place of the Tetragrammaton
Eloheinu — our God, the word "El" or "Elohei" signifying God (see also: Elohim), and the plural possessive determiner suffix "nu" or "einu" signifying "our"
Echad — the Hebrew word for "1" (the number)
"Echad" is the word used of a COMPOUND or collective unity.
whereas if a single oneness is being spoken of, the word "Yachad" would be used.
This same word can be seen in Gen. 2:24, "..the man and the woman shall become one (echad) flesh." there is no implication of only "oneness in purpose", there is an actual spiritual truth here. God sees the them as ONE.
Deu 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one"
Now tell me, understanding that when mankind refers to any single entity, it is assumed that that entity is a single entity, why would it be important to say in effect "Our God is one"? Wouldn't that be naturally assumed? So why the need to make the statement? Did the writer in Deuteronomy simply err and use the wrong word for "oneness"? No. He used the word that he was inspired to use: "Achad" - a compound unity.
Now if God is saying here of Himself that He is a compound unity, what do you suppose that he means by that? Shouldn't we consider it telling that this phrase was deemed important enough to be made the cornerstone of His chosen people's prayers?
Father, Son and Holy Sprit is one God.
Fifth Generation Mormon Comes TO Christ.
http://evidenceministries.org/mormons.php?viewarticle=45
John Chapter 1 is speaking of the Father and the Son and says they were together. I guess I'm just not seeing how you can misinterpret that one scripture and forget about all the others I brought up where they are clearly mentioned as seperate.
You aren't listening. I never agreed that Jesus and God are the same entity. They are one in purpose, but different identities. Yes Jesus existed before the world was created. I'm not sure what you missed there in my explanation.
The war in heaven was before the world was created. By Lucifer's opposition to the Father, he became evil and was thrust out of heaven. Satan does not reside in heaven now, nor do his dominions. I never said that Satan could not speak to Jesus, I said Satan can't be in the presence of the Father, because he is full of sin and sin cannot reside with the Father.
Online4Him,
Sorry, I guess I mispoke. The man of perdition isn't Satan himself, but led by Satan. I was too wrapped up in my point that I typed that faster than I thought about it :)
But you never did acknowledge that in John Chapter one, it clearly states that Jesus and God are the same person. You also have not addressed that Satan actually did come to God in the book of Job.
Job1:6-7 says "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
7And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it."
That is pretty self-explanatory. No argument there.
And then in Revelations (which is a book of things to come), it says in chapter 12: "And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Note the phrase "neither was their place found any more in heaven." Meaning that thy had, before that time, a place in heaven.
bigondrums,
Well, I'm glad that we finally agree that Jesus and God are one and the same. And that the temple will not be rebuilt, because it is an old covenant creation that was done away with, with the crucifixion of Christ.
bigondrums,
"The man of perdition is Satan from what I understand. The temple was destroyed, so if you don't think this happened already, shouldn't you be building a temple so this can happen and Jesus can return?"
Your interpretation of 2Thessalonians chapter 2 needs additional biblical support to substantiate your claims - Satan being the “man of perdition” and the “temple”. Care to elaborate? Satan is NOT the man of perdition as you claim and the temple spoken of in this chapter is the church; not a rebuilt Jewish Temple.
Wow, in almost everything you said I saw my point made. Yes, the Word is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ did exist before the earth was formed. We believe Jesus Christ created the earth under the instruction of the Father. He is our advocate with the Father. He is our median with the Father, which is why we pray to the Father in the name of Jesus Christ. He said "our" image because Christ was there with Him. The only difference is that Jesus had not come to earth and received a body yet. He existed as spirit until being born of Mary. He then taught us of the Father.
Satan and his angels were cast out of heaven. We are told that in Revelations. Once Lucifer had rebuked the Father, he became evil. God cannot have evil near Him, which is precisely why the atonement is soooooooo important. If God were able to have evil in His presence, the sacrifice of our Savior would not have been necessary. Once Adam and Eve transgressed and evil was introduced to man, the atonement was necessary so we may all return to live with the Father. I'm not sure how you came to understand that there is evil in heaven, but that is a lie, born of Satan himself. There is no evil in heaven. Jesus will return to defeat Satan on earth. Satan does not dwell in heaven. Neither do his followers.
Another good example is found in Genesis 1.
Verse 26 God said "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
Notice how He says let US make man in OUR image. Who is He talking to? The other two parts of the trinity.
But then notice in the next verse: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."
God created man in HIS image, in the image of God HE created him....etc etc.
The mystery of the trinity is truly an elusive mystery. How can God be one person, and yet three?
bigondrums,
John 1.
Verses 1-3 say "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made."
And then verses14-18 explain who the Word is: "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' " From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only,who is at the Father's side, has made him known."
So, by this scripture, two parts of the trinity is explained. Jesus is God, and the Son of God. It is a mystery that has no explanation. The trinity is a difficult thing to grasp, almost as difficult as a God who has no beginning, and no end. But, then, I percieve that you are LDS which means that your god did have a beginning.
But the God almighty, y'wh, yhova, has no beginning and no end.
bigondrums,
Do you not know that even satan has access to heaven and God? Is it not him who went before God to petition him for Job's life? Don't you realize that in the end times, the final battle between the angels of God and the demons will result in them finally being eternally cast from heaven?
God showed that the use for the physical temple was done with when He tore the veil in two. The temple was only in use until the New Covenant was made. It was the only access that man had to the spirit of God. That is where blood was shed for the sins of His people. When Jesus died, He became the final and ultimate sacrifice for the sins of ALL mankind. To say that the temple will be restored, and all the ordinances (which would include animal sacrifices) would nullify the work of the cross. But the temple will be rebuilt....by the antichrist. Are you sure you want to be associated with him? The physical temple has been done away with. Why do we need it? God dwells in us now. We are the temple. No more need to atone for our sins. No more worthless, dead rituals.
During this crusade against woman […] nothing was left undone to compel them to accept the revelation on polygamy. Husbands were commanded to resort to all manner of severity if their wives would not consent to their taking more women, and those who objected to being taken were subjected to every conceivable persecution. Their reputations were blasted, and their souls threatened with eternal condemnation.
If a woman declined to be divorced from her husband to become the concubine of the prophet, if he happened to fancy her, she was branded as an infamous character, and the Saints were warned not to associate with her thereafter. (The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
There are no evil spirits in heaven to be bound. That makes no sense.
If God and Jesus were the same person, then why are there scriptures that mention them both, seperately? How did prophets see Jesus on the right hand of the Father? Why did Jesus go off alone to pray to the Father if it was really Him just talking to Himself? Why did the Father make it a point to let those present at Christ's baptism that He was pleased with His Son? Why wouldn't He just say "I'm pleased with myself"? Why would Jesus ask the Father why He had forsaken Him on the cross?
God and Jesus are one just as Christ said He and His apostles are one: in purpose.
Jesus referred to our bodies as temples to let us understand how sacred these bodies are. We should take care of them and not put harmful substances in them or mark them up with tatoos or a lot of piercings. We get these bodies back in the resurrection. He never said that there is no more use for THE temple. If that were so, He would have done more than just overthrow the moneychangers, He would have just destroyed the temple. He was upset that they had desecrated His temple. He never said there was no more need of it.
John 1 states clearly that God and Jesus are one and the same.
As far as the temple is concerned, yes Jesus was concerned with the temple. That's why He refered to His own body as the temple. And that's why our bodies are refered to as the temple in First Corinthians 3, First Corinthians 6, Second Corinthians 6, Ephesians 2.
The old convenant (including the physical temple) was done away with at His crucifixion. Thus the reason why the holy veil was torn in two by God's own hands. We are now His temple.
God and Jesus are the same person.
"Until death do you part...." What does that have to do with binding in heaven?
A: There is no scripture to support that phrase (though it is God's will that we remain married until death)
B: Since there is no marriage in heaven, that just makes sense.
C: I still don't know where the connection is between binding on earth and in heaven. I percieve that you view the word "bound" as a contractual bond (such as marriage), where I view it as a binding (a restriction, or a tying up) of spiritual forces. i.e. Binding the evil spirits to deny them permission to work in our lives.
And one more statement about the scripture you quoted: if God and Jesus Christ are not 2 separate entities, then why would God and the Lamb be mentioned separately.
If you already have that power, then why do protestant preachers marry until death do you part? This is because they knew they did not have the power to bind in heaven.
As for temples, maybe you don't see the importance of them, but obviously those in biblical times (including the Savior) did.
bigondrums,
We already have the power. What we bind on earth is bound in heaven already.
The temple and it's ordinances will not be recreated. Revelations 21:22. It's talking about the New Jerusalem and it says "And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it." I know that Revelations talks a lot about the temple, but I believe in the end, it will be done away with. There will be no need for it.
Apostles and prophets will be done away with. Ephesians 4:11-13 says:
"And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:"
Notice that in verse 13 it says "Till we come in the unity..." The five-fold ministry is a temporal arrangement. In the new heaven and new earth there will be no need for those ministries.
After conversing with you, I can see why some leaders of the church have said that we do not believe in the same Jesus Christ.
As a convert in to the church from the Wesleyan Church (a protestant denomination), I think some would think I worshipped a different Christ than you then as well. It seems you believe that our Lord is finite and incapable of leading His sheep in the present day. You believe in some of the scriptures, but not all. It seems this stems from misinterpretations of them. You take certain scriptures to back up your beliefs, while ignoring others. I know that I worship the same Jesus Christ as I always had since I was a child, I just know much more about Him now.
I believe that Jesus Christ is preparing to return to the earth, to reign over it in person, and destroy satan and his cause. I believe in the restitution of all things, including the priesthood, the power to bind in heaven as well as earth, temples and temple ordinances, and the organizational structrure of prophets and apostles.
There are sins that the Lord will not forgive. Matt. 12: 31-32 says:
31 ¶ Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall cnot be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
Does that mean the Lord contradicted Himself?
As for the Blood Atonement you bring up, I think everyone that has looked at this at all realizes that this came from the Old Testament way of dealing with certain sins. If you remember, people were stoned to death for adultery, etc.
One example is Genesis 9:6 ("Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."). Leaders spoke of this type of treatment, but never suggested that it be carried out. A lot of these sermons that were given by early church leaders are taken out of context to make things seem vile. If you would like to know a little bit about it feel free to go here.
http://www.fairlds.org/Misc/Did_Brigham_Young_Say_He_Would_Kill_an_Adulterous_Wife_with_a_Javelin.html
The LDS church never said the gospel was taken from His children. The keys to act in the name of God were taken (which is the priesthood). We believe that the fulness of the Gospel was restored when the priesthood was restored to the earth. Without the priesthood (which is the power to act in the name of God) who has the authority to baptize or perform other ordinances? Does going to college give people the authority to perform ordinances in His name? When someone says they feel called of God to become a preacher, who gives him the authority to perform these ordinances and "save" people?
Do I believe that He left or had forsaken man? No. But He did prophesy that the heavens would roll up like a scroll and there would be a famine in the land of the words of God. This means that there would be a period of time that God would not directly speak with man. Did He contradict Himself? No. His influence was still upon us with the presence of the Holy Ghost.
God is a God of much order. You can see this in His creations. There is great detail in the most microscopic molecules. Do you honestly think that He would allow His gospel to be blown about by every wind of doctrine? That His church could be so divided on doctrines that He established?
Our church does not believe that the comforter was taken from the earth. I never claimed that. As for revelation being taken, didn't you just say that God could no longer speak to man? You said that God can't add to His revelations. I think you are dead wrong on that. God has the power to speak with us directly, and I believe that He has done so in these last days in preparation for the second coming.
I've never said that God lies. You misinterpret me, just as you have the scriptures.
The man of perdition is satan from what I understand. The temple was destroyed, so if you don't think this happened already, shouldn't you be building a temple so this can happen and Jesus can return?
Q,
I have no problem with you quoting scripture, I just said that I didn't want to clutter this post with things that you can go offsite to read. As for painting you as an uncaring bigot, you hold the brush on that one. If the way you treat mormons on here is caring, I would hate to see how you handle children.
You are correct, God doesn't contradict Himself. There are prophecies that speak of the gospel being spread to the four corners of the earth. Never was there detail on how it would happen. However, who are the other sheep that Jesus left the apostles for? Other planets?
Where does it say that God would never again speak with man?
Thank you to Wilderness for bringing to the discussion such interesting documents such as the history written in 1888 by J.H. Kennedy.
Contrary to BoD's accusation that you are "digging up fiction" - I found this enlightening document to be available in it's entirety to the public at:
http://www.archive.org/details/earlydaysofmormo00kennrich
I would recommend the black and white PDF download.
I also found an impressive collection of historical documents to be held in the Western Illinois University special collections. http://www.wiu.edu/library/units/archives/archives_web.sphp?id=210
It's just a matter of a little more browsing to find online versions of these documents if one feels the need.
Upon browsing the content of said book, what can one say? Biblical prophets have all been "men of God" both in word and deed, but this poor wretch, Joseph Smith, was everything, but.
