EllenMaksoud
-
Posts
2,617 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by EllenMaksoud
-
-
I am not asking if Mormons are Christians. I know that's been debated ad nauseam. I am asking if it is possible for ANY mormon to be a Christian.
If I accept Christ as my savior, can I be a Christian? If I accept the Christ of the Bible as my Savior. If I have a personal relationship with him, know that I am a sinner, and know that it is by his grace that I am saved.
I am very familiar with the standard arguments against this concept. That I worship a different Jesus. That to be Mormon I must believe in being saved by works and therefore can't receive God's grace. What I am getting at is, is it possible for any one Mormon to be a Christian in your eyes (and presumably in the eyes of God) while still remaining a Mormon. What would have to happen in order for this to be the case?
(btw - I am not baiting anyone here. I am attending a Christian university and have been absolutely blown away by how well my Christian friends treat their Mormon classmates. This really got me thinking about this.)
Well, I am not just sure if I am Mormon or Muslim since our two faiths connect at so many points. Were I still Evangelical, they would be frothing at the mouth over that. In the Mormon faith, there are not statements like "All Muslims will go to Hell", (John Hagee). There is reasonable freedom to pray, study and ponder. I can still remember in my old EV church when I said I had issue with the Trinity. That Revelation 22:19 does not preclude further revelation, simply because, the bible in its entirety did not exist at the time. The statement was applicable to Revelations only.
There are other areas where the Mormons will allow a discussion, but in my old denomination, you would be seen as a heretic.
0 -
hello, i am trying to decide if sister rowe had a real vision and if so it is quite remarkable . my 7 children are divided on the subject and i am not yet committed either way. i have tried e mailing to her but no reply but i am sure she is busy. nothing online that i see offers anything against her or i would say an opposing view on the matter. i do question her saying the church is purchasing tents for the coming gathering and preparing places of refuge.i went to the church website and thru feedback asked if tents were being prepared as she stated, also i looked around the website. i found the church does obtain tents but for the disasters as needed not for the gathering as she says, so far. the church rep for the church response team said he does not know of any such preparation of tents as sister rowe claims and also said she has no right to say such things which is the leaders job. now this may be as far as the rep knows and what he says may be opinion. so what do you think? also i wonder what her bishops take is on all this as i think that could speak volumes. has anyone heard on this matter of the bishop or the church for that matter? i will talk to my bishop on this and i will soon come to the answer. yes i have prayed and so far this is the path i seem to be on now. my family is affected by this and so i will find what is the truth. for the most part all our lives are proceeding as usual none of my children are doing anything extreme but are more focused on prepping, i myself will do what i can but my resources are very limited so i just do what i can do. i really dont worry about myself i will just follow the prophet and the spirit. would like some opposing views on her to help weigh this matter. ive always liked movies on end of the world stuff, you know road warrior, deep impact etc. trouble is im a little lame due to motorcycle accidents and bouncing off cars. bummer. as a side note all our blessing seem to address end of the world matters so that makes this all the more involving in a way. all my kids are promised safety when the destructions come and know this. thanks for any help and email me if you can, i hope i dont make trouble and if so i apologize.
It took me a while to find out what a NDE was. Well, it can't be refuted one way or the other.
Do you have doubts about it because Julie is a woman and someone has convinced you that God only works through men? Might I remind you that Deborah (Judges 4 and 5) was a prophet? This sticks in my mind because I was a visitor at the ARCO meeting house this summer when a woman started to give a message on Deborah and two men in the congregation began to openly make fun of her.
It pains me that you are so apologetic. You have as much right to an opinion as any man.
Can she have talked to God, or an angel in her experience? You bet ! The only way she will know if it is true is if it happens. I'd be on Julie's side.
0 -
Due to past experiences.... yes I do have an issue with authority. I have been ecclesiastically abused by a former local leader. So some of my tension is rooted in those experiences.
To that I can not speak. The local folk have all been loving and kind to me.
I do not think the church has a good oversight mechanism. That is only my opinion and I will not be starting a movement to protest.
