Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bluebell

Was Jesus The Son Of God Before The Earth Was Created?

Recommended Posts

 

What is true repentance? You must first work to overcome your sins, THEN and only then does one receive grace. Many believe that grace is what allows you to keep the commandments but grace only happens AFTER one has completely forsaken his sins. I must work to overcome my sin, THEN grace is effective.

Here is another example of what I warned you about. Why do you feel the need to misrepresent what the verses are saying?  Could it be that if you take them at face value, you would have no basis for contention?

 

What are you implying?  That we should continue in sin?

 

God forbid!

 

What then?  Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace?

 

God forbid!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post

I would go on, but I don't have the time right now.

 

But so far, you are pretty much living up to our expectations.  Unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post

  BlahBlahBlau - Totaly disagree my posts still are standing. They stand independant of LDS Theology [Thou they agree without knowing it ] it is theres. May True Grace Be obtained by you.

 

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

             Anakin7

 

Well, ok. I won't contest you insisting your opinions "stand."

 

They aren't really your opinions though, and if you will be honest, the links you posted are someone else's opinions that you just happen to share.

 

Of course, my opionion stands as well, and under the same condition as your opinion. I chose the one that makes most sense to me and I'll stand on that one.

 

Now, you can offer more opinions if you choose, but that's all they will be, and that's all the weight they can carry in a debate. No one can claim to have a corner on the truth when it comes to interpreting Scripture and if they do, in my opinion they are a loony religious zealot. And again, that's my opinion. Yours may vary.

Share this post


Link to post

In the LDS Church, the expression "this life" (I.e. life in the fallen state) refers to life in the flesh and in the spirit world prior to the resurrection. Because of his great love and mercy, the Latter-day Saints believe God provides for repentance while in the fallen body and also while in the post-mortal realm of spirits prior to the final judgement that takes place after the resurrection.

As for the Latter-day Saint quest to continually grow in the grace and knowledge of God, unto the eventual day of full sanctification in Christ, we are simply following the inspired counsel of the Apostle Paul;

12 NOT AS THOUGH I HAD ALREADY ATTAINED, either were ALREADY PERFECT: but I follow after, IF that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.

13 Brethren, I COUNT NOT MYSELF TO HAVE APPREHENDED: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and REACHING FORTH UNTO THOSE THINGS WHICH ARE BEFORE,

14 I PRESS TOWARD THE MARK FOR THE PRIZE of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 3)

Why revile and make sport of the Latter-day Saints for taking Paul at his word? And excuse us if we take the Lord at his word when he solemnly proclaimed that only those believers who overcome the world, as he overcame the world, will be given the right to reign as kings and be seated on the very throne of God (see Revelation 3).

By the way, you are awfully presumptuous and unkind to put erroneous words in my mouth. But I have come to expect nothing less from most anti-Mormons (there are rare exceptions). You might learn a lot from me if you can turn over a new leaf and demonstrate a sufficient degree of respect and kindness to encourage me to continue in dialogue. But if you continue being presumptuous and disrespectful I'll disengage and leave you with your faulty understanding of the beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I say this because I have been participating on this board long enough to have learned it's useless trying to engage disrespectful and dismissive know-it-alls in a worthwhile discussion.

 

Good grief!

 

First, you did not answer either of the questions I asked. Is that why you responded without quoting me? The intention here is clearly to badger and harass me into submission, so I can only think you were attempting to side step the questions. I'm not accusing you of that, but if it's not true and you really are the wonderful person you would have everyone believe you are, then why don't you just go ahead and answer the questions.

 

Secondly, everyone here keeps accusing me of things I haven't done. You accuse me of putting erroneous words in your mouth. I have no idea what you mean. If I seem to be attacking you it's only because I have had to defend my honor and character from pretty much every one of you who have had something to say to me. I keep getting warned that I better not challenge any Mormon beliefs with my bogus Christian ideas, and with many other unkind and untrue attacks on my person and character. All I have done is ask a few questions about your own teachings and asked for clarification. It appears that repentance, as described by the Scriptures and the church Elders who have given talks to explain those Scriptures, is impossible. I posted the Scriptures and talks that lead me to that conclusion and all I have asked is for clarification. I have not bashed anyone nor promoted any "anti-Mormon doublespeak, even though I continue to be either warned not to do that or accused of already doing that. Neither are true. Instead of actually offering me rational dialogue on this issue, to date, no one has even began to get close to offering any thoughts. Everyone is too busy warning me or chastising me or accusing me of things that I better not do.

 

I realize badgering the Christian is appealing to the more fleshly Mormons, but aren't there at least a few of you out there with enough guts to challenge your own intellect? 