One can only shudder in horror and guess at this man's fate, recalling Heb 10:27, 29, 30
" But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.... Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
For we know him that hath said, Vengeance [belongeth] unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord..."
Amen, cat.
Christ died for my sins on Calvary. To that truth I cling. Christ did not redeem me through blood he sweated in Gethsemane. Christ's blood shed on the cross covers ALL of my sin.
"...the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God" (1 Corinthians 1:18).
1Cr 2:2 "For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified."
1Jo 1:7b "... the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from ALL sin."
I found this to be of interest on yet another site referenced in this forum:
"One of the pillars of the Christian faith is there is no sin that Christ's blood cannot cleanse.
1John 1:7 states, "...the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth from all sin."
If the Mormons are in fact serving the same Christ as we, why is this not true of his blood?
In the LDS tract entitled, What the Mormons Think of Christ (1973, pg. 22), it reads, "Christians speak often of the blood of Christ and its cleansing power. Much that is believed and taught on this subject, however, is such utter nonsense and so palpably false that to believe it is to lose one's salvation.
Many go so far, for instance, as to pretend, at least, to believe that if we confess Christ with our lips and avow that we accept Him as our personal Savior, we are thereby saved. His blood, without other act than mere belief, they say, makes us clean."
On page 92 of McConkie's Mormon Doctrine, he wrote, "But under certain circumstances there are serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men must then have their own blood shed to atone for their sins."
"In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints 'do not believe in the traditional Christ.' 'No, I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak'" (LDS Church News, week ending June 20, 1998, p.7).
"It is true that many of the Christian churches worship a different Jesus Christ than is worshipped by the Mormons or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" (LDS Seventy Bernard P. Brockbank, The Ensign, May 1977, p.26 ).
"... mormon leaders know full well that the LDS Jesus is not the Jesus who Bible-believing Christians trust in for their salvation. Why else would McConkie also accuse Christians of abasing "themselves before the mythical throne of a mythical Christ" if he really thought we served the same Jesus? (Mormon Doctrine, pg.269).
In light of the above, we must ask which Jesus has the power to save? The spirit-brother of Lucifer who had to work out his own salvation? Or the unique Jesus of the Bible who was always and is eternally God, the one who can rightfully declare, "I am the way, the truth and the life"? Unfortunately, it is possible to believe in the wrong Jesus. Paul made this clear to the Christian church in Corinth. (2 Cor 11:4).
The question is, which one are you trusting in? "
BoD:
Another question regarding the website that you've sent me to:
Your author says:
"The Apostles were killed and ...the keys to direct and receive revelation for the Church—was taken from the earth... the gospel as established by Jesus Christ was lost, resulting in a period called the Great Apostasy. After centuries of spiritual darkness, a restoration of truth was needed. Under the Direction of our Heavenly Father, the gospel of Jesus Christ was restored on the earth through the Prophet Joseph Smith. God has promised it will never be taken from His children again. "
FALSE - The gospel was never "taken" from His children even a first time.
God promised in Heb 13:5b "...He (God) hath said, I will never leave thee nor forsake thee."
In John 14:26-27 Jesus said: "But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid."
And in John 14:16-17 Jesus said "And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you FOREVER,
the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you."
Jhn 14:18 "I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you."
My God said that "my peace I give to you" and my God gave us the Holy Spirit FOREVER.
You claim that your God took his peace, the revelation, the gospel and the Spirit away from the world after the Apostles died - and that he has redelivered them to the world with a NEW promise not to take them again.
If your God lied about his promise to leave the Holy Spirit with us Forever, what makes you think he will not do so again?
The one true omnipotent and eternal, holy God does not and cannot lie.
Jhn 8:44 Jesus says: "...the devil... was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it."
BoD,
You've referenced a mormon site that claims the Great Apostasy occurred shortly after the death of the Apostles.
As proof text the author quotes 2 Thes 2:1-3.
Let's take a look at that scripture in context, which would include the remainder of the thought expressed in verse 4.
2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and [by] our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2Th 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
This scripture plainly says that the "falling away" will come, as will the revealing of "the son of perdition...sit(ting) in the temple of God".
Tell me friend, in order to legitimately interpret this scripture in the way the author of your quoted website has: Who is this man of perdition? and when was he revealed? and when did he sit in the temple of God? Certainly since the temple was destroyed in 70AD, this man would have had to perform his abomination of desolation prior to 70AD, so who was he?
An Open Letter to BoD:
You fault me for deferring to and quoting scripture - yet the Word instructs us that we should derive our teachings from scripture as opposed to man-made traditions. I do not stand upon my own authority or knowledge, but "every word that proceeds from the mouth of God".
Is it arrogant to uphold the Word of God as truth? Vilify me for it if you will, but I stand firm on this point and will not apologize for it.
for:
2Ti 3:16 "All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"
Mar 7:9 "And (Jesus, rebuking the Pharisees) he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition."
You accuse me of considering mormons "hardly worth my time", yet I have given freely of time for nearly two weeks now to discuss these matters at length with you.
It may be easier for you to dismiss me and what I say if you can paint me as an uncaring bigot, but I think we both know the truth of the matter.
And finally - you continue making only vague references to "other" scripture and "additional prophets" and asking in so many words "isn't it possible that God added to his revelation"?
No.
Scripture is clear. God does not contradict himself. Although this topic too, I've addressed at length with you, at the most basic level, the Word of God contains prophecy; prophecy that foretells the coming of Christ AND prophecy that foretells the Second coming of Christ.
Nowhere does scripture tell us that there will be "the coming of Christ version 1.5".
Jesus does not tell his disciples "go into all the earth and preach the gospel, EXCEPT over the sea to North America, because I'm gonna handle that personally".
I do care about mormons, deeply, as I do for anyone who is walking in deception whether it is the man-made deceptions of false gospels or the self-made deception of walking in dead religion.
My heart aches for those who sit in pews each Sunday thinking that they're saved Christians simply because they darken the door of a church each Sunday, even though they've never truly made Christ the Lord of their lives - in the same way that my heart aches for those who may have been reared in a false religion and have had nothing of the truth all their lives, believing themselves enlightened, they yet grope in the darkness.
Dismiss me if you will but I will continue walking in accordance with:
Tts 1:9 "Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers."
Tts 2:15 "These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee."
Maranatha!
The Jesus Christ of Mormonism
http://www.mrm.org/topics/jesus-christ
Chill out wilderness. I'm sorry but I'm not buying it. I've read tons of books on the topic, from both sides, and what you're digging up just sounds like fiction.
UTAH, September, 1906.
MY DEAR BOY;
The cry of persecution has for many years been the stock argument and the chief cause for a favorable consideration of the Mormon propaganda. This cry protected them for many years in Ohio, Missouri and Illinois, where it is a significant fact that, in every State where they have settled, the Gentiles of the community have been forced to band themselves together for protection from the assaults of the Mormons.
(The Letters of an Apostate Mormon to his Son by Hans P. Freece, 1908)
The chief object had in mind by the Smiths in the early days of the Gold-Bible delusion was the making of money, to which was doubtless added a desire for local notoriety. The foundation of a new sect was an after-thought. (Early Days of Mormonism, Palmyra, Kirtland, and Nauvoo, by J. H. Kennedy, Editor of The Magazine Of Western History, 1888)
And yet all this persecution was conducted in the most secret manner possible. In public, the Saints denied that they either advocated or practiced polygamy, though it was the one important and all absorbing theme of their counsels in private. Those who would not sanction or follow the revelation were denounced as traitors to their faith, whose portion should be the lake of fire and brimstone forever.
One old lady who had passed through that terrible ordeal, said: “A person can scarcely form the slightest conception of what we suffered during that dreadful time; poverty, sickness, distress, or death would have been nothing compared to what we endured. Indeed, death would have been gladly welcomed by many of us; but, alas, we cried in vain; he would not come!
“Our husbands were enjoined to treat us with the utmost severity if we objected to their ‘living their religion;’ not alone to withdraw all marks of esteem and affection, but also to deprive us of the necessaries as well as the comforts and luxuries of life. ‘Starve them and beat them, if necessary, to bring them to submission, was the counsel; better crucify the body than let the soul go to perdition.’
“If, by chance, the men were rebellious, they were dispatched on missions, and their wives commanded to receive the attentions of other men during their absence. I dare not repeat the counsel given on this point, it is so grossly indelicate and immoral. If a wife fell a victim to the snare, and her husband found more children in his home when he returned than when he left, it was all ‘religion.’ If she remained true and loyal, her reputation was ruined among the Saints.”
(The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
http://www.mormon.org/mormonorg/eng/basic-beliefs/the-restoration-of-truth/the-great-apostasy
Of course you can click all around for other topics. That one was just the subject at hand at the time.
I wish I could stay longer and chat with you good people, but it is time to go. If any one would like to continue with intelligent emails, I will gladly and appropiately respond. God Speed to all.
vince4jesus@gmail.com
HEY bigondrums send me the sight you refered to Que also, I can't find it from past days either.
How many men of means were approached before the victim was finally secured has not been placed on record by any confession of those concerned. In one case the rebuff was of a character that would have cooled the ardor of a less vehement man than Smith.
Calling upon a Mr. Crane, a prominent Quaker, Joseph asked him for the needed assistance, and declared that he was "moved by the Spirit" to make the call. The response was prompt, and to the point. Smith was advised to cease his money-digging and golden-Bible schemes, and to make a living in some honest way, lest the doors of a prison should open to receive him. (Early Days of Mormonism, Palmyra, Kirtland, and Nauvoo, by J. H. Kennedy, Editor of The Magazine Of Western History, 1888)
But to return to the early history of polygamy. Any unfortunate or rebellious star who declined the honor of being one of these satellites, and attached to the illustrious train of one of Israel’s chosen kings,--all good Mormons are going to be kings in the next world, and the Gentiles their subjects,--was destined to roam forever through realms of darkness, or as the prophet tersely and less poetically expressed it, “If the women would not submit to polygamy, they should be eternally damned.” These are Brigham Young’s own words, often repeated in council and sometimes in the public Tabernacle.
Old Mormons do not hesitate to say that the word “damned” may be interpreted as a synonym for murdered, and that the threat has frequently been carried into execution. There are also many instances on record where the destined victim has anticipated her doom, and precipitated it by her own hand, preferring death to shame and dishonor. Verily it is not exaggeration to declare that the annals of this horrible system can never be truly transcribed until they are written in letters of blood.
(The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
At first glance all of Que's interpretations are man based. Que talks about torture to grammar, grammar, is man deciding what word should go where, and when one should pause, in writing and speaking. I found it interesting that he used a Greek word and translation to try to prove his point, but it seems to me that man established (to the best of his ability) that some Greek word would mean such and such in English. If one is going to claim such a strong belief in the “WORD of GOD” shouldn’t his/her premise for interpreting or understanding also be God’s word?
LDS believe all that God has revealed, (in other words=iow-God spoke to prophets/apostles and revealed the truth) LDS also believe all that He does not reveal (iow- God reveals His truth and gospel today, to prophets and by the Holy Ghost (john 14:26) and LDS believe that He (God) will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. (iow- God will continue to reveal His truth and gospel in order to build up His kingdom on earth)
I must agree with you bigondrums. The arrogance and pride is just amazing, it feels like one is talking to a pharisee, I would like Quecat to answer his own question.
"Begging your pardon, but Where did that come from?"
Que: I have read over you post about John 14:26 and Acts 3:21 (actaully 19-21). I would like to know where these interpretations come from? Nothing you said was "plainly" put. Not to mention you seem to indicate that Christ in talking about the Holy Spirit was only refering to the disciples, didn't Jesus send the Holy Spirit to teach all, and bring a rememberance to all, what so ever He has said?
You(any one) explain to me, please, If you have your interpretation of the Bible and LDS have their interpretation and understanding, then how might one know which is from man and which is from God. Or what if both have mis-intrepreted?
Well I guess I could do what you do and copy and paste all the material that I want you to see and consider just as you do from scriptures, but I just didn't want to clutter up the posts. From your last post I think I've confirmed your arrogance.
You say you want to have a discussion, but you don't show signs of the capability of considering a different opinion. You state your opinion as if it were fact and refuse to even crack the door on the idea that you just might not be the smartest person on the planet. You say that your patience for bad doctrine is short. This reiterates my point that your strong opinion on what is good or bad doctrine proves that you limit the communication abilities of our All Powerful God to one book. I guess in that case you seem to say that God doesn't have the ability to speak to us with new scriptures, or the ability to call a prophet in this day.
Well, my patience with arrogance is very short. I hope we can continue to try to communicate with each other, but we cannot if you continue to do so while looking down your nose.
It appears you have formed your opinion that mormons hardly worth your time. If you truly cared about converting a mormon to your beliefs, you'd do so as if you cared about the person you were converting. Not once have you dropped your arrogant attitude, nor have you remembered that you are a sinner as well.
Like I said we can continue to converse, but I'd rather do it on the ground, as I don't have a high-horse.