I was disgusted that they did not obey their own operating documents, but the issue has burned out and lacks fuel now. I suppose I could write a letter to SLC, but who would I send it to, and the existence of said letter would be proof that I do not believe in the power of prayer. And, I never interact with anyone but the local folk and they are kind to me, so what is there to complain about?
0 -
I have raised this issue before though I never feel like an answer is clearly given.
Do I need to follow a prophet when I think they are wrong? In otherwords these two quotes are in opposition to each other and yet they are both shared by lds "quasi official sources" Is one wrong or both wrong?
- “I remember years ago when I was a bishop I had President Heber J. Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting I drove him home … Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said: ‘My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.’ Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, ‘But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.’” (Conference Report, October 1960, p. 78.)
or this
- We have heard men who hold the Priesthood remark, that they would do anything they were told to do by those who presided over them, if they knew it was wrong: but such obedience as this is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme;and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself, should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God, who seeks for the redemption of his fellows,would despise the idea of seeing another become his slave, who had an equal right, with himself to the favor of God; he would rather see him stand by his side, a sworn enemy to wrong, so long as there was a place found for it among men. Others, in the extreme exercise of their Almighty (!) authority, have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without asking any questions - Millenial Star 1852 edition =XIV - Page 594
Also in terms of speaking publicly when you disagree with a leader. Many seem to say that is an absolute no-no.
But I find it happens more often than we think and in instances where it is seemingly approved. For example Neal Rappleye who recently wrote a few letters to Jeremy Runnels. (By the way Neal, if you read this, those were well done and I felt were done mostly with charity and civility. Thank you as it made them a pleasure to read and I found them very helpful) In the Article Neal says this
- """In your response to FairMormon you insist that “170+ year Mormon teaching” was not based on an assumption. Again, I remind you that I am not interested in saddling the Book of Mormon with generations of tradition, regardless of who it came from. You may personally struggle with the idea that several prophets and apostles were mistaken for a long time, but it does not really bother me. I reject the hemispheric model for Book of Mormon geography, and the idea that Lehi’s Clan are the exclusive ancestors of all Native Americans because I feel that sound textual analysis and interpretation forces us to reject those conclusions.32 Can you engage that analysis rather than lean on tradition? While I do not feel bound by any long-held tradition, it does seem worth pointing out that there really is not a unanimous 170+ year consensus on this topic, as you imply. Several Latter-day Saints, including leaders from both the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve, have expressed views about the limited scope of Book of Mormon geography, and about the Book of Mormon peoples being among others in the Americas. Matt Roper has traced the intellectual tradition for limited geography and “others” in the land both all the way back to the 1840s.""" ( on the part about DNA)
Neal seems to be stating plainly that prophets and leaders were wrong in their statements at times. He is not offering his view as an alternative but rather that they were simply wrong and he is even saying on what issue they were wrong on.
Since the Church has not taken any official stance on how big a group the lamanites were is he not presuming to be right and saying so publicly when the Church has not itself acknowledged it is wrong. Even the altered heading of "among " their ancestors still doesn't shoot down a prior held view of a leader but rather gives other views room to be explored.
What makes one person WRONG by saying a leader is wrong and another member says so with approval? Is it tone? Is it that one leader is living and another deceased? Is it that one defends the gospel in doing so while another perhaps tries to validate the doubter's frustration?
If we arrive at any answer that defends one instance and shoots down other instances, than it is really wrong to criticize the view of a leader? And if it is truly wrong to do so irregardless, than what does that say about all the apolgetic arguments that do so? If it is a judgement call, then who judges?
Is there a difference between criticizing a leader and publicly disagreeing with what they teach or say?
This is an important issue for many who struggle who feel they must do so silently as any effort to share why they are struggling is met with a "do not criticize leaders"
First, perhaps you would want to prayerfully ask yourself if you have an issue with authority. I most certainly DO have an issue with authority and obedience, and I make no excuse for it. The one issue I have with "them" became mute when I realized that I might not do for me what I want them to do for me. So, what is left? Heart felt obedience, and meek service. I'm supposed to learn to be meek !?! What?