Share this post


Link to post

As a fellow Evangelical I would like to advise you to temper your judgement about people, especially Calm and especially on a web based forum, where emotion and sarcasm isn't always communicated accurately. Calm is one of the nicest persons you'll meet on this board and I've never heard her make a hateful comment yet. So my advice... chill... and read some threads for a bit and get to know people first. 

 

As for your elephant in the room. Often times people don't want to have to explain their position for the 100th time, that is often why you don't get much reaction from people. 

 

Hello Daniel.

 

Warnings and advise is all I get here. LoL I just signed up recently but I've been reading here for awhile now. So thanks for your advise but for crying out loud people, who died and left you all in charge? Everyone is so paranoid here about what they think I might do or say that it's to the point of absurdity. Not to mention I seem to be held to a higher standard than others, simply because of my Faith.

 

You said "I would like to advise you to temper your judgement about people, especially Calm and especially on a web based forum, where emotion and sarcasm isn't always communicated accurately"

 

Doesn't that apply to Calm as well? Perhaps it's what Calm said to me.... "Tends to be much easier to attack others' worship and fellowship habits when protecting one's own by hiding them."

 

This comment was made in reply to my comment to Anakin, that I prefer not to tell anyone where I worship or who I fellowship with. yet I had not attacked anyone's worship or fellowship habits, but Calm was clearly butting in just to admonish me for not divulging that info.  Perhaps Calm thinks posting the Scriptures and LDS Elder's talks somehow is an attack? Perhaps if I offered an anti-Mormon commentary, but I am not anti-Moron and I have not offered anything other than my opinion of those Scriptures and talks and I've asked if I am wrong in assuming they seem to indicate that repentance is impossible, and if so, what in my understanding is wrong? Rather than getting answers or engaging me in a dialogue, all I get is bagdered.

 

My reply to Calm was that I thought it was a bit mean spirited to jump the shark and assume my intentions are less than honorable. I felt once again, badgered. What difference does it make to anyone here where I worship or who I fellowship with? Why it even worth commenting on? I've spent enough time on these boards to understand that anything and everything I say will be scrutinized in detail, disected, disrespected, taken out of context, misrepresented and attacked. So I choose not to give the zealots any more ammunition than I have to.

 

Calm replied "Never said or assumed your intentions weren't honourable. Why are you assuming I did? Personal info in the guidelines is about identity info. If your beliefs are so unique that someone could track you down through them ,by all means don't post them."

 

I answered "Because you said: "Tends to be much easier to attack others' worship and fellowship habits when protecting one's own by hiding them. Should I suppose that was said in "love" like the others who have chastized me and then said it was done out of love?"

 

To which Calm replied: "I don't sign my posts "in love" for a reason."

 

What should I make of that? How should I understand that in any other way than Calm disagrees that posts should be made "in love." What do you suppose Calm's intentions were when replying to me, which, by the way, he (or she I guess I should say) initiated the conversation. Had it been me replying to a Mormon with an unsolicited comment, instead of the other way around, would you all be so willing to think none of that was meant to badger or discredit me in any way? BTW, I never used the word "hateful" to describe my thoughts concerning what Calm said to me, I said It's a bit meanspirited, in my opinion, to jump the shark and assume my intentions are not honorable.

 

Why don't people try and get to know me first? Or is that just my job? Shouldn't everyone be treated equally here?

 

As for your last comment: "As for your elephant in the room. Often times people don't want to have to explain their position for the 100th time, that is often why you don't get much reaction from people."

 

Well, that is either true or a copout. If it's true then please point me to a thread. Otherwise it's just a copout.

Share this post


Link to post

I find it simultaneously fascinating and disgusting that a "discussion" about the Good News of the Gospel can degenerate into a mean-spirited win-at-all-cost debate. What a shame that people who jointly claim to follow Him cannot find enough of the pure love of Christ to avoid being so easily offended with each other.

Share this post


Link to post

I appreciate that, daniel. It means a lot to me. I was wondering if perhaps I was having a really bad day without realizing it. :). It can be confusing at times to understand what someone means if one hasn't any history with them. Usually I tend to explain more, perhaps that contributed.

And your comment of the 100th time is quite kind and generous since from what I've seen you've gone through a bit of that on the board as well. We all keep trying to turn the light on for the other guy, do we not? :)

I think timing, right after conference, debating...many use the time to have a breather and recharge, so may not want to walk too well worn paths at the moment.

 

Hi Calm,

 

If you didn't mean to be sarcastic and/or condescending, then I apologize for thinking you were.

 

I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and start over as potential friends, if you will return the gesture. 

Share this post


Link to post

Good grief!

