Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 6, 2006 15:50:33 GMT -4
Yesterday and today at Townhall.com, a website that posts Conservative political articles, there were two articles posted by the same author about the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons). The first appeared mostly positive in praising the character of the Mormons. The second was mostly negative about the origins of the LDS faith, attempting to contrast it with the archaeologically-proven reality of the Bible (I know. That's a subject for another thread). Both articles received a huge amount of feedback in the comments section of the site - far more than the normal response for most articles on the site. What amazed me, a practicing Mormon, the most, however, was the sheer volume of utter crap that so many posters were vehemently proclaiming is LDS doctrine and is the reason why Mormons cannot be considered Christians and why we're all going to hell, etc. It was remarkably similar in quality to the kind of stuff hoax believers post on this forum and others about why the moon landings or 9/11 were faked: People speaking solemnly and at great length about something they have absolutely no knowledge about, parroting the "theories" they had heard from other critics without stopping to think through the theories for even a moment.
FUD rears its ugly head again, this time acting for religious intolerance.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 6, 2006 16:10:37 GMT -4
I wonder how anyone claim to know the fate of another’s soul. In order to make that kind of statement, it seems to me that you have to prove the existence of a soul and cite the full requirements God has for acceptance into heaven. That task is well beyond me.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 6, 2006 17:09:28 GMT -4
That and you probably should avoid starting your posts with "you're all going to hell and here's why." It seems to tend to get people a little defensive.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 6, 2006 17:42:28 GMT -4
That and you probably should avoid starting your posts with "you're all going to hell and here's why." It seems to tend to get people a little defensive. Some people are so sensitive.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jun 17, 2006 13:40:52 GMT -4
Jason, I think the objection is that the LDS church represents itself as Christian when it isn't (God was once a man, Jesus is the offspring of the physical union of God and Mary, Lucifer is Jesus's brother, etc., etc.) As for condemnation, Jesus Himself states who will and who will not enter the kingdom of heaven and who His sheep are. If a person falls outside the parameters the Lord set forth, that person will go to hell. He says so, not me.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 18, 2006 23:28:09 GMT -4
Dead Hoosiers, is there any reason for me to argue with you? It sounds very much like you've already made up your mind what Christianity is and that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints doesn't meet that definition. Would you be at all open to reconsidering that opinion, even if I were to show you that your perception of LDS doctrine is not as perfect as you might think it is (for instance, the idea that Christ is the result of a physical union between God and Mary is not official Church doctrine)?
My definition of "Christian" is simply "someone who believes in Christ's teachings and attempts to follow them." Whether they follow them correctly or not is the difference between a bad Christian and a good Christian, not between Christian and non-Christian. Non-Christians are people who don't believe in Christ's teachings at all - muslims, hindus, jews, and so forth.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jun 20, 2006 1:01:06 GMT -4
... Would you be at all open to reconsidering that opinion, even if I were to show you that your perception of LDS doctrine is not as perfect as you might think it is (for instance, the idea that Christ is the result of a physical union between God and Mary is not official Church doctrine)? ... YES! First and foremost, Christians are people in whom the Holy Spirit dwells. Anyone who is not "born again" cannot truthfully claim to be Christian. Then I would agree that some are more obedient than others.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 20, 2006 11:32:34 GMT -4
I disagree. I call anyone who claims to be following Christ's teachings a Christian, even if they don't actually have the Holy Spirit and have not been born again.
The reason I use this definition is because it's not my place to judge. How do I know if someone has been born again or has the Spirit? Only God can tell if someone is a true follower of Christ, so I have no problem giving anyone who claims to be a Christian the benefit of the doubt.
In fact I consider it rather rude behavior to greet someone with "your particular faith is not Christian, and here's why," and I believe it's certainly unhelpful in improving their attitude towards your own particular brand of Christianity, whichever it may be.
As to the examples of LDS doctrine you gave, only one of the three is official church doctrine; The idea that God was once a man (before the existence of this Earth) is widely accepted in the Church but is not an official doctrinal point. The idea that Christ was the result of a physical union between Mary and God is something I hadn't ever heard until church critics started responding to the afformentioned Townhall article. It is not official church doctrine. The idea that Lucifer is Christ's brother is correct, but in the same sense both Lucifer and Christ are brothers to all of us. We all came from the same Father after all.
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jun 20, 2006 17:18:53 GMT -4
I would like to point out that the apostles were not "christian," but Jewish.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 20, 2006 17:29:20 GMT -4
I would like to point out that the apostles were not "christian," but Jewish. Actually they were both.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jun 20, 2006 23:15:31 GMT -4
Jason, it's not my intention to judge you. I'd like to do a side by side comparison of a few of the major teachings of the LDS church with the Bible and let the facts fall where they will. We are allowed to judge between truth and error--in fact, we must.
Do you believe that insofar as spiritual matters are concerned that the Bible is the final authority? What books do you consider to be authoritative LDS writings and do you believe those books (from which you will present LDS doctrine) to be of equal authority with the scripture?
I will be using the Bible only to back my beliefs and will try to limit my arguments regarding LDS doctrine to those writings that you recognize as authoritative in the matter of doctrine. It's my position that the Bible is the final authority on all things Christian and that any writing, "Christian" or not, which contradicts scripture, is in error.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 21, 2006 0:16:44 GMT -4
Do I believe the Bible is the final authority in spiritual matters? Definitely not. God is the final authority.