As to certain other divisive issues, since the beginning many people have died over religious issues. In the Old Testament, being murdered was the retirement plan for God's prophets. Think about all the burnings at the stake, the Inquisition, what they tried to do to Martin Luther, and what they did to Wycliffe and others. Finally, think about what happened to Joseph Smith, his obedience and his disobedience. I'll never understand, or believe in his use of polygamy after reading the book of Jacob 2:23-30. However, his vision and leadership early in the church is unquestionable.
Often those persecuted suffer while they learn profound things from God. Suffering injustice is never just that. With it comes knowledge that we might not ever acquire otherwise.
1 -
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58505719-78/utah-wives-appeals-attorney.html.csp
Apparently the state of Utah is just not going to let this one go. We thought they might, then they didn't.
The original lawsuit ruling - where the cohabitation clause was declared unconstitutional - was December 24, 2013.
On August 27, 2014 the judge issued the final ruling (not sure what the difference is).
Now they are appealing this decision to the 10th circuit court of appeals, but in light of the SCOTUS action this past week, I think they're going to have a hard time winning that appeal.
Oh, and while I was reading up on this I came across an interesting bit of trivia - guess what year one of the last prominent mainstream Church polygamous family that were members in good standing died out?
Would you believe 1954 - 64 years after the manifesto and only 60 years ago?
Much closer than we realize. There are probably members on this board who were members when polygamous families still existed in the Church.
For a church that says they don't do Polygamy, and a judicial system that can't make up their mind, some one sure keeps stirring the pot. Can someone tell me what is going on? Is there a substantial group that wants to do it?
Geeze, the Muslims just do it with impunity. What ?
0 -
I noticed this article and pondered my response. My views have changed over the years as I have seen the suffering of people at the end of life. Is there a theological reason why we MUST allow people to suffer until they die ' naturally ' ? Personally I tend toward allowing a choice if strict protocols are followed.
At the moment, the only suffering I have is from getting old. However, if I had something terminal that I knew about, there are lots of ways to go without involving anyone else.
When I was closer to the Medical profession, there was a sort of code. If the chart said, "sedate to comfort", that was the signal to drug them so heavily that it eventually killed them. My only issue with that is that it just runs up a big bill. The only thing stopping common sense is the failure of others to adjust.
0 -
I can see: King James Bible John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.This was addressed to the leaders of the Jews.
Genisis 3:4 is significant, as is 2 Chronicles 18:21, and Matt 12:34
Most of my learning is from an Evangelical perspective, so to see Jesus as the brother of the devil takes some time for me. It is never said in EV circles. This discussion is helping me to turn the corner on Mormon Doctrine.
0 -
Do States require that persons authorized to perform marriages to actually perform marriages?
Perhaps religious leaders should now in earnest, use the Hobby Lobby ruling, to create laws specifically exempting performance of same sex marriages.
Personally, I hope that they will see civil unions as sufficient. That they would assume to have Temple Marriages seems excessive to me.
0 -
Dan Peterson on his blog linked to this blog post by Chet Cannon.
It's hilarious enough on its own.
But the real howler is that a number of enraged persons immediately jump in to rail against it in their online comments, thereby exemplifying through personal behavior the very thing that Cannon has just finished lampooning!
Um, what did you do to me? The internet police will not allow me to look at his blog. Are the police constables going to be beating my door down?
0 -
When you say shared privately on Facebook I assume you mean that she sent you a private message? If that is so, then where are the snarky comments coming from?
I am not doubting her experience, because I could see it happening. I have been in GC priesthood meetings at ward houses/stake centers where a woman attended with her husband. I always just considered it a fluke and never thought about it. However, in today's environment it would make me question motivation of the sister involved. It still boggles me mind.
For next priesthood session:
Rent suit
Get men's shoes
strap pillow to front to simulate big gut.
leave wig at home. I have no hair.
Get ridiculous tie.
Avoid crushed hand from handshake.
Remember to use stall with door.
0 -
Elder Oaks, 1995,
"Much can be learned by observation and analysis, but that method will yield only partial knowledge of the function and potential of a machine."
In the above statement, he is refering to science.