First, you did not answer either of the questions I asked. Is that why you responded without quoting me? The intention here is clearly to badger and harass me into submission, so I can only think you were attempting to side step the questions. I'm not accusing you of that, but if it's not true and you really are the wonderful person you would have everyone believe you are, then why don't you just go ahead and answer the questions.

Secondly, everyone here keeps accusing me of things I haven't done. You accuse me of putting erroneous words in your mouth. I have no idea what you mean. If I seem to be attacking you it's only because I have had to defend my honor and character from pretty much every one of you who have had something to say to me. I keep getting warned that I better not challenge any Mormon beliefs with my bogus Christian ideas, and with many other unkind and untrue attacks on my person and character. All I have done is ask a few questions about your own teachings and asked for clarification. It appears that repentance, as described by the Scriptures and the church Elders who have given talks to explain those Scriptures, is impossible. I posted the Scriptures and talks that lead me to that conclusion and all I have asked is for clarification. I have not bashed anyone nor promoted any "anti-Mormon doublespeak, even though I continue to be either warned not to do that or accused of already doing that. Neither are true. Instead of actually offering me rational dialogue on this issue, to date, no one has even began to get close to offering any thoughts. Everyone is too busy warning me or chastising me or accusing me of things that I better not do.

I realize badgering the Christian is appealing to the more fleshly Mormons, but aren't there at least a few of you out there with enough guts to challenge your own intellect?

I did answer your questions. But so as to avoid any further confusion and potential frustration, let's take what I call the minimalist approach to dialogue. Here's how it works: you ask me one simple and very specific question at time (not a multifaceted question) and I will answer you with a specific and highly-focused response. Because I am not a fast typist, and because I like to focus on one specific point at a time, and because I also believe focusing on too many points at once tends to create confusion and scattered thinking, this is how I would like to carry on. So if you are willing, go ahead and ask me your first focused question and I will answer you as I have time to respond (we're about to leave to go on a scenic drive to Seven Lakes Drive and Bear Mountain in the state of New York). But though I'm busy, I will make sure to set apart the time to answer your first question before bedtime.

Edited by Bobbieaware

Share this post


Link to post

This has already been addressed in this thread.

 

It is a classic Evangelical misrepresentation of what the verse says and means.

 

Here is a small clue.  The word "after" in that verse means after!  It doesn't mean "because of".  It means after in the chronological sense.

 

So, here is example #1 of you doing exactly what I warned you about.

 

Hi Vance.

 

It's hard to believe you're not being condescending when you keep reminding me that you have warnded me. I understand you're attempting to take the higher moral ground, but I haven't been here long enough for you to actually own that stance.

 

Wouldn't you consider it condescending if I prefaced each of my comments with "this is the typical clueless and misinformed Mormon response?"

 

I certainly hope you're a bigger person than this behavior typically points to. Pride is our worst enemy.

 

I agree with your eisegesis, that after really means after. I looked it up in my reformed Egyptian dictionary and it really does mean after.

 

After "what," is my question. Will you care to address that?  

Share this post


Link to post

Here is another example of your misuse of Scripture.

 

The "filthy rags" of Isa 64:6 are not "righteous deed" or "righteous works" or even "righteousness" in the correct sense.  Read the verse in context.  It is referring to the acts of the wicked.  The "righteousnesses" of the wicked are not real acts of righteousness.

 

So, there you go.  Another example of you doing what I warned you about.

 

Vance, you said "the rightousness of the wicked are not real acts of righteousness." With that I agree wholeheartedly.

 

And if you're warning me not to attempt to discuss your beliefs, then please don't discuss mine.

Share this post


Link to post

So, with that in mind, why the snide comment?

 

Which comment are you referring to? Your own are rather condescending, I might add, and if you choose to play in the mud you're probably going to get a little on you.

 

Just warning you..

Share this post


Link to post

Would the words of the Bible convince you? 

 

Somehow I think not.

 

Matt 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

 

Luke 1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

 

Why the snide remark?

 

Convince me of what?

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for posting this very inspiring message.

 

BUT for some reason you seem to think that the Grace of Christ is somehow being denied by them.  Think again.

 

Denied by who?

 

And no, I was pointing out that your Scriptures indicate that "IF" you deny yourself of ALL ungodliness, "THEN" is grace sufficient for you.

 

Tell us Vance, have you denied yourself of ALL ungodliness? Have you truly repented? Do you know anyone who has? This says you must, and my question is... is that possible?

Share this post


Link to post

Here is another example of what I warned you about. Why do you feel the need to misrepresent what the verses are saying?  Could it be that if you take them at face value, you would have no basis for contention?