It was a very common affair for a little girl of thirteen or fourteen years to be forced
into polygamy with some wretch old enough to be her grandfather! After long years of such tyranny and inhuman treatment, is it any wonder that our women became reduced to the lowest depths of degradation?
(The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
I find it interesting that you haven't responded to any of the questions or comments that I've put to you. Instead you keep going on about some website. I'd rather have a discussion with you, but if you insist, please repost this site you are referring to.
I've scanned back through 5 days of messages and have not yet found said link.
Mind you, I'm not interested in reading page after page of pro-mormon propaganda as my patience for bad doctrine is very short. I would be much more likely to hold a discussion with someone who can speak for themselves.
I ask again, did you even look at the link I posted a few days ago? Are you so prideful as to not even be able to fathom you may be wrong about something?
All I know is that the Word of God (the Bible) has always proven itself to me. If anyone wants to follow a teaching that states that it is incorrect, their life (and the "life" hereafter) will reflect that.
I'm sorry but it would seem you've misunderstood both why I quoted John 14:26 and what the verse itself is actually saying.
You've said: "As for your quote of John 14:26, that didn't prove your point at all. That scripture reiterates to us that by the power of the Holy Ghost, we can know the truth of all things........."
Begging your pardon, but where did that come from!?
In John 14:26 Jesus is quite plainly talking to his disciples and assuring them that the Holy Spirit would be sent to them and would bring to their remembrance everything that He (Jesus) has taught them. The implication, of course, being so that they (the disciples) would faithfully transmit Jesus' sayings and teachings on to others.
As to your comments regarding "falling away" and "restitution of all things" - we've been down this path before. The falling away quite plainly refers not to an adulteration of the scriptures, but rather the apostasy of portions fo the church in the end times. To derive any other meaning from this verse is to torture both the grammar and context of the words to arrive at a twisted version.
Once again - "restitution of all things" in mentioned in Acts 3:21 "For he must remain in heaven until the time for the final restoration of all things"
The grammar used here does in no way indicate that "all things will or must be restored"
BEFORE the Messiah can return, or in order for the Messiah to return. Rather, exactly what it says, He will remain in heaven UNTIL it is time for the restoration.
Moreover the Greek word here for "restitution" is "apokatastasis" meaning restoration of a true theocracy, of the perfect state of even physical things before the fall.
Obviously the "restituton of all things" does NOT refer to God and Jesus re-delivering the gospel to a world that had inadvertently lost or mangled portions of the original revelation.
Just as I thought, it looks like we have different opinions on what we both have been referring to as "Word". I believe that the words Christ spoke will never be null. I believe that His teachings will always be in effect for us to follow. I do not believe that every thing that He taught was recorded in what we call the Bible. Nor do I believe the Bible that we currently use is flawless. This doesn't mean that Christ's words passed away, this means through man's errors, the records that we have of His words are sometimes inexact. Does this mean God is less than omnipotent? Boy you really threw words into my mouth there. NO! It does not.
Christ prophesied that it would happen. He didn't tell us exactly how it would happen, but He told us there must be a falling away first, and He told us of a time of the restitution of all things.
As for your quote of John 14:26, that didn't prove your point at all. That scripture reiterates to us that by the power of the Holy Ghost, we can know the truth of all things. That doesn't mention that you can hear the truth, and then defy it or reject it. But we know that you certainly can, and all of us do in some way because we are all sinners. But does that make the truth untrue? NO! It makes the man less than perfect. The truth remains.
I doubt the omnipotence and omniscience of God in no way. God's purposes, as you call it, will ring true no matter what we do. What I have been talking about is the fulfillment of prophesy. A different Christ I do not worship. Did you even look at the link I posted for you a couple of days ago?
The maidens were as adverse to becoming plural wives, as were the first wives to have their rights invaded and their homes desecrated; but where flattery failed to cajole or threats to intimidate, special revelations were obtained to suit special cases.
The history of Joseph Smith’s revelations would prove interesting reading, and would make a volume of no mean dimensions, as he claimed to have received thirty-seven distinct communications from Heaven in the year 1831 alone.
It was a great habit with him, after he had committed some particular breach of decorum, to obtain a revelation assuring him that “the Lord forgave his servant Joseph” his special sins. (The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
2 Timothy 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived
BoD says: "The same could be argued for the New Testament. Some were written years after the event occured. Men, though inspired, still fall short of perfection so it could easily be argued that not everything that was said or done by Jesus was properly recorded."
I reject that unequivocally!
Jesus said in: Mat 24:35
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away"
("pass away" - Greek- parerchomai = continue for a time (as in temporary existance), perish, metaphor for to be neglected, suffer omission, be averted)
By your words you show that you believe that the omnipotent God is incapable of preserving his revelation to mankind untarnished. You claim that "some" of Christ's words have been lost or altered.
You also claim that men, even though inspired, probably didn't record everything that they were supposed to. This is in direct opposition to Jhn 14:26
Jesus said: "But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and BRING ALL THINGS TO YOUR REMEMBRANCE, WHATSOEVER I HAVE SAID TO YOU."
Your problem would seem to be much greater than was originally apparent.
You doubt the veracity of scripture. You doubt the veracity of scripture
because you doubt the omnipotence and omniscience of God.
You seem to believe that the actions of man can somehow frustrate God's purposes; that the God who sits outside of time, and sees all of history from beginning to end and is infinitely more holy, and mighty than the mortal mind can even begin to fathom, who purposed to redeem mankind through the death of the Son....cannot preserve His Word through the ages untainted by finite mens hands!!???
The God of the Bible is the "Almighty God" the Great God, Mighty God, mighty in work.
Rev 19:6 "...the Lord God omnipotent reigneth."
Evidently the Jesus and God of LDS meant well, but just couldn't deliver on the promise of preserving his whole counsel throughout the ages. But, he did have a "plan B" and came back to try it again.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Christ who is prophesied of and revealed in the Bible is the one and only true Christ and the only Christ who is the Way, the Truth and the Life and the ONLY way to get to heaven. Any other "christ" is false and useless; actually worse than useless - leads to damnation.
Don't be fooled by counterfeits.
I'm assuming you are accusing me of adding to the Bible when you say God's Word. I have not added anything to it. I simply remember the scriptures where the author admits he was told he was not permitted to write what was revealed to him. And I also remember the times when the mysteries of the kingdom are mentioned.
As for Eve exaggerating, I've never heard someone get caught up on that one. I would think that at this point, who knows if the part about touching the fruit was originally said or not? Moses was the author of this book and look how many years had passed between the occurance and the pen's record. The same could be argued for the New Testament. Some were written years after the event occured. Men, though inspired, still fall short of perfection so it could easily be argued that not everything that was said or done by Jesus was properly recorded. I am not making this argument, just bringing to your attention that you don't actually know, either way. You weren't there, nor do you know someone who was there. My argument has been since the events were penned. I believe there are others that are guilty of changing these precious scriptures that we all hold sacred (whether on purpose or not). During the times of the recording of the New Testament, there was no canon of the New Testament. Men made the decision later what would be included and what wouldn't. And they also met to discuss the doctrines that were difficult to understand to try to come to conclusions as to what exactly was meant.
There are many early historians that wrote about these occurances, and there were many others who expressed their disagreements with the events, and even accused them of drawing their conclusions and then altering some scriptures to make them make sense with their conclusions.
We also know that separation of church and state used to be an issue. To gain power, some rulers would take it upon themselves to try to control the church and alter teachings for self benefit.
I bring these things to your attention to try to make you think. . . Is the gospel supposed to be so convoluted that many different interpretations can be born from the same teachings? I think not. I think that Satan has helped to make this happen. I don't believe that there are supposed to be thousands of different churches that proclaim to follow Christ but do it in entirely different ways. I believe there is supposed to be one church, that we are all members of, that follow all of Christ's teachings, and do so in total accord. I refuse to believe any different. I would hope you feel the same way.
I am sure you have attended other churches that did not teach the exact doctrine that you believe is truth. How did you feel about that? What do you think of their interpretation of the same scriptures that you got something different from?
Summa,
A professional historian is someone (Master's or PhD level) who gets PAID to research, write, publish and/or teach history. In other words (and in my case) often a college professor of History.
If you have a degree in history(you never said you graduated in it, the area of study, or what level), the use it and go back to the primary sources of your church's history. You'll be surprised.
Self flagged previous post. Guess I'm cranky today too.
Quecat, Im sorry that was intended for medievalist?
Anyway, Im grumpy today, sorry if it seems like im taking it out here.... My bad.
This is a classic case of where "adding to God's Word" gets you into trouble.
The first time was when Eve responds to the serpent Gen 3:2 " We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT, lest ye die. "
God only said Gen 2:16-17 "... Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."
God didn't say anything about not touching it. Eve was exaggerating, as are you.
You commented "...apostles said there was no way that everything that Jesus did or taught could be written".
When what John actually writes in Jhn 21:25 is "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written."
WHAT HE DID - Not what he SAID.
However Jesus did say: Jhn 14:26 "But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and BRING ALL THINGS TO YOUR REMEMBRANCE, WHATSOEVER I HAVE SAID TO YOU."
So in answer to your statement: "Surely you cannot believe that all the words that God would have us know could be contained in a book as small as our Bible. ", based upon John 14:26, YES, I do believe that the Word of God is the complete revelation of God insomuch as He has deigned to reveal His holy workings and intentions to mankind.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but the apostles said there was no way that everything that Jesus did or taught could be written. And there were visions that were not allowed to be written for us to read. Also there were books that were left out of the canon. Decisions by men were made to include and exclude certain things from the canon. Surely you cannot believe that all the words that God would have us know could be contained in a book as small as our Bible. He has many things for us to learn, and He embellishes us to ask Him for more knowledge. He promises that as we are ready to receive them, He will unfold the mysteries of the kingdom to us.
I never said His words passed away. His words are still in effect and are commandments to us all. Man has corrupted the church that Jesus founded. Plain and simple. That is no fault of the Savior's. He know it would happen however. He prophesied that there would be a falling away from His church. This is what I speak of.
No Christ did not change His teachings. They remain the same. But man's interpretation of them has changed many times over and over again. If this were not so, why are there so many that claim to be Christian that follow only some of His teachings correctly? Just a quick example:
How was Christ baptized? It says He came straightway out of the water, which means He was immersed. Why then do some Christian Churches sprinkle the head with water and call it baptism? Did Christ not set the example for us? If so, then how is a sprinkling following that commandment? You see, the words remain the same. The commandment is still in effect. However, man has corrupted its meaning. It is now an opinion between denominations who is right. I don't think it should be left to opinion. I think it should be as Christ said it must be.
The Gospel of Jesus Christ is simple enough that He taught men and women just like us what we must do to be in accordance with it. However, it is complex enough that we will never, in this state of being, be able to comprehend everything fully. Everyone is in a different stage in their spiritual quest. Some are able to understand more than others. This is how these different opinions have creeped in. I don't think it was on purpose, but it obviously has happened. If it were not so, then there would be one church where everyone agreed on every doctrine. Jesus laid out His doctrines plain and simple, and man clouded them (with the help of Satan).
Furthermore:
Jesus does not say, "THESE my words shall not pass away," as if He were speaking only of a particular utterance. Instead, He says, "My words [understood inclusively] shall not pass away." Christ’s words in Matthew 24 on His coming at the fall of Jerusalem and at the end of the world, all of Christ’s words and all of Christ’s words in their context (i.e. the four gospels) shall not pass away. The NT is the words of Christ by His Spirit too. And would God promise to preserve the NT and not also preserve the OT? Thus Jesus here assures us of the preservation of the complete Word of God, OT and NT. Anything that has not been preserved, failed due to lack of inspiration. To believe otherwise is to make God out to be a liar and less than omnipotent.
Christ’s promise is absolutely trustworthy; no part of God’s Word has passed away.
And it is not just the ideas of Scripture that are preserved for us. Jesus said, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God" (Matt. 4:4). And how can we live by every word, if every word is not preserved? Every word of God is preserved according to Christ’s promise. Feed on these words for this is your life!
Re: your view that "handed down a LONG time ago" = misinterpretation, errors, etc.
Jesus said in: Mat 24:35
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away"
("pass away" - Greek- parerchomai = continue for a time (as in temporary existance), perish, metaphor for to be neglected, suffer omission, be averted)
Did Christ lie? or do you believe that an omnipotent God is incapable of preserving his revelation to mankind?
You seem to aver that God's true revelation to mankind was lost within a century or two of it's original delivery and that it was only restored when God had to come back and re-deliver it to Joseph Smith. Simply more evidence that your god is not my God.
Summa,
whoa whoa there - you've got yourself all in a tizzy. Who are you intending to address. I don't think it was me.
I don't know what all this talk of "professional historian" and "tanners" is, but I've mentioned nothing about either subject.