"The best and most complete knowledge about the operation and potential of a machine will be revealed by studying the manual written by its manufacturer. The operator’s manual for our bodies and souls is the scriptures, written by the God who created us and interpreted by his prophets."
I am not sure that Oaks is putting as much stock in sciencitific knowledge as you seems to assert he is.
Does this ignore knowledge given to individual believers by the Holy Spirit? Is he implying that all scriptural interpretation must come from the prophet? That is not something I can support.
0 -
There was no one awesome talk I can point to, no phrase or quote that will stick with me for weeks, though due to work and other events there are a few talks I must catch up on.
That said, I felt something. I will illustrate using Elder Uchtdorf's PH Talk "Lord Is it I"
While listening to the talk I was pierced with the same feeling I got all through Conference with the same thoughts through my mind.
I sit on top of a pivot trying so hard to stay centered balancing between doubting my doubts and feeding them. I fully realize their are what I would absolutely call problematicc issues. There are solid reasons to doubt. I also see evidences, and those are suffcient enough as well. 3 years ago, I almost called it quits and left. Luckily I realized that the biggest obstacle in the way was my own assumptions and expectations. Don't get me wrong, even after those were largely corrected there were still difficult and problematic issues that weighed me down though I also partook in spiritual experiences which kept me connected. but it was a back and forth. I don't want to be a gullible idiot who falls for a sham. I also don't want to miss out if the Church is true but in the joy and in the opportunities to become like Christ.
This conference has shifted my off the fulcrum. Below I share some of the things that have changed.
- I will say first and foremost, I will still try to deal with difficult issues. Talk about them, explore them, and see where those discussions lead. I will also conitnue to empathize with the one who doubts and struggles
- That said I AM going to be more charitable to those who consider me the problem, both in my real world and in the internet world.
- This conference really helped me divide between the gospel and the Church. The gospel to me is true, no ifs ands or buts. The Church I see as very flawed.... not in that it is faulty or damaged or in apostacy..... no nothing like that. But rather we are all on various places on a spectrum and while many the speakers talk to me at the place where I am at, and others still are ahead of me begging me to move forward, I also realize some are simply in another place and their words, council, and "truth" simply is not my "truth" and doesn't meet my needs. In the past this made me angry. I would think "Don't they know what they are saying is hurting me" This conference something clicked and I just understood that is where they are at... so be it.
- I am determined to be better and now, for the first time, I feel I see the road to get there.
Scott, ERAY, Bob Crockett, and others - While I still strongly disagree with your approach and will continue to disagree, I am determined to disagree much more softly.
=============================================================
WHAT DID YOU TAKE FROM CONFERENCE????
Did we listen to the same conference? Or maybe each one of us heard different things according to the need? I heard a comment about those who leave the church. I heard a comment about "Searchers", of which I certainly am. One of them talked about getting distracted by narrow issues and losing sight of the will of God and of Jesus the Christ. That's why I have to listen to it again.
0 -
There was no one awesome talk I can point to, no phrase or quote that will stick with me for weeks, though due to work and other events there are a few talks I must catch up on.
That said, I felt something. I will illustrate using Elder Uchtdorf's PH Talk "Lord Is it I"
While listening to the talk I was pierced with the same feeling I got all through Conference with the same thoughts through my mind.
I sit on top of a pivot trying so hard to stay centered balancing between doubting my doubts and feeding them. I fully realize their are what I would absolutely call problematicc issues. There are solid reasons to doubt. I also see evidences, and those are suffcient enough as well. 3 years ago, I almost called it quits and left. Luckily I realized that the biggest obstacle in the way was my own assumptions and expectations. Don't get me wrong, even after those were largely corrected there were still difficult and problematic issues that weighed me down though I also partook in spiritual experiences which kept me connected. but it was a back and forth. I don't want to be a gullible idiot who falls for a sham. I also don't want to miss out if the Church is true but in the joy and in the opportunities to become like Christ.
This conference has shifted my off the fulcrum. Below I share some of the things that have changed.
- I will say first and foremost, I will still try to deal with difficult issues. Talk about them, explore them, and see where those discussions lead. I will also conitnue to empathize with the one who doubts and struggles
- That said I AM going to be