 

What are you implying?  That we should continue in sin?

 

God forbid!

 

What then?  Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace?

 

God forbid!!!!!

 

Well, obviously your warnings have fallen on deaf ears. It's like a tinkling bell... eventually you don't even hear it anymore.

 

What have I misrepresented? I've posted Scriptures and asked questions about them. Will you care to answer?

 

No, I'm not implying that we should continue to sin, where did you ever get that? The Scriptures I posted clearly say with no uncertain terms that I  must forsake my sin completely, denying myself of all ungodliness and do ALL that I can do. Otherwise I have not truly repented and grace is not sufficient.

 

Have you truly repented? Do you know anyone who has? If you do, then I want to talk to their wife, or sister, or best friend and see if they agree.

Share this post


Link to post

I would go on, but I don't have the time right now.

 

But so far, you are pretty much living up to our expectations.  Unfortunately.

 

LoL. No doubt, when you're the judge, jury AND executioner.

Share this post


Link to post

I find it simultaneously fascinating and disgusting that a "discussion" about the Good News of the Gospel can degenerate into a mean-spirited win-at-all-cost debate. What a shame that people who jointly claim to follow Him cannot find enough of the pure love of Christ to avoid being so easily offended with each other.

 

Hi Okrahomer. Thanks for the sermon.

 

Not to sound pushy, but do you have anything to offer along the lines of the topic? I mean, we can all use some fire and brinstone preachin from time to time, but we're in the middle of a gentlemanly discussion here. What are your thoughts about the questions I've asked?

Share this post


Link to post

I did answer your questions. But so as to avoid any further confusion and potential frustration, let's take what I call the minimalist approach to dialogue. Here's how it works: you ask me one simple and very specific question at time (not a multifaceted question) and I will answer you with a specific and highly-focused response. Because I am not a fast typist, and because I like to focus on one specific point at a time, and because I also believe focusing on too many points at once tends to create confusion and scattered thinking, this is how I would like to carry on. So if you are willing, go ahead and ask me your first focused question and I will answer you as I have time to respond (we're about to leave to go on a scenic drive to Seven Lakes Drive and Bear Mountain in the state of New York). But though I'm busy, I will make sure to set apart the time to answer your first question before bedtime.

 

Hello Bobbieaware,

 

Finally, someone willing to engage me with something other than condescending rhetoric.

 

Awesome.

 

I'm sure you tried, but I didn't really see an answer that satisfied my curiosity. My question is simple. Is it possible to truly repent, considering the teachings found in the Scriptures and Elder's talks which I've posted so far. I'll post them again all in one place if you like, as I have them saved to a document for reference.

 

My question arises from the half dozen or more Scriptures and talks by Mormon Elders which I have posted throughout this discussion, which focus on the same thought... that one must forsake one's sin completely, denying oneself of all ungodliness, and do all one can do before grace is sufficient. I would ask that you take all of them into consideration, since they all say essentially that same thing... that I must do ALL I can do before grace is sufficient.

 

In consideration of what all of these Scriptures and Elders teach about exaltation, is it possible to truly repent? It seems to me that the requirement that one must completely forsake one's sin before grace is sufficient, is literally quite impossible. Speaking for myself, there is no doubt it is impossible, and I can't imagine anyone, in our fallen and depraved state, to actually completely overcom sin. 

 

For example: Moroni 10:32; 2 Ne 25:23; Alma 11:37; D&C 42,43; D&C 82:7; 1 Ne 3:7; D&C 1:31,32; Alma 34:32-35; Alma 42:13, 29,30; D&C 58:42,43; and If you have a copy of "The Miracle of Forgiveness" read p.164 and 354... always do better than you can, trying is weak.

 

How does one do better than they can?

 

Drive careful and enjoy your trip. Sounds like a nice time. I'm retired and moved to the mountains of northern Arizona about a year ago, and I absolutely love it here. I often see elk grazing right in my yard, and there are deer, Javelina, rabbits, skunks and racoons. If you haven't seen an elk up close, they are HUGE. Some as big as a horse, and a bull in full head dress up close is truly intimidating.

Edited by BlahBlahBlah

Share this post


Link to post

Well, you can take your hateful attitude and your jocularity somewhere else, if you don't mind. Don't bother responding to me again unless you're prepared to treat me with the dignity and respect that I deserve. I don't care who you think you are or how many posts you have. That's nothing to me.

 

So if you're not challenged beyond your ability to defend your beliefs, then why don't you defend them rather than attempting to change the focus to disparaging my character instead? This isn't my first rodeo either, cowboy, and that ploy only tells me you don't really have any valid answsers.