There are women living in Salt Lake City in this year of grace, 1882, who were secret
plural wives to Joseph Smith or Brigham Young, deceiving their own husbands, because they dared not brave the prophet’s anger and its consequences. For then, as to-day, the Mormon weapon against its antagonists was slander. The man or woman who has the moral courage to apostatize, becomes a target for the vilest kind of abuse and falsehood. (The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
Mt 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
With a limited understanding of the scriptures, and following the thoughts handed down by men from a long time ago, I can see why you see it that way. I used to as well. I no longer misinterpret the scriptures that way. I hope we can disagree on this without one of us degrading the other.
quecat:
I don't care if you are a "Professional Historian," buy the way, what the heck is that anyway? All that sounds like to me is someone so full of themselves and their knowledge that they sit around, study and then form conclusions according to their own egos and views on life.
I have an education too, yes, it was in history as well, do I go around saying "Im a professional historian." Wow, how arrogant.
Yes, I am right about the tanners, they are scum and have been proven as such. And if you knew anything about history you would also know that. The tanners are the ones who take items out of context and twist it to their liking.
If you want to know about LDS history, try watching "The Mormons," a very Biased PBS show. In that documentary, Marlin Jensen, church historian, is quoted many times. He does not dodge any question, neither did Dallin H. Oaks. All of these church leaders were neither secretive nor dishonest.
There are about 700 verses in the bible, that include verses in 26 of the 27 New Testament books, that speak either implicitly or explicitly to the cumulative doctrine of the Trinity.
A few of those follow:
All the elements of the doctrine are taught in Scripture.
1.One God
2.The Father is God.
3.The Son is God.
4.The Holy Spirit is God.
5.The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons (i.e., they are not each other, nor are they impersonal; they relate to one another personally).
There is ONE GOD - One God: Explicit Statements
OT: Deut. 4:35; 39; 32:39; 2 Sam. 22:32; Isa. 37:20: 43:10; 44:6-8; 45:5; 14; 21-22; 46:9
NT: John 5:44; Rom. 3:30; 16:27; 1 Cor. 8:4-6; Gal. 3:20; Eph. 4:6; 1 Tim. 1:17; 2:5; James 2:19; Jude 25
None like God (in his essence)
Explicit statements: Ex. 8:10; 9:14; 15:11; 2 Sam. 7:22; 1 Kgs. 8:23; 1 Chr. 17:20; Psa. 86:8; Isa. 40:18, 25: 44:7; 46:5, 9; Jer. 10:6-7; Micah 7:18
Being like God a Satanic lie: Gen. 3:5; Isa. 14:14; John 8:44
Fallen man become "like God" only in that he took upon himself to know good and evil, not that he acquired godhood: Gen. 3:22
Only one true God: 2 Chr. 15:3; Jer. 10:10; John 17:3; 1 Thess. 1:9; 1 John 5:20-21
The New Testament presents a consistent triad of Father, Son, Holy Spirit (God, Christ, Spirit): Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:34; also Luke 1:35; 3:21-22 par.; 4:1-12; John 4:10-25; 7:37-39; 14-16; 20:21-22; Acts 1:4-8; 2:33, 38-39; 5:3-4, 9, 30-32; 7:55-56; 10:36-38, 44-48; 11:15-18; 15:8-11; 20:38; 28:25-31; Rom. 1:1-4; 5:5-10; 8:2-4, 9-11, 14-17; 1 Cor. 6:11; 12:4-6, 11-12, 18; 2 Cor. 1:19-22; 3:6-8, 14-18; Gal. 3:8-14; 4:4-7; Eph. 1:3-17; 2:18, 21-22; 3:14-19; 4:4-6, 29-32; 5:18-20; Phil. 3:3; 1 Thess. 1:3-6; 2 Thess. 2:13-14; Tit. 3:4-6; Heb. 2:3-4; 9:14; 10:28-31; 1 Pet. 1:2; 1 John 3:21-24; 4:13-14; Jude 20-21; Rev. 2:18, 27-29.
The Bible does teach the Trinity.
I don't see any flaws in those verses. I only see flaws in your interpretation. As I read them it reiterated that they are separate beings. The most obvious one being His ascension to the Father. If He is one, then why say it that way? Why not say I go back to Heaven?
Christ is one with the Father in purpose. If we do everything in accordance with Christ's teachings, then we are also in compliance with the Father's teachings. I think this was proven to be what He meant by "my Father and I are one" when He said He and his apostles were one.
As far as your math goes, it reminded me of an old Abbott and Costelo skit.
Do you not understand the definition of "mystery"? ..something not fully understood or that baffles or eludes the understanding; an enigma:
Why is it that you expect a finite and degraded human mind to be able to fully comprehend a majestical, utterly holy and infinite God?
Which "persons" is Christ referring to in the following verses?
Jhn 15:23 He that hateth me hateth my Father also.
Jhn 15:24 If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father.
Jhn 15:25 But [this cometh to pass], that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.
Jhn 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:"
Christ is speaking, he says that He will send this Comforter (Greek Parakletos - helper -the Holy Spirit destined to take the place of Christ with the apostles (after his ascension to the Father), to lead them to a deeper knowledge of the gospel truth, and give them divine strength needed to enable them to undergo trials and persecutions on behalf of the divine kingdom) - from the Father.
I count three. 1+1+1=3 & 1X1X1=1
I suppose your man-made faith claims that this bible verse is also a "mistranslation". How convenient. You consider the bible sacred, but flawed and it is conveniently flawed only where it would come into conflict with Mormon teachings.
2Cr 10:3-5 For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does.
The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."
I'm not just talking about the "C"atholic church. I mean the world. I do hold the Bible to be sacred. But I don't believe it is inerrant. There were many things that were lost in translation, and there were things changed to make it make sense with traditional beliefs. That isn't strictly an LDS belief. I've always believed that and drew my conclusions from Bible scholars long before I joined the LDS church.
Your definition of the trinity does not make sense to me. How could Christ be at the right hand of the Father, if they are one and the same? How could prophets have seen Christ at the right hand of the Father if they weren't 2 different beings? Why would Jesus Christ pray to Himself alone? There would be no reason if there weren't people around Him. He wouldn't be teaching anyone how to pray, so why would He? Why would God tell witnesses on earth that Christ is His beloved Son? Why wouldn't He just say, "This is me, the Almighty God, worship me". Your logic makes no sense. Basically, what He would be saying, if the trinity were true, "This is a form of me, and I please myself". And how could Christ be at the right hand of the Father, if the Father didn't have a hand? Spirit has no shape or form, so the Father wouldn't have a hand. He also wouldn't have a face for Moses to see. Nor would he be able to make us in His image, since spirit doesn't have an image.
As far as your incorrect assessment on revelation beyond the Bible, you should read it again. You missed some parts.
We will simply state what is an indisputable fact, that Joseph Smith, while in Nauvoo had entered into criminal relations with a number of his female disciples, and the scandal became so notorious as to threaten his influence and compromise him as a leader and teacher of religion, when he pretended to have had a revelation from Heaven commanding the Saints to adopt what is termed, “The order of celestial or plural wives.” (The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
Ps 36:4 He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil.
Summa,
summa wrote: I have always found it interesting how the LDS denounce creeds (which were developed to combat heresy), yet have a creed of their own (the Articles of Faith).
Quecat:
If you think quoting the Nicaean creed is going to prove anything, then you are wrong. Why adhere to a creed that is just the arguments of corrupt people who lived 325 years after Christ? Their arguments hold no more weight than if one were to have another council today and come to the conclusion of who God is...
Summa,
Wrong again. Jerald Tanner was one of the best historians around. Most historians have easy access to their primary sources (particularly American historians), he did not. He had to fight for access or get it from private collections. His sources check out, I spent much research time validating his sources and checking for accuarcy of context (I am a professional historian). All of his sources were accurate and could be verified. Now , Hugh Nibley on the other hand, his sources were often taken out of context or were not there.
One of my American history professors (American History) in Grad school, who was LDS admitted to me that why he didn't agree with Tanner's conclusions, he could not fault him for being a good historian. Also, Tanner did something very few historians of any type do, if he changed his mind or found evidence to the contrary, he published it.
summa wrote:
The Tanner's works are full of inacruacies that have been proven wrong on multiple occasions. The LDS laugh at their attempt to "Disprove Mormonism." The Tanners are one of the most uncredilbe sources and they have been known as such for over twenty years.
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world - 1John 4:1.
But the followers of Joseph were not all so blinded by his influence, neither had they become so corrupt, nor so lost to all principles of truth and honor as to sanction his unblushing wickedness; so, in order to screen himself from the consequences of his iniquity, and at the same time retain his influence over his followers, he conceived the idea of obtaining the revelation on polygamy. (The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
As then, many today are being deceived by workers of iniquity. O Lord, “Draw me not away with the wicked, and with the workers of iniquity, which speak peace to their neighbours, but mischief is in their hearts” (Ps 28:3).
The Catholic church is filled with man made traditions that have no valid scripture backing them up.
Quecat:
If you think quoting the Nicaean creed is going to prove anything, then you are wrong. Why adhere to a creed that is just the arguments of corrupt people who lived 325 years after Christ? Their arguments hold no more weight than if one were to have another council today and come to the conclusion of who God is...
I've missed no point. You conclude that "the tree died" based on your opinion that the Catholic church (with a big "C") departed from the Word of God by adding man-made traditions.
What you are missing is that Sola Scriptura denies the man-made traditions of the Catholic faith and bases it's authority directly from the Word of God. That being the case, how can you deny the validity of the faith? Naturally, you next assault the reliability of scripture, even though your own tradition holds them sacred.
The Bible is the most reliable and accurate document handed down to us from antiquity.
What do you hold to? ANOTHER man-made tradition and a highly flawed one at that!
And this is the mystery, that The Son, Jesus Christ is one person of the three-person Godhead that includes God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. God is the great I AM, the eternally self-existant ONE. He has always existed and always will. He is the thrice-holy God and there is no time at which he has ever NOT been such. All things that were created were created through Christ the Son, as the Word. Christ came to earth, incarnate of Mary and the overshadowing of Holy Spirit, he lived a sinless life and died for the sins of the world. He rose again on the third day and is seated on the right hand of the Father as our advocate and coming King. Whoever believes on Him will not perish but have eternal life. The blood that He shed on the cross at Calvary is the propitiation for our sins so that we may stand before God justified.
THIS is the Christ of the true gospel. This is the Christ in which I place my faith. There is none other.
Satan is a liar and the accuser the brethren. He is nothing more than a fallen created being (he was a archangel). His first and still strongest deception is "Has God indeed said..?"
We can aspire to be Christ-Like and look forward to our sanctification, but at no point will we be co-gods, gods in our own right or gods of any kind. We WILL rule and reign with Him forevermore.
The faith once and for all delivered unto the saints has been faithfully perserved for us over time in the holy scriptures that are with us even today. There is no additional revelation either prophesied or forthcoming beyond the Bible.
1Ti 4:1 " Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.."
Jesus is the ONLY Son of God. He has no brother.
God is a spirit. Always has been, always will be.
There will be no marriage in heaven, not to mention procreating.
We will not be given our own little planets to rule over.
We cannot become gods.
Alright... is it true that the Mormons believe that Jesus was umm... born on another planet and transported here by ROCKETSHIP? It sounds like John Smith was watching Superman when he was thinking of a way to make money by donations.
Ok, and I don't see how that makes me mistaken. I just chose not to be as specific.
Way to miss my point though.
I believe that you are mistaking the meaning of "catholic" church.
Catholic, Catholic Church, Universal Church
The word catholic comes from a Greek word meaning universal, and in early Christian writings it is a synonym for Christian. The Church is catholic in the sense that there are no restrictions on who can join; it is open to everyone in every place. Before the split between Rome and Constantinople in AD 1054, all Christians referred to themselves as orthodox and catholic, but after the split, the west tended to call themselves ‘catholics’ and the east tended to call themselves ‘orthodox.’ In the west, especially after the Reformation, the term Catholic, when written with a capital letter, generaly refers to the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, many Anglican and Orthodox Christians still refer to themselves as catholics in the original sense, just as western Christians refer to themselves as orthodox.
The modern Catholic Church is the direct continuation of only ONE of the five ancient patriarchates of the ancient catholic Church. For that reason, the phrase ‘catholic Church’ in documents written before AD 1054 is often translated ‘universal church.’
The Nicene, Apostles, and Athanasian Creeds were all composed before the split, thus when they speak of the ‘catholic church,’ they are referring to all five patriarchates of the ancient church, not just the patriarchate of Rome and its modern continuation.
This is, again, where you bring your opinion into play. I believe that the catholic church, long ago (probably unintentionally by most) departed from the actual church that Jesus founded with His apostles. I guess you could call that heresy, since you seem to like that word. To me, somewhere along the way, they parted ways with the Word of God. So to me, it would appear the tree died. (Not the vine - or Jesus Christ, as you compared it to earlier). So to me, Protestantism branched off of a dead tree, and are heretic as well from the Word of God.
Do you see how it is opinion? You telling me your opinion doesn't change my mind. It just reminds me of what I believed several years ago.
