Emerging Pastor to Young Believers: Ask Anything

jimb »

Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:36 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

Another important point which I neglected. I do not seek to tear down another's faith. I seek to build on it. The Bible is true, inasmuch as it is translated correctly. The Book of Mormon is also true. Other churches have many things right, but those things can be built on and error can be dispelled. The fulness of the gospel has been restored. We seek to make bad men good and good men better. I support other Christians in their pusuit of right, as they try to live their faith.

Emerging Pastor to Young Believers: Ask Anything

jimb »

Sun Dec 30, 2007 5:27 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

Oh, and one other thing. About that Bering Straits theory. The cover story of Newsweek, April 26, 1999, presents a host of findings that dispute that the primary ancestors of the American Indians came by that route, although some may have. Newsweek is not a Mormon magazine. The article, "The First Americans," compiles archeological information that points toward western Asia and/or Europe for sources from where most of the ancient Americans came. Of course, archeology is constantly being disproven. It is not a good source for evidence on which to base your faith.

Emerging Pastor to Young Believers: Ask Anything

jimb »

Sun Dec 30, 2007 5:17 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

That irony was not lost on me either, Merkin. Nevertheless, I shall indulge him or her. Jesus4me, have you truly never heard of the civilizations that existed in ancient America? Long before I knew anything of the Book of Mormon, even in grade school, I learned of the civilizations that we now call Aztec and Inca and others. See http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-09/ci-air090903.php to read about the ancient roadway to which I referred (this is not a Mormon website). Search google for Olmec, Inca, Aztec, and Maya and you will be able to find an abundence of information detailing what modern scientists conclude of them. There is really no question of their existence, although the archaeologists' conclusions on the details of their existence may not be entirely accurate or at all consistent. The dates that they think they lived vary greatly between different reports. To learn of some ancient temples, see http://www.tourbymexico.com/yucatan/chichen/chichen.htm. Note that this website says, "The conquerors found the buildings partially in ruins and their names and real use were unknown; this is why the present names are suppositions." This brings me to a final note of astonishment: if, after a civilization falls into ruin, the names of their cities are not preserved intact but are changed, do you actually believe that proves that they never existed? Even the city of Jerusalem has had different names throughout its history. It was called Jebus, for example, in 1 Chronicles 11:4.

Emerging Pastor to Young Believers: Ask Anything

jimb »

Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

This is mainly for Citizen, so I hope he or she still sees it. It is also to educate Jesus4you. J, it sounds like you were not aware of this, but the Revelation of John was not the last book in the Bible, chronologically. It was placed last when the various books were compiled long after the time of Christ. So saying that no scripture written after Revelation is valid is to invalidate much of the Bible, including the epistles of John, and even the Gospel of John, which were all written after Revelation. The Sadducees said the same thing of any scripture written after Deuteronomy, because of Deuteronomy 4:2, which says, "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." The gospel of Jesus Christ was restored in its pure and original form through modern day prophets. Therefore it is not a different gospel than was preached by Jesus Christ, to which Paul referred, but it is certainly a different gospel than what is being preached today by many ministers of religion. The true gospel makes clear the immeasurable love and mercy of God the Father and His son Jesus Christ. It is something in which we should rejoice. I understand, Citizen, why it does not sound loving the way it is usually preached.

Emerging Pastor to Young Believers: Ask Anything

jimb »

Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

Citizen: if you are still reading this, don't worry about what Jesus4me said. God loves all His children. He is just and merciful. He does not punish someone for the sins of another. The doctrine of original sin is the product of Augustine, bishop of Hippo, at the start of the 5th century A.D. "For modern readers of Augustine, few of his teachings are more difficult to assimilate than his doctrine of original sin." - Augustinian Studies 23 (December 1992): 125-147. It was not taught by Jesus. As such, it is a "private interpretation" of scripture, which has been widely promulgated throughout modern mainstream Christianity. Becoming popular does not make it correct. "Private interpretation" means any time people change the meaning of scripture from what was originally intended. Scripture is when holy men of God, or prophets, write as moved upon by the Holy Ghost. Because God loves his children, he chooses prophets, or spokesmen, through whom He speaks. He continues to do that, because He continues to love us, and we continue to need it. "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth His secrets unto His servants the prophets." - Amos 3:7. The Book of Mormon is just one example of His continuing to work through prophets. Because Christianity was so dramatically altered by philosophers after Jesus walked the earth, it needed to be restored in its original form. This was foretold in the Bible - see Revalation 14:6, Isaiah chapter 29, 2 Timothy 4:3-4, and Acts 3:19-21. In ancient days, writing was done upon scrolls rolled on sticks. Ezekiel 37:16-17 foretells the coming forth of the "stick of Joseph," or Book of Mormon, as a companion to the "stick of Judah," or the Bible. Jesus later spoke of going to visit his "other sheep, which are not of this fold" - he was referring to the ancient Americans, as recorded in the Book of Mormon - see John 10:16. Because He loves all of His children, He did not limit His visit to one small culture in Israel. Of course, most people have heard of the archaeological evidence of ancient advanced civilizations in the Americas. They have been called, in modern names, Aztec, Maya, Inca, and Olmec. Ancient temples have been found in the Yucatan and elsewhere. Remnants of roads have been found, such as the 8,500 km Gran Ruta Inca.

Emerging Pastor to Young Believers: Ask Anything

jimb »

Sun Dec 23, 2007 3:12 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

Citizen: Many contemporary churches teach the concept of original sin. This is a philosophy of man, not a teaching of God. "Men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression." - Article of Faith #2 of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. God knew that Adam and Eve would disobey His commandment. In so doing, they suffered spiritual death, or separation from God. Through the atonement of Jesus Christ, we can overcome that death. "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." - 1 Corinthians 15:22. The processes of aging leading to physical death also began with the disobedience of Adam and Eve. This was necessary, however, in order for them to bring children into the world and begin to face opposition, learning to choose good over evil. Physical death was then overcome through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Thus, everyone will be resurrected; that is, their souls and their bodies will be reunited to an immortal state. The future condition of individuals in that immortal state will vary, however. That depends on what an individual does in this life. Repentance of sins and enduring to the end is necessary for eternal life. John 5:29 makes clear that those have done good will receive the "resurrection of life," and those that have done evil will receive the "resurrection of damnation." There are also gradations in between, as 1 Corinthians 15:40-42 teaches. Just two polar opposites would not make sense. A person who was just a shade worse than the dividing line would get the same reward as Jack the Ripper, and someone who is barely better would be rewarded as Mother Theresa. Thus, there is a spectrum of final situations. Aside from 1 Corinthian 15:40-42, you can see John 14:2 and 2 Corinthians 12:2 brief references to this topic. For a more complete explanation, see Mosiah chapters 15 and 16 in the Book of Mormon, which you can find at www.lds.org, choose gospel library icon, then scriptures.

What has Happened to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?

jimb »

Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:23 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Sorry - I accidentally hit the submit button before I finished my sentence.
We are being generous and Christian only when we give our own money, time, or talents and try to use our influence on others to do the same.

What has Happened to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?

jimb »

Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:20 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Ifeelfine72: You are correct that we are commanded by God to help those in need. This is clear from the 25th chapter of Matthew, as well as many other scriptures. However, this is quite different from confiscating money from others to give to those in need. We should voluntarily give our own money, time, and talents in service of others. When ye are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your God. - Mosiah 2:17, from the Book of Mormon. Nowhere have I found a scripture that so much as implies that we should use force on others to provide for charity. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your parenthesized statement, but it sounds to me like that is what you are advocating. Christians are very good at charitable giving. You can find the National Generosity Index 2006 at www.catalogueforphilanthropy.org/cfp/generosity_index/2006/data/. On it you can find data for each state, and divide the average itemized charitable contributions by the average adjusted gross income for each state, obtaining a rank of the average generosity of people in that state. The top 2 sates are Wyoming and Utah, both with large latter-day saint communities, and the next 8 are mostly southeast, "bible belt" states. At the bottom of the list are the states where Christianity is much less prevalent, mainly in the northeast "liberal" states. The people in those northeast states tend to vote for politicians who make promises using other people's money, confiscated through taxes. Christ said we should render to Caesar that which is Caesar's. He did not condone what Caesar was doing, he merely said we should be obedient to the law. We are not being generous and Christian when we vote other people's money toward our favorite charities. We are