 

She's not being hateful, disrespectful, or disparaging of your dignity, and she's very welcome to stay in my thread.  If you don't want to be in a thread that she is participating in, then you should probably be the one to leave it.  :)  

Share this post


Link to post

"How should I understand that in any other way than Calm disagrees that posts should be made "in love"".

That never even entered my mind.

Share this post


Link to post

She's not being hateful, disrespectful, or disparaging of your dignity, and she's very welcome to stay in my thread.  If you don't want to be in a thread that she is participating in, then you should probably be the one to leave it.  

 

Why, thank you for your opinion, but don't hate.

 

And I respectfully disagree. She most certainly did cause me to feel disparaged and disrespected whether or not you felt that,, and if it bothers you that I called her on it, or you're so calloused or biased against evangelical Christians that you either can't see or choose not to see the condescension, then that's your problem not mine. Pride is our worst enemy.

 

And there is no reason to continue the hateful attack on my character, as you are attempting here.

 

Just because you started a thread doesn't give you the authority to lord anything over those of us who may choose to comment in that thread. Again, pride is our worst enemy.

Edited by BlahBlahBlah

Share this post


Link to post

"How should I understand that in any other way than Calm disagrees that posts should be made "in love"".

That never even entered my mind.

 

Well what should I think? I can't read your mind. I only know what you said. You said you don't sign your posts "with love" for a reason, but you didn't go on to say what that reason was, other than you're a long time poster here with a consistent way of posting and that I should have somehow figured out what you meant because of that. 

 

Well excuuuuuuse me.  

Edited by BlahBlahBlah

Share this post


Link to post

Why, thank you for your opinion, but don't hate.

And I respectfully disagree. She most certainly did cause me to feel disparaged and disrespected whether or not you felt that,, and if it bothers you that I called her on it, or you're so calloused or biased against evangelical Christians that you either can't see or choose not to see the condescension, then that's your problem not mine. Pride is our worst enemy.

And there is no reason to continue the hateful attack on my character, as you are attempting here.

Just because you started a thread doesn't give you the authority to lord anything over those of us who may choose to comment in that thread. Again, pride is our worst enemy.

I agree, pride is the worst enemy. Words all of us can stand to remember more often.

But I do have some say in threads that I start. Thread originators have some pull in their threads.

No one can make you feel disrespected or belittled. If you truly feel that she has done you a wrong, then turn the other cheek, forgive, and move on.

The flack you are getting has nothing to do with being evangelical Christian. Some of my favorite posters here claim that as their religion.

It's the personality that the poster chooses to display that people usually react to, not their religion.

Give people the benefit of the doubt and you will get that back. Be judgemental and self righteous and that tends to come back as well.

Time for everyone to move on and return to the topic. :)

Share this post


Link to post

I agree, pride is the worst enemy. Words all of us can stand to remember more often.

But I do have some say in threads that I start. Thread originators have some pull in their threads.

No one can make you feel disrespected or belittled. If you truly feel that she has done you a wrong, then turn the other cheek, forgive, and move on.

The flack you are getting has nothing to do with being evangelical Christian. Some of my favorite posters here claim that as their religion.

It's the personality that the poster chooses to display that people usually react to, not their religion.

Give people the benefit of the doubt and you will get that back. Be judgemental and self righteous and that tends to come back as well.

Time for everyone to move on and return to the topic. :)

 

Bluebell, thank you. I acknowledge the spirit in which your words above were spoken, and I respect you for that.

 

I have turned the other cheek, in fact, apolgizing to Calm if I have misunderstood her intentions. I apologize again if she missed it. I would expect that you would give her that same advise? At this point I don't think there is any reason for me to think differently about anything she said to me. It occurs to me that the long time posters here seem to think everyone should bow to them for some reason.

 

Oh, yes it does matter that I'm an Evangelical Christian. At least 4 LDS posters have warned me that they will have nothing to do with my stupid nonsense, so don't even try. Not their words, but surely the shortened version that sums it up. I think Vance was probably the most condescending but others are close.

 

I agree it's one's personality that people respond to, and so far I have spent most of my time defending the personality everyone hangs on me seemingly expecting me to live up to their assumptions, rather than affording an opportunity to discover who I really am. I haven't responded to anyone in any manner other than that of a sounding board. If I seem crass and sarcastic, well, look in the mirror and see if you haven't first approached me with disdain. As you said "give people the benefit of the doubt and you will get that back. Be judgmental and self righteous and that tends to come back as well."

 

I agree but that should apply to everyone here, not just me.

 

I've started a new thread, with my comments and questions all in one place:

 

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/66194-is-it-possible-to-truly-repent/

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×