"The doctrine of a plurality of Gods is as prominent in the Bible as any other doctrine” (Joseph Smith History of the church, vol.6 pp.308,474). Mormon Apostle LeGrand Richards commented as, follows in a letter written in 1966: “There Is a statement often repeated in the Church, and while it is not in one of the Standard Church Works, it IS accepted as Church doctrine, and this is: "As man is, God once was; as God man may become” (Letter from Apostle LeGrand Richards to Morris L. Reynolds, dated July 14, 1966)
self- explanatory :(
Is is offensive to refer to that which should be discarded, as refuse? No - it's a suitable, factual and appropriate description. It is intellectually dishonest to refer to the degraded as anything higher than degraded.
The word of God admonishes us time and again to test the sprits, beware of false teachers, and to reject any gospel other than that taught in the Bible, even though that "other" may be brought by an angel (or a treasure hunter with a "seeing stone")
I don't require manifold proofs to tell me what is heresy. I only need the Word of God.
Christians are called are to preach the gospel to the entire world. This mean atheists, pagans, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindu, and Scientologists, as much as it means those walking in a half-truths such as Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormonism.
The Great I AM is the eternally self-existant God!
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.
People often say that they now look back with the utmost amazement to those days, and marvel at the strange magnetic influence which this illiterate, wicked man possessed over men and women of intelligence and education. That he was of loose and immoral character is conceded by his warmest friends, as well as his bitterest enemies.
Even his successor, Brigham Young, said that Joseph was of mean birth, wild, intemperate, dishonest, and tricky; but for all that he was a prophet of the Lord. These inconsistencies may seem strange to outsiders, but they are understood by those who are acquainted with the inner workings of Mormonism. (The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
Let us take heed and “Enter not into the path of the wicked, and go not in the way of evil men. Avoid it, pass not by it, turn from it, and pass away” (Proverbs 4:14, 15).
Didn't we already talk about this? I've seen those "false prophecies" brought up countless times, and for every site that throws it around, there is another that proves that they weren't false prophecies.
It's the way you repeatedly throw posts like that around that prove you don't like to discuss religious topics, you just like to degrade.
There is a simple litmus test that can establish this matter once and for all:
Do LDS 'prophets' and Mr. Smith have a record of infallibility regarding their prophesies? NO!~
Deuteronomy 18:20-22 warns of false prophets and their fate
Regarding so-called modern day prophets, test them. Do they show a history of inerrancy? If not, beware!
I apologize for being so sparse. Time has not allowed me to participate fully in this dialogue. I had to catch up on 5 pages of catholics and protestants battling it out, and I must say it has been more than fascinating. I have enjoyed it thoroughly.
Konewone said this:
"Remember, Sandra Tanner is a great-great-granddaughter of Brigham Young, the second president of the Mormon Church and really knows what she is talking about when it comes to Mormonism."
Wow, that is so logically flawed....
Im related to FDR but does that make me know everything about being a President? The Tanner's works are full of inacruacies that have been proven wrong on multiple occasions. The LDS laugh at their attempt to "Disprove Mormonism." The Tanners are one of the most uncredilbe sources and they have been known as such for over twenty years. How they heck does being related to someone make them on expert? Totally stupid...
correction:
why not quote GOD’S WORD?
Taj,
No, it is you who does not get it my friend; you continue to neglect or ignore the explicit teachings of the Word of God so that you may keep the traditions of men. Tell us; where in God’s Word do we read about the assumption of Mary, purgatory, indulgences, immaculate conception, etc. Have you not read that we are not to add or subtract from God’s Word? Instead of quoting church fathers who have contradicted one another and why not quote GOD’S WORD?
"Clive Handford, the Nicosia-based Anglican bishop in Cyprus and the Gulf, says construction will start in the Qatari capital of Doha in early 2006 on the $7 million Church of the Epiphany, along with a conference center and meeting rooms.
Plans for the Anglican church and three other Christian houses of worship have not been well publicized in Muslim-dominated Qatar,
The Anglican archdeacon in Qatar, Ian Young, said the church was one of four planned in the energy-rich Gulf state.
Also in the works are church buildings serving Catholics, Egyptian Coptic Christians and a multi-denominational church serving Indian Christians, said Young, a 58-year-old Scot who has served as Doha's chief Anglican priest since 1991. "
Amen, the Church of God (without denomination) continues to grow. I hear monthly of protestant and catholic churches opening up all over the world. His Word goes forth mightly and it will not return void.
Tradition of God:
This truth is supported in the scripture and we can see in 2Thessalonians 3:6 ¶ Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition [paradosis i.e. law or ordinance] which he received of us. 7 For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you;
Now the "traditions" of the apostles was what?.. The same tradition they learned from both the scriptures and the Lord Jesus Christ! Are the ways of God outlined in the Old Testament? Are they not adhered to, and even expounded upon, by Jesus in the New Testament? Yes, of course they are.
The apostles taught these precepts both verbally and written, as any good preacher would do today, speaking of a scripture(s) (or a precept outlined in scripture) and then expounding upon it. The scripture is what gave credence to the speaker. The spoken words had to be in accord with the scripture or the person was not to be listened to. We see that Paul taught these precepts verbally and by written letters of faith (epistle). We also take note that both forms of transmission carried the same data!
2Thessalonians 2:13 ¶ But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions [paradosis i.e. law or ordinance]which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
There weren't scriptural rules and then also different rules transmitted orally.
These were the same precepts taught by either method to some individuals - and both to others.
One did not supercede or contradict the other.
One did not contain information that the other didn't.
Paul wrote that they should obey the 'paradosis' whether you heard it, or read it, or heard it read. God's word is true whether spoken or written
This article only highlights one thing: the Church continues to grow uninterrupted and unimpeded even in difficult times. Some institutions increase while others decrease, but the Church of 2,000 years continues to increasingly spread the good news of the Lord. PRAISE GOD! and Praise God for the newest Christian Church in Qatar.
The entire chapter of Second Timothy 3.
Corinthians 4:6, Paul says, "Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us you might learn not to go beyond the things which are written; that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other."
New Century Version : Brothers and sisters, I have used Apollos and myself as examples so you could learn through us the meaning of the saying, "Follow only what is written in the Scriptures." Then you will not be more proud of one person than another.
http://www.truthontheweb.org/sola.htm
Wilderness,
Amen. Those traditions are the very things that Jesus condemned in the Pharisees. I see now that many have come full circle.
wilderness,
When did the bible is the only way start? did the early Christians believe that?
prophet,
I didn't write this article or come up with these statistics, I'm only pointing to the truth of the growth of the Church. If you want to deny these facts or call them boastful it that is your choice.
“But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (2 Thessalonians 2:13-15).
The traditions taught to the Thessalonians is past tense (have been taught) and not futuristic or progressive embellishments of ceremonies to be passed down over time.
So, what are these traditions in 2 Thessalonians 2:15? We find greater understanding by reading a little further (contextual reading). “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received from us. For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you” (2 Thessalonians 3:6, 7).
2 Thessalonians 3:6, 7 now gives us the proper definition of how “traditions” is being used in 2 Thessalonians 2:15. The definition is “behavior” (walking orderly). It is not about traditions of worship such as: candles, pictures, smoke, shrines, incense, statues, elaborate robes, wearing expensive crowns, saint worship or adoration, invoking the saints in heaven, chanting, kissing the pope’s foot, bead prayer inventions, scapulars, medallions, popery, etc.
The oral teaching was accepted by Christians, just as they accepted the written teaching that came to them later. Jesus told his disciples: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me" (Luke 10:16). The Church, in the persons of the apostles, was given the authority to teach by Christ; the Church would be his representative. He commissioned them, saying, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations" (Matt. 28:19). Thus, the president of the evangelical society was right when he examined the writings of the early Christian Fathers. Oh that annoying thing called history.
taj,
You, and TLIML, constantly boasting in your church wearies me. And your denial and justification of it tires me as well. Even in your denial of boasting, you continue to boast. I boast only in Jesus. He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one can come to the Father but through Him. He didn't say but through the Baptists. Nor the Pentacost. Nor the LDS. Nor the SDA. Nor Catholicism.
To boast in such temporal things will bring His reward for those who do. You have boasted in temporal thiings, and you will recieve in temporal thiings. You recieve the honor of man, but God's face is turned.
To make sure that the apostolic tradition would be passed down after the deaths of the apostles, Paul told Timothy, "[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first four generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy's generation, the generation Timothy will teach, and the generation they in turn will teach.
hahaha...so now we get to play whose bible verses are better again? 2 Thess. 3:6, "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep aloof from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us."
2 Thess. 2:15, "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." 1 Cor. 11:2, "Now I praise you because you remember me in everything, and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you."
Any person or group of people who do not believe the Jesus Christ is God, that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior are not believers. This heresy was settled by the early church fathers. Some of the top 25 "churches" do not worship the Eternal Creator.
Mk 7:8-9 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
1 Peter 1:18-19, "Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation (manner of life) received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:"
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Matthew 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.3 But (Jesus) answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
I don't boast about the growth of the church over 2,000 years I thank God that he has remained with the church. The Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, Nuns, Lay People,... alone are not responsible for this awesome growth of the universal church it is God all praise goes to him. The latest CP article about the first Christian Church in Qatar (Catholic) is just further evidence that the Church continues to spread and grow. Even in these difficult times the research above notes that the Catholic Church continues to grow. Praise God!
Mat 15:8-9 "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me.
But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men."
"Heaven and earth will pass away, but my Words will never pass away."
I put the Word of God above all else. Including church. A church without the Word of God is dead and worthless. The Word of God without a church is still the Word of God.
I am part of His Body. As I have been saved, I have become a part of His Church, or Body. Nothing anyone can say will change that. But what name is on the door of the building I assemble with His Children in, will burn someday, as well as the name "Catholic".
To boast that on religion/denomination is better than another is prideful. Only the Word of God is to be boasted in.
prophet,
That's the thing let's take Online4Him for example, first he was a Catholic then a SDA and now he says that he is non denominational and doesn't belong to any religious organization. He puts the bible above everything else much like the Muslims do with the Koran. However, to do this means that you have to deny the living church. I personally don't think that God would just leave a book as the be all end all, if that was the case he would have wrote it himself. Instead he entrusted his teaching to the apostles who passed it along to the early Christians. It is no coincidence that the president of the evangelical society reached the conclusion that many Christians have reached before him and continue to reach...how could the early Christians been wrong since they were handed the truth in such a short period of time? you can continue to follow your love affair of a book like the Muslims, but as a Catholic the bible without the Church is not complete.
Mary died. There is no scripture that supports this, but (again) there is no scripture that supports that she was magically transported to heaven. Enoch and Elijah are the only ones who had that honor.
Catholics like to use Revelations 12, but they don't realize that that is a vision of what is to come. Reading into chapter 13 will show that. The event that is to happen that is revealed in that vision is, I admit, comfusing. I believe that it is figurative. But I DO know that it is NOT Mary being caught up into heaven. John knew Mary well. And if it had been Mary he would have noted that.
Mary is not the mother of God. There is no scripture to support that, but there is also no scripture to support that she IS the mother of God. Catholics say that becausd Jesus is the Son of God, God incarnate, that she is, by default, the mother of God. If they want to use that kind of thinking, then when Jesus said "Who are my brothers and sisters and mother, but they who do the will of my Father" that would qualify my wife to be a mother of God as well.
No, Mary merely gave birth to a human child who enveloped the Spirit of God. She is, at most, the mother of the Son of Man (as Jesus often refered to Himself). Jesus showed both sides of his character. He was fully man (whom Mary gave birth to) and therefore tempted in every way we are. He was fully God (who always was, who has no beginning, and no mother).
More scripture on Jesus as the only heavenly intercessor.
Romans 8:26-27: For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us[ with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God.
And verse 34: Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.
Ther is only one who intercedes and prays for me in heaven. Jesus Christ. First Timothy 2:5 "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,"
There is only one who can forgive my sins. Jesus Christ
First John 1:9: "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
Salvation through works is a false teaching. It's through faith. It's a gift. (Gifts are free.)
Romans 10:9-10 "If you will confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus Christ, and believe in your heart that God raise Him from the dead you will be saved. For with the heart man believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth the confession is made unto salvation."
Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."
Romans 4:1-3What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”
Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast."
Actually last year's President of the Evangelical Theological Society gives a nice response about what Catholics can learn from protestants and what protestants can learn from Catholics:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/mayweb-only/119-33.0.html
Why again did the president of the evangelical theological society convert to Catholicism last year? oh yeah because he started reading the works of the early Christians.
Fulgentius of Ruspe
"Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the Catholic Church [and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church" (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).
Augustine
"We believe also in the holy Church, that is, the Catholic Church. For heretics violate the faith itself by a false opinion about God; schismatics, however, withdraw from fraternal love by hostile separations, although they believe the same things we do. Consequently, neither heretics nor schismatics belong to the Catholic Church; not heretics, because the Church loves God; and not schismatics, because the Church loves neighbor" (Faith and the Creed 10:21 [A.D. 393]).
"[J]ust as baptism is of no profit to the man who renounces the world in words and not in deeds, so it is of no profit to him who is baptized in heresy or schism; but each of them, when he amends his ways, begins to receive profit from that which before was not profitable, but was yet already in him" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:4[6] [A.D. 400]).