I'm not really interested in "Bible bashing" - taking scriptures from the Bible and using them to try to prove someone else's view wrong. It very rarely convinces anyone of anything.
If you insist on quoting some scriptures up I'll be happy to tell you how they fit into LDS theology. If you want to bring up some LDS writings I'll be happy to tell you if I consider them authoritative or not, or what I consider them to mean.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jun 22, 2006 1:53:08 GMT -4
Supposing those extra-biblical revelations contradict scripture? What do you do then?
You need to relax Jason. I'm not Bible-bashing you or persecuting you in any way.
I was looking for a common frame of reference from which we could debate. Since all genuine Christians honor the Bible as the Word of God as the ultimate authority concering spiritual matters, and you claim to be Christian, I thought we'd be able to agree on that.
Please go ahead and explain how Jesus is Lucifer's brother. You said you'd do that in one of your previous posts.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 22, 2006 11:48:10 GMT -4
Supposing those extra-biblical revelations contradict scripture? What do you do then?
If God contradicts earlier scripture then you must accept God's current word over scripture given in the past.
There are several possibilities when you see what appears to be a contradiction between two scriptures; a) Your understanding of one of the texts was incorrect. b) One or both of the scriptures may have been mis-translated or mis-transcribed in the past. In such a situation, the scripture that has been in human hands the longest is more likely to be the flawed text. c) God may be superseding past commandments with new commandments. The early Christians dealt with situation (c) when they discussed whether Christians would be required to obey Jewish dietary requirements, circumcision, and so forth. They concluded that Christ had fulfilled the Law of Moses and that it was no longer necessary for Christians to obey it. The then current "extra-Torah" revelations of God superseded that which had gone before.
The Jews had never been commanded to preach their faith to other nations. When Jesus said "go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature." His current word superseded that which had gone before.
The Sermon on the Mount is full of Christ superseding earlier guidelines on behavior "Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."
You need to relax Jason. I'm not Bible-bashing you or persecuting you in any way. Don't worry, I'm not angry or agitated. If my replies seem somewhat intense it is because I consider this an important subject, not because I'm upset.
I was looking for a common frame of reference from which we could debate. Since all genuine Christians honor the Bible as the Word of God as the ultimate authority concerning spiritual matters, and you claim to be Christian, I thought we'd be able to agree on that. I'm sorry, I don't believe that "all genuine Christians" consider the Bible the ultimate authority on spiritual matters, and I don't think they should consider the Bible to be the ultimate authority. God Himself is the ultimate authority on spiritual matters. You referred to this idea yourself in an earlier post when you said that He is the one who decides who is one of his followers: "He says so, not me." No one should ever put a mere book before God.
Now, that being said the Bible certainly is an important collection of God's word and I do respect it as such.
If you find the Bible of such great worth, why should you object to receiving more of God's word? If God has spoken before, why can he not also speak today? Please go ahead and explain how Jesus is Lucifer's brother. You said you'd do that in one of your previous posts. I did give a brief explanation in reply #7. I'll go into a little more depth:
God is our Father in a literal sense because He created our spirits. God also created Lucifer's spirit, and so He is Lucifer's father. Jesus is God's son. As they have the same Father, Lucifer is Jesus' brother, and he is our brother as well. Our spirits all have the same Father, so we are all brothers and sisters.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Jun 25, 2006 15:18:35 GMT -4
God doesn't contradict Himself. 1Cr 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
In the OT God foretold of the change that would come from the beginning. Gen 49:10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him [shall] the gathering of the people [be].
Although God didn't specifically lay out what all the changes would be, He pointed His people to the Messiah and told them to heed Him. No word or prophecy exists indicating there would be any change in the game plan after His coming. What is written concerning Christ in the NT covers everything through eternity.
The law dealt mainly with behavior. Christ expanded on the law to include man's heart. Not a supercesion (is that a word?). Rather an expansion of the existing teaching.
I'm no expert in how the veracity of books is established, but I'm pretty sure that it's not by the age of the text--that is, presuming that the newer writing is more accurate simply because it's newer.
I'm sorry, I don't believe that "all genuine Christians" consider the Bible the ultimate authority on spiritual matters, and I don't think they should consider the Bible to be the ultimate authority. God Himself is the ultimate authority on spiritual matters. You referred to this idea yourself in an earlier post when you said that He is the one who decides who is one of his followers: "He says so, not me." No one should ever put a mere book before God.
Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Rev 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
If you find the Bible of such great worth, why should you object to receiving more of God's word? If God has spoken before, why can he not also speak today?
He speaks to His people today through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. When I read something claiming to be new revelation I always check it against these verses: Gal 1:8 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. Gal 1:9 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.
God is our Father in a literal sense because He created our spirits. God also created Lucifer's spirit, and so He is Lucifer's father. Jesus is God's son. As they have the same Father, Lucifer is Jesus' brother, and he is our brother as well. Our spirits all have the same Father, so we are all brothers and sisters.
Jhn 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Col 1:16 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:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.
Col 1:19 For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell;
Since Christ (who is eternal) is Lucifer's creator, how can He be Lucifer's brother?
|
|