"I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44–48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13–19]" (ibid., 4:21[28]).
"The apostle Paul said, 'As for a man that is a heretic, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him' [Titus 3:10]. But those who maintain their own opinion, however false and perverted, without obstinate ill will, especially those who have not originated the error of bold presumption, but have received it from parents who had been led astray and had lapsed . . . those who seek the truth with careful industry and are ready to be corrected when they have found it, are not to be rated among heretics" (Letters 43:1 [A.D. 412]).
"Whoever is separated from this Catholic Church, by this single sin of being separated from the unity of Christ, no matter how estimable a life he may imagine he is living, shall not have life, but the wrath of God rests upon him" (ibid., 141:5).
Jerome
"Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church" (Commentary on Titus 3:10–11 [A.D. 386])
Lactantius
"It is, therefore, the Catholic Church alone which retains true worship. This is the fountain of truth; this, the domicile of faith; this, the temple of God. Whoever does not enter there or whoever does not go out from there, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. . . . Because, however, all the various groups of heretics are confident that they are the Christians and think that theirs is the Catholic Church, let it be known that this is the true Church, in which there is confession and penance and which takes a health-promoting care of the sins and wounds to which the weak flesh is subject" (Divine Institutes 4:30:11–13 [A.D. 307]).
Cyprian of Carthage
"Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined to an adulteress [a schismatic church] is separated from the promises of the Church, nor will he that forsakes the Church of Christ attain to the rewards of Christ. He is an alien, a worldling, and an enemy. He cannot have God for his Father who has not the Church for his mother" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 6, 1st ed. [A.D. 251]).
"Let them not think that the way of life or salvation exists for them, if they have refused to obey the bishops and priests, since the Lord says in the book of Deuteronomy: 'And any man who has the insolence to refuse to listen to the priest or judge, whoever he may be in those days, that man shall die' [Deut. 17:12]. And then, indeed, they were killed with the sword . . . but now the proud and insolent are killed with the sword of the Spirit, when they are cast out from the Church. For they cannot live outside, since there is only one house of God, and there can be no salvation for anyone except in the Church" (Letters 61[4]:4 [A.D. 253]).
"When we say, 'Do you believe in eternal life and the remission of sins through the holy Church?' we mean that remission of sins is not granted except in the Church" (ibid., 69[70]:2 [A.D. 253]).
"Peter himself, showing and vindicating the unity, has commanded and warned us that we cannot be saved except by the one only baptism of the one Church. He says, 'In the ark of Noah a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water. Similarly, baptism will in like manner save you" [1 Peter 3:20-21]. In how short and spiritual a summary has he set forth the sacrament of unity! In that baptism of the world in which its ancient wickedness was washed away, he who was not in the ark of Noah could not be saved by water. Likewise, neither can he be saved by baptism who has not been baptized in the Church which is established in the unity of the Lord according to the sacrament of the one ark" (ibid., 73[71]:11).
"[O]utside the Church there is no Holy Spirit, sound faith moreover cannot exist, not alone among heretics, but even among those who are established in schism" (Treatise on Rebaptism 10 [A.D. 256]).
Origen
"[T]here was never a time when God did not want men to be just; he was always concerned about that. Indeed, he always provided beings endowed with reason with occasions for practicing virtue and doing what is right. In every generation the wisdom of God descended into those souls which he found holy and made them to be prophets and friends of God" (Against Celsus 4:7 [A.D. 248]).
"If someone from this people wants to be saved, let him come into this house so that he may be able to attain his salvation. . . . Let no one, then, be persuaded otherwise, nor let anyone deceive himself: Outside of this house, that is, outside of the Church, no one is saved; for, if anyone should go out of it, he is guilty of his own death" (Homilies on Joshua 3:5 [A.D. 250]).
Irenaeus
"In the Church God has placed apostles, prophets, teachers, and every other working of the Spirit, of whom none of those are sharers who do not conform to the Church, but who defraud themselves of life by an evil mind and even worse way of acting. Where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace" (Against Heresies 3:24:1 [A.D. 189]).
"[The spiritual man] shall also judge those who give rise to schisms, who are destitute of the love of God, and who look to their own special advantage rather than to the unity of the Church; and who for trifling reasons, or any kind of reason which occurs to them, cut in pieces and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and so far as in them lies, destroy it—men who prate of peace while they give rise to war, and do in truth strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel. For they can bring about no 'reformation' of enough importance to compensate for the evil arising from their schism. . . . True knowledge is that which consists in the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place [i.e., the Catholic Church]" (ibid., 4:33:7–8).
Justin Martyr
"We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared him to be the Logos of which all mankind partakes [John 1:9]. Those, therefore, who lived according to reason [Greek, logos] were really Christians, even though they were thought to be atheists, such as, among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus, and others like them. . . . Those who lived before Christ but did not live according to reason [logos] were wicked men, and enemies of Christ, and murderers of those who did live according to reason [logos], whereas those who lived then or who live now according to reason [logos] are Christians. Such as these can be confident and unafraid" (First Apology 46 [A.D. 151]).
Ignatius of Antioch
"Be not deceived, my brethren: If anyone follows a maker of schism [i.e., is a schismatic], he does not inherit the kingdom of God; if anyone walks in strange doctrine [i.e., is a heretic], he has no part in the passion [of Christ]. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop, with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons" (Letter to the Philadelphians 3:3–4:1 [A.D. 110]).
Online4Him,
Yes you all agree that is why you repeatedly tell us that you are non denominational and belong to no religious affiliation. It's you who don't get it. The living Catholic Church is the body of believers of Christ it has been like that for 2,000 years and just like these statistics reveal will continue to be the body of believers until Christ returns. God will protect his church even though it has internal problems from time to time, God will keep his biblical word. Why don't you just be happy in your own community church in your basement and stop criticizing the international church?
online -
>>>Salvation is coming to know Jesus Christ personally and surrendering your life to him; it is not achieved through works or your religious affiliation. No church can save you; this is a transformation of the heart that God alone can perform. <<<
Amen to that!
tliml -
You brought up your church's dogma that those who do not know of Christ could be saved anyway by meritorius works. And then seemed to indicate that all "protestants" disagreed with you. Online stated he'd never said that, and then you replied "Star2 said it though, so did GMG. So I guess there ARE some major beliefs that you don't see eye to eye on. Just do what you always do and pretend it never happened so you can keep your Protestant Blanket Alliance."
I never said those who don't know about Jesus are automatically damned. I simply asked you about the "works" part of your statement. So don't lump me in some general category either. At least have the decency to get your specific assertations matched with the proper person.
tliml,
"And if the Protestant faith is the true faith... which one is it? Baptist? Methodist? Episcopalean? SDA?"
Have you not noticed from your time spent here on the CP that all the Protestants that you have met agree upon “salvation”? We all declare with one voice that salvation is through Jesus Christ "alone" through faith in him "alone" which is by God's grace "alone". That is the difference between your religion and true biblical Christianity; as Protestants, we are more concerned about “being in Christ” rather than being under a specific “name tag.” You still don’t get it –
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new – 2Corinthians 5:17.
He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life – 1John 5:12.
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his Romans 8:9.
But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God – Romans 2:29.
Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God – John 3:3.
Salvation is coming to know Jesus Christ personally and surrendering your life to him; it is not achieved through works or your religious affiliation. No church can save you; this is a transformation of the heart that God alone can perform.
Jester,
Well, I just wanted to give you a shout out. Good to hear from you.
hey online,
yeah, im just boppin between a couple dozen pages annoying people. then i think i'll go back into hiding.
Hey Jester,
Lol - long time no hear; it is good for you to stop by.
Prophet,
That is so untrue; we by merely holding to the scriputres alone automatically places us against his religion. I will continue to follow Jesus' example by quoting the scriptures.
"This article was number one so I checked it out."
yeah right. i looked back at the earlier posts. they came on here for the sole purpose of slamming protestants. nothing less. they can flour it and shake it up like a shake-n-bake, but it won't change the fact that its still chicken. i noticed truthandjustice and ingoditrust showed up. where's the third guy...moe. or is it curly? well, whoever it is, im sure he'll show up soon. he better, he's the smart one of the group. he knows which shoe goes on which foot.
i don't know. TLIML was going on about how no one likes him, and you and I are out to get him and how we "purposely" seek out catholic articles, but when he shows up on a non-catholic article he's "just checking it out".
He'll be back.
Hey guys,
Just stepped in; what are we talking about?
Amen, wilderness! Amen!
Mrs. Ann Eliza Young, in dedicating her book, “My Life in Bondage,” to the Mormon wives of Utah, says, “So long as God shall spare my life, I shall pray and plead for your deliverance from the worse than Egyptian bondage in which you are held. Despised, maligned, and wronged; kept in gross ignorance of the great world outside, its pure creeds, its high aims, its generous motives, you have been led to believe that the noblest nation on earth is but a horde of miscreants, and that every one outside of your own church is your enemy, and plotting your destruction.”
(The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
May Christians today, as Mrs. Young in her day, plead and pray for the deliverance of all who are bound in false doctrines, lies, and deceptions.
Ok, bye.
Prophet-
I am allowed to be proud and "get jiggy with it" the baptists do it all the time.
I like youre excuse. But with how you entered the room...we all know that it was more than "you thought it was interesting." I have to go.
Prophet-
This article was number one so I checked it out.
I had no way of knowing that, you associate yourselves with people that DO do it so I have the right to assume that you, being in their company, do it as well. Anyway... I don't feel like arguing with you any more tonight, my prohet index has spiked and it needs a rest. That "Report: More than Half of Britons Have No Religion" thread looks promising, I think I will check into that one.
You said "I do not draw conclusions when you leave." Maybe not, but you just drew an incorrect conclusion when you said that we give ourselves thumbs up.
As I asked earlier...what are you doing on a non-catholic article?
Nice try, TLIML, but I don't use the thumbs up or down. If I like what someone has to say...I tell them. Simple.
Prophet-
Sorry to inconvenience you, my child threw up, maybe I should have told him "Clean it up and hold it in next time"? Don't be so quick to draw up judgements. I do not draw conclusions when you leave.
I thought you had to go?
medeivalist-
I read that book and, although I do not necessarily agree with it, I found that it was very well-written and I believe your comment was an inteligent one so I gave it a thumbs up. I actually have a reason behind giving thumb's up to posts. Prophet, Online4Him, and wilderness give each other thumbs up to make themselves feel better.
Summa,
I ask you to prayerfully read the book:
From God To Us:How We Got Our Bible by Norman Geisler and William Nix .
It addresses many of your issues regarding the bible. If you agree to read through it with me in a book club/discussion format, I will even send you a copy for free. God gave us minds in order to use them. Use yours.
Also, without WHOSE authority? The authority of Joseph Smith? He wrote (and in his own words completed_ his own Inspired Version of the Bible yet you fail to use that, instead you use the KJV.
Summa wrote:
About the bible being extrabiblical, sounds like an oxymoron.... Well the Bible as we have it today was put through additions of book, subtraction of books, changes in translations etc..... Many times, many years after the apostle's deaths.... Thats extrabiblical, or should I rather say, done without the proper authority.
By the way, what are you doing on a non-Catholic article? Miss me?
Of course you have to go. Why wait for a rebuttle when you can throw your zinger in there and then run off before someone can respond.
Online4Him and I were having a nice little conversation about apologetics...nothing even remotely close to Catholicism. And TAJ comes in and says:
"Wow Online4Him maybe there is a religious maturity to you that I haven't discovered yet then again you are a former Catholic. Some people took exception to the fact that Strobel labels both Catholics and protestants as Christians (similar to the CP). What I like about Strobel is that he brings in Catholic theologians like Peter Kreeft into his books. Good for you Online4Him continue to share away."
Why did he feel the need to bring up Catholicism? Insecurity? Maybe he wasn't getting enough air time? Just the natural need to cause arguments? The sarcasm of his post was overwhelming.
And then you come in a short time later:
"Ya see that church right up there at the top? That's what I am talkin' about baby! WOO! Dee dee doo dee doo doo doo... we can dance... we can dance..."
Pride. Arrogance. Both attributes of Christ. Maybe that was masking insecurity as well. Is it possible that you, as a Catholic, feel threatened by non-Catholics?
Please don't claim we came here to start trouble with the Catholics and throw about your "victimized" attitude. Is that how you witness to non-Christians? By playing the victim?
I have to go.
Prophet-
I checked this. I searched Catholicism and every thread that had the word Catholicism in it, you were there and so was online and wilderness.
I don't target Unitarianism because there have been no articles on it, and no one who claims that Unitarianism is the only way to salvation on here. If you want to find a unitarian to come and post on here, I'll certainly talk Christianity with them. Would that make you feel better? Like you were'nt singled out? You take things too personally.
"it is obvious because you seek out threads about Catholics..." How obvious? I haven't been on a pro-Catholic thread in a long time. I've actually been spending my time talking about LDS,JW, and homosexuality. You want to align yourself with one of them? If not, then your angry tirade is wasted breath.
Prophet, if it had one hundred members you would find no interest in it because it would pose no threat. I don't see you targeting any smaller religions like Unitarianism. Because they aren't threats.
Prophet...
Not this article... others. Young Catholics becoming increasingly liberal? Please. What interest could you have in that?
If the Catholic faith had only 100 members I would still say what say about it now.
LOL...TLIML,
"You people obviously came on here with the intent of attacking the Catholic faith... it is obvious because you seek out threads about Catholics... "
You so funny. Read back beyond before you and TAJ showed up. We were discussing what this article is about. Mormons and JW's. Don't martyr yourself yet.
You people obviously came on here with the intent of attacking the Catholic faith... it is obvious because you seek out threads about Catholics...
I am back. I have a good motto for YOUR religion... (s) "We are insecure about our religion and so we attack the religion that most threatens us" if your religion WAS the truth then you would be content with that and you wouldn't feel the need to attack a more powerful religion. And do not pretend you are trying to spread the truth, if the Catholic Church had only 100 members you wouldn't give a rat's tail about it, even if you had heard of it. And if the Protestant faith is the true faith... which one is it? Baptist? Methodist? Episcopalean? SDA?
"so you can shut your obnoxious little mouths"....now there's a poster motto for the RCC. That should draw them by the droves.
TLIML,
It was all justifiable.
And I have to go now. Sorry, I have a life that demands my attention. When I have to go I have to go, so you can shut your obnoxious little mouth about when I am on and when I am not. Seriously dude, I don't make comments when you or Online say you are getting tired or you have to leave.
In your history, which is far far far shorter than ours, you have committed the same amount if not more treacheries than we have.
Online4Him-
You are nitpicking tiny words that, at the time, Mary wasn't worried about saying. She wasn't trying to be politically correct.
Prophet-
Queen Elizabeth, Queen Isabella, KKK, Anti-Irish Catholic riots, church burnings, barring Catholics from coming to America, you wanna point fingers? Bring it on.
Mary was just a woman chosen by God. She was guaranteed eternal life the same way the rest of us were. And she died as all of us will, should the Lord tarry.
Justifiable....yeah. So goes the history of the Catholic church. The teflon religion.
tliml,
We are not putting anyone on trail; I am merely quoting Scripture.
Thes.
"Hold onto your tradition"
Prophet-
All crusades but the fourth were justifiable (and by the way it was not Catholics then, just Christian) the first two were to rid Spain of the concouring Islams, the Third was to reinforce it, and five through nine were to make the Holy Lands passable for pilgrims. The muslims were barring way and killing pilgrims. And guys, do not put Mary on trial, she did not watch every word she said. If you were so overjoyed at your son being the saviour you wouldn't have said "Oh my gosh, I am bearing the World's Saviour" you would have said "My Saviour!" Mary was not striving for political correctness. It is rich how you people get all snarky when I have to leave. Grow up. I got a business call that I needed to take. Do not compare me to whack-a-mole, or else I will start charging you a quarter per argument.
Prophet,
It is amazing to me how some will vehemently defend their “traditions” and yet neglect the Word of God; this speaks volumes.
Prophet,
Lol - I know; we all need to remain humble and pray as we continue our discussions.
Sometimes I wish I could insult as well as Jester does. But then God convicts me. LOL
TAJ, and TLIML remind me of that arcade game "Whack-a-mole". With the little moles who pop up out of their hole, and you have to whack them before they disappear again.
Prophet,
I guess they left?
taj,
As I have stated before; unless, you can give me an alternative biblical answer for the passages that we discussed - your objections are futile. I do not think you want go back down this previous discussion.
taj,
I guess; you missed the part in my last post where I mentioned "all" churches were experiencing losses. Anyway, we all know that you revel in statistics and numbers; I am not surprised that the world is running after your religion; it is to be expected, since "it is written".
tliml,
"She did not monitor every word that came out! She wasn't worried about the way she phrased things!"
So now you presume to know what Mary was thinking, huh? I don't buy it.
tliml,
Lol - "protestant blanket alliance", yeah, okay. Yes, there have been discussion where we have not agreed with one another; but on the issue of "salvation" which is the most essential. The book of Romans speaks of those who had the "law" will be judged by the law and those who did not have it will be judged accordingly.
The Catholics killed innocents in the name of God. No matter how you paint the picture.
TLIML,
And don't leave before I bring up the crusades. Or...maybe that's why you're leaving.
Online4Him,
yes, I read the article did you really read it? "about to lose its status as a majority Protestant nation, at 51 percent and slipping" hmmm...now let me think: does the Catholic Church have official diplomatic relations with the US? Did the US government GIVE them the Consulate in which they reside? Is the US Supreme Court made up of mostly Catholics? "The share of the population that identifies as Catholic, however, has remained fairly stable in recent decades thanks to an influx of immigrant Catholics, mostly from Latin America. Nearly half of all Catholics under 30 are Hispanic, the survey found." The world is changing and thus demographics are changing right along with it - what does it matter what ethnic group is predominating? unless you are a racist that is. The only group that is truly gaining in a big way is your group - "The religious demographic benefiting the most from this religious churn is those who claim no religious affiliation". As for organized religions please refer to the statistics in this article. Please also note that the article you are referring to is only a survey...I hope you know the difference between a survey and actual statistics. Besides every time the Catholic Church continues to grow around the world, which as this article points out continues to happen every day, you retreat into your end times diatribe anyways.
So if Jesus said that my wife is his mother, what does that make her? Lets do some Catholic math. Jesus is God. Jesus said that whoever does the will of my Father is my mother. My wife does the will of God. So my wife is a mother of God.
I have to go.
Prophet, the KKK did have a great example. Queen Elizabeth! Remember? The Protestant that killed Catholics? Yea... the KKK was a Protestant devising, do not pretend otherwise.
Online4Him-
Mary wasn't a LAWYER! She did not monitor every word that came out! She wasn't worried about the way she phrased things! Besides, she could mean "my" because it was HER son. And what about the miracle of Lourdes? Explain that please. And did you read my comment that when the Ten Commandments which were God's presence, were put into their carrier the carrier had to be completely clean, pure, and blessed. Mary, who was also carrying God, should have the same rules of purity apply to her, no? Or is it different somehow?
I always knew there was a good example that the KKK used. I just didn't know it was the RCC.
tliml is so caught up in dogma and denominations that the truth passed right by him.
Oh my Gosh! The pope was around before the KKK! HAHAHA! Hilarious! Oh my gosh that is just rich! "Ohh.. so that is where the pope got the cone hat idea" HAHAHAHA!
tliml,
The Immaculate Conception is nowhere to be found in scripture my friend; this doctrine was put forth in 1854; why so late? When we review the New Testament in general and the book of Acts specifically, many of these doctrines are not found. I mentioned the book of Acts because it a history of the early church directly after the ascension of Jesus. This doctrine and many others are simply absent. As for Mary being born without sin; this is contrary to the scriptures:
Read these passages - “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God” – Romans 3:23.
Mary herself says in Luke 1:47 – “And my spirit hat rejoiced in God my SAVIOUR”. Mary needed a savior just like the rest of mankind.
Prophet-
That has to be the most ignorant, idiotic, and actually hilarious comment I have ever heard from you. The pope was wearing the cone hat before the KKK... lol. HAHA!
Online4Him-
"I never said that please do not put words in my mouth"
Star2 said it though, so did GMG. So I guess there ARE some major beliefs that you don't see eye to eye on. Just do what you always do and pretend it never happened so you can keep your Protestant Blanket Alliance.
coned shaped hat....i always wondered where the pope got that idea...
Online4Him-
Let's see... Jesus said "This is my body" and "This is my blood" and he also said "He who does not eat the son of man and drink his blood has no life" I dare you to explain that last quote.
tliml,
"Protestants, however, completely deny that anyone who, even if it is not their fault, do not have access to God's word are doomed."
I never said that; please do not put words in my mouth.
Prophet-
HEY! What about a cone shaped hat? I think the african americans believed the KKK when they said "We are going to kill you"
tliml,
It is funny how you take one passage out of "context" and ignore the rest of the Scriptures to hold on to your traditional "unbloody sacrifice". You reject all the other passages to hold on to the tradtions of men.
Online4Him-
I did not see your post addressing my comment about the dogma of the Immaculate Conception anywhere.
Geez, TLIML, sorry for twisting the words around. I just thought that since it works for the Catholics that I could do it too. I suppose I have to be more pious in order to pull it off. Maybe if I wore a banana shaped hat on my head people would believe me.
Online4Him-
Our dogma states that those who by no fault of their own do not have access to God's Word can still be saved. How is that closing it off from everyone? In fact... The RCC accepts basically all baptisms except Unitarian, Jehovah's Witness, and LDS. Protestants, however, completely deny that anyone who, even if it is not their fault, do not have access to God's word are doomed. It appears that you people are damning far more than we are...
correction:
FIRST of all, that is “unbiblical”
Did your wife bear the Son of God or God incarnate? No. Stop twisting the words of the bible. As for calling Jesus a liar, I don't know, the Protestants seem to do it all the time... Jesus says the Eucharist is his body and blood, you say it isn't.
tliml,
I did address your concerns; but if I remeber correctly, you said you did not care what I posted, despite all the scriptural references. Let's be honest here my friend.
Tliml,
If you slowed down a bit to have read the before mentioned post of mine, you would have knew that it was not me who gave a thumbs up concerning your personal life. I have not done that with any casual and somewhat kind discussions that we have had and you know it. You have addressed the list of dogmas that we discussed earlier; unsatisfactory, I would have to say. In our past exchanges, you did happen to agree that there were some dogmas (RC) that are not found in the scriptures. I hope the last sentence will not be considered as anything that is from your personal life; it was a part of a theological discussion, right?
You say that we Protestants; I prefer Christians, are harsh and unmerciful? How is someone who is disagreeing with you being unmerciful? It is your church who fallibly says that there is not salvation outside of her walls; for of all, that is “unbiblical” and it is your church that pronounces anathemas (curses) upon all who trust in Jesus “alone” for their salvation. Look who’s talking?
No she's not. She's mother of God.
"48But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
49And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother."
Who are you to call Jesus a liar?
Prophet-
No, your wife is the mother of a human being that is WITH Jesus and Jesus is IN them, they are not God themselves.
My wife is mother of God.
And our numbers would be even greater today had the U.S. not bombed Hiroshima. That was an extremely Catholic city.
It is funny, wikipedia says we have gained members... In fact our numbers are steadily rising by the thousands.
I am back. Online4Him, you didn't address my posts about the Immaculate Conception in Younger Catholics More Liberal whatever. Why? I told you about it. And hey taj.
Taj,
Here is another article for you to read - "Survey: US Religious Landscape in Flux".
It speaks of "all" churches who are loosing members for one reason or another. This following sentence speaks of your religion -
"The Roman Catholic Church has lost more members than any faith tradition because of affiliation swapping, the survey found."
Excellent articles, although I think there is more Catholics in Canada and the US. However, the report does indicate that the Catholic numbers continue to rise. I like CP's article today: Christians to Welcome Qatar's First Christian Church. Which Christian Church? do we really need to ask? The true Universal living Church continues to become truly international.
I don't know what you're complaining about. If you can't handle it, then don't dish it out.
Prophet-
You know that was not the point, you know you were directing it at me as an insult.
And to think, that no one would have known it was you if you hadn't opened your mouth.
Did you forget where your Bible is?
Yea, I caught your jab about me misplacing my bible.
My wife is mother of God.
thelordismylight,
What's your beef? I never said anything about your personal life.
You are right wilderness, look at all the PROTESTANT televangelists that ask people to give money to them and say that they will be saved or experience joy.
Oh yea and I think it is funny that somebody gave Online4Him's comment a thumbs up, showing that they agreed with his agreeance! HA! It is pathetic.
When Brigham Young declared that “if women would not submit to polygamy they should be eternally damned,” and when history shows that women who have resisted have often been murdered, the mystery of the non-resistance policy which they commonly pursue, is certainly cleared up.
“Starve them, and beat them if necessary, to bring them to submission,” said the Mormon apostles; “better crucify the body than let the soul go to perdition.” Well was the method of these hypocrites characterized by a Mormon woman who said of one of them, “He is a man who steps on hearts as though he stepped on stones.”
(The Women of Mormonism or The Story of Polygamy As Told By The Victims Themselves - Edited by Jennie Anderson Froiseth - 1882)
Sadly, as it was then, so it is now: false prophets and teachers leading many into the dark abyss of bondage and deception. “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction” (2 Peter 2:1).
Online4Him-
One thing that has constantly evaded the Protestants is why Jesus said "He who does not eat the Son of God and drink his blood has no life" and as the crowd heard this and walked away, Jesus did not take it back or say "Oh, guys, it was metaphorical" And you guys interpret the bible literally right? Oh wait, except you do not take the part about the Last Supper literally... I bet you do not take this part literally either, do you? But you DO believe that Jonah bided his time in the belly of a whale. You Protestants can be so gosh darn whimsical.
Prophet-
Wow, Protestants seem to just love commenting on Catholic's private lives. Star2 made comments about my life earlier and Online4Him gave it a thumbs up. And here you are targetting the fact that I misplaced my bible. Don't worry, I found it now, but thank you for your concern. When I was a boy in school we had an entire hour devoted every day to reading the bible. Catholics read the bible. I know for a fact that my boy reads the bible every day in school. My church has a bible-reading session that I frequently attend, where we participate in Lectio Divinae. Our dogmas are indeed scripturally sound, I defy you to name one that isn't. Online4Him, I addressed the Immaculate Conception in "Younger Catholics Becoming More Liberal" I have also addressed the ones about the Eucharist and the Mercy Dogma. You Protestants certainly aren't a merciful bunch. You basically say that 4 fifths of the world isn't going to heaven... Just because someone doesn't have access to the word of god you say they go to hell. Yea... real christian-like there, bucko. And as for opening the bible during mass... huh? Private devotions do not replace the liturgy! Third commandment? Keep Holy the Sabbath, which means while you are attending mass you should be concentrating on the mass, not absent mindedly reading the bible. If you mean to follow along with the readings and people do not open their bible just to follow along I do not know why you would scoff at the fact that they would rather listen to it and think more deeply about it than follow along. I mean really.
Prophet,
Well said. I have had older Catholics tell me that their priests actually told them that they could not understand the bible. So many of them grew up without the Scriptures and did not know what they teach.
Online4Him,
I don't think the question is whether they can read or not...its whether they do. In my experience with Catholics, most don't open their Bible other than at mass, some don't even do that, and some (including a couple that post on here regularly) can't even find their Bible.
But, as I've said before, that is a problem that even many Protestants have as well.
Many years ago a pastor told me, "If more people actually studied the Bible, as the Bible instructs us to do, there would be fewer Catholics." I thought he was rude. Today, I would agree with him.
"The chief error today in the church is that experiences (feelings, emotions, passions, intuitions, etc.) have become the guide for entering into and attempting to establish true spirituality. Rather than subjective feelings and emotions being present as a result of one’s adherence to sound doctrine, they have become the judge of whether or not something is truly Christian.
Instead of testing a teaching or practice or situation by the Word of God, the arbiter becomes “how one feels about it.” This puts the human imagination in the seat of judgment. That thought alone should provoke an emotion in the heart of every Bible-believing Christian: sheer horror! Doctrinally however, it’s even more frightening.
Twice in the Book of Proverbs, in almost exactly the same terms, we are told, “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Proverbs 14:12; 16:25). In other words, if a man goes by what he thinks or feels, independently of and in opposition to what God has declared, the consequences for him will only generate destruction. Death is separation, the spirit and soul from the body; moreover, the ways of death include separating man from the light of God’s truth. “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:20).
Cont'd
Why am I saying this? Because I feel it is necessary to point out that we all have opinions, and we all feel we are right. The only measure of truth that we can cling to is the witness of the Holy Ghost. We all may say that we have had that witness, and still stand on different sides of the fence, and in truth, only Jesus Christ can judge our hearts.
The experiences that led me to baptism in the LDS church are mine alone. I can convey them to you, but ultimately, they were my experiences, so you may not care, or think they have any validity. But to me, as I studied for many months, and prayed and fasted, I know that my goal was to get closer to God, and to be where He wanted me to be. When I came to a conclusion, and followed through with the promptings, I did feel closer to God, and I was more spiritual than I ever had been. And even though I grew up a religious person, and was raised by parents that taught me good morals, and Gospel truth, I was burning with joy inside because I had done my best to know more about my Father in Heaven. Since then, it has been much the same. I love my Father in Heaven and thank Him for all that I have been blessed with.
So if you want to take that, and all that is good in my life, along with millions of others that have felt this same joy about our Father in Heaven, the same God you worship, and turn it into something that sounds evil, and tell me that I will burn in hell for this profound love that I have for my Heavenly Father, then go ahead. It's your right. And it won't hurt me in the end that you feel that way. Let it be known that I don't feel that way about my christian brethren. I wish everyone the relationship that I have found with my Father in Heaven, and pray that I continue to grow closer to Him and learn from my many mistakes.
So far, I haven't heard anything in these off-site links that I haven't already studied. I have seen all the so-called "false prophecies" of Joseph Smith before and have seen them all proven wrong on other sites as well (most never came to pass because of choices the person involved made that made them fall out of favor with the Lord - similar to the Lord's promise that those who believe in Him will be saved. But if they stop believing in Him, they no longer have that promise, thought they may think they do).
I have read many things by the Tanners, and I have found that just because they were descendents of Young, doesn't mean they know everything about the church.
I know that I worship the Lord Almighty. And I know that I do so in total faith. I can't prove anything within Christianity to someone that does not believe in a creator. I can't prove that Jesus Christ was the Son of God to someone that is expecting scientific evidence or DNA samples that show half of His DNA structure was inhuman. But, I know through the Holy Ghost that He is the Son of God. And I know that there is a God. Just as I can't "prove" the validity of the Bible, I'm not going to be able to "prove" the validity of the Book of Mormon. But I know that I worship the same God as I did before I converted to the LDS church. And I know I pray all things in the name of Jesus Christ, as I did before I converted. So when someone mouths off their opinion about the LDS church and claims them to be un-christian, I immediately feel they are wrong.
I study scriptures daily (mostly the Bible, because I am more familiar with it) and it brings comfort to me when I do so. I get the same comfort from reading the BOM. I have read some of the Torah, and the Koran, and I can see why some would consider it scripture, but I do not get that feeling of companionship of the Holy Ghost when I read them.
The list of false prophecies given by Joseph Smith was quite eye-opening.
http://www.saintsalive.com/mormonism/falseprophetjs.htm
While I found myself laughing at the sheer nonsense of some of these "prophecies", it actually breaks my heart to think of the thousands upon thousands of souls who have been led astray by this one man's legacy of lies.
~Deu 18:20-22~
SummaTheologica,
There is thousands of manuscript evidence to support the New Testament; the texts which are known by these names - Majority Text/Received Text/Textus Receptus are accessible and consistent with the New Testament that we have today. These thousands of manuscripts cannot be refuted; this cannot be said of your fictional book. The “random texts” as you call them, have given Christians throughout the ages the discernment and wisdom to identify and expose false dogmas like yours. Perhaps, you should re-read them and prayerfully consider what they say.
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed – Galatians 1:6-9.
And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many – Matthew 24:11.
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction – 2Peter 2:1.
A reminder for those who know the biblical Jesus –
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world – 1John 4:1.
"Kone,
Is that all of your post? I didn't see the point in it. I am assuming there's more."
Drums, ya need to cut and past this link:
http://www.focusonthefaulty.com/Pages/mormon.html
to your web browser and read the whole article. Hope it helps you understand more that goes on within Mormonism. Mormons believe what they believe because they are TOLD what to believe instead of verifying the truth of Scripture (an accurate translation of the Bible) for them selves. K?
Here's another essay that should help you, hopefully:
TERMINOLOGY DIFFERENCES
By Sandra Tanner
Introduction
Whenever an evangelical Christian and a Latter-day Saint engage in a doctrinal discussion they encounter the problem of terminology. LDS leaders use the standard vocabulary of Christianity but with radically different definitions. A Christian should never take for granted that his/her LDS friend understands common Christian terms in the biblical way.
Because the Bible has many warnings about false prophets (Matthew 24:11, 24; 2 Corinthians 11:4, 13; 1 John 4:1) and people teaching strange doctrines (2 Peter 2:12; Galatians 1:6-8; Hebrews 13:9), it is essential that we understand what the Bible says on various doctrines.
The references below will demonstrate that the LDS Church is indeed teaching a different god and a counterfeit gospel, thus offering a false hope.
The following list of Christian terms will be defined by LDS sources and then by biblical quotes. While this is not a complete list of terminology differences, it will cover the most basic ones. For a more detailed look at terminology differences, see The Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism.
Terms:
1. GODHEAD
2. JESUS CHRIST
3. PREMORTAL LIFE
4. THE FALL
5. VIRGIN BIRTH
6. SIN
7. FORGIVENESS
8. SALVATION BY GRACE
9. REDEEMED
10. GOSPEL
11. BORN AGAIN
12. TRUE CHURCH
13. AUTHORITY - PRIESTHOOD
14. BAPTISM
15. SONS OF GOD
16. ETERNAL LIFE
17. IMMORTALITY
18. HELL
19. HEAVEN
20. KINGDOM OF GOD
See here for the links to the above list:
http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/terminologymain.htm
Remember, Sandra Tanner is a great-great-granddaughter of Brigham Young, the second president of the Mormon Church and really knows what she is talking about when it comes to Mormonism.
More about Sandra Tanner and deceased husband, Jerald, here:
http://www.utlm.org/navaboutus.htm
Enjoy discovering the truth.
Taj,
First, you assume that tliml and I have only been referring to this article; it did not dawn upon you the possibility of us speaking about another article. This is the article that I was referring to – “Bible Society: 6 in 10 Filipinos Don’t Read, Own Bible”. Perhaps, it is you that needs to read all the interactive posts between others before commenting. Oh, yes, and unless you can explicitly give biblical evidence for your dogmas; why speak of other things?
Sorry but I just had to laugh..
some of these false prophecies are a riot!
Joseph Smith,...declared in 1837: "Inhabitants of the Moon are more of a uniform size than the inhabitants of the Earth, being about 6 feet in height. They dress very much like the Quaker Style & and quite general in Style, or the one fashion of dress. They live to be very old; coming generally near a thousand years. This is the description of them as given by Joseph Smith the Seer.
There is a simple litmus test that can establish this matter once and for all:
Do LDS 'prophets' and Mr. Smith have a record of infallibility regarding their prophesies? NO!~
Regarding modern day prophets, test them. Do they show a history of inerrancy? If not, beware!
Why should I answer your questions when mine are not answered? About the bible being extrabiblical, sounds like an oxymoron.... Well the Bible as we have it today was put through additions of book, subtraction of books, changes in translations etc..... Many times, many years after the apostle's deaths.... Thats extrabiblical, or should I rather say, done without the proper authority.
and online4him, you just think you are answering my posts with some random quotes from the NT, it really isn't doing you any justice.
Online4Him,
Do you even seriously read these articles? What confused you about the first sentence: "in the United States and Canada" I have no idea why you are bringing about Spain, the Philippines and other things but then again you are so wrong on other things this shouldn't surprise me. Please try to stay focused enough when reading the FIRST sentence of an article it usually gives you a hint on what follows.
The Lord is good.
I was researching an entirely different topic and happened across this utterly fascinating site:
http://www.saintsalive.com/mormonism/falseprophetjs.htm
Kone,
Is that all of your post? I didn't see the point in it. I am assuming there's more.
Quecat,
In response to you question of how I believe on the restitution, I typed several paragraphs and when I clicked submit it said I didn't log in correctly. I guess the best place to look is here for the answers to those questions.
http://www.mormon.org/mormonorg/eng/basic-beliefs/the-restoration-of-truth/the-great-apostasy
You can also click the next section about the restoration too.
Tliml,
My point was that some of your followers (like in the Philippines) cannot even read; they don’t even have bibles according to the article. How long ago did Spain enter the Philippines with your faith? For years your services were said only in Latin; like the laity understood that language. Having been Catholic; I have spoken to many older people who stated that the services were always spoken in Latin and they did not understand what was being said. Oh, yeah, they also tell me that they never took bibles to church. So, again, this has contributed to the mass numbers; people adhering to the outward religious symbols with little understanding of the biblical gospel.
Tliml,
You are full of assumptions my friend; I did not give a thumbs up concerning your personal life. The other assumption is that your church is scripturally based; perhaps, I should wait until your bishop friend comes aboard to help give you a mature explanation for what you think you believe.
Quecat said:
"bigondrums
You truly do shock me. I expected better of you than to try to claim that DNA cannot prove nor disprove ancestral lines. (especially in light of the LDS church's fascination with genealogy)
Are you honestly telling me that you are entirely unaware of the validity of DNA studies that can reliably track human migrations throughout the history of mankind?"
What religion are you? Do you not believe in Adam and Eve?
I can believe that DNA can prove certain things about our lineage, but I hardly see how it can discount that we all came from the same two people. In fact, many atheists try to prove that the Bible is a fable because DNA can't prove we all came from Adam and Eve. In a battle of "Science vs. God", science will always lose, because God created science. I hope you see what I'm talking about here. You are trying to say the Book of Mormon is false because DNA can't prove Jewish descent. From what I've heard before, DNA shows Asian descent (I am assuming they are testing only American Indians). Ok, so where did Asian people come from? Regardless of how you slice it, they were not evolved from monkeys, nor were they dropped off by an alien spacecraft. They descend from Adam and Eve.
Alright Online4Him, here is what you are saying. One-third of America cannot read and is being mislead by the church. All of Portugal, Spain, and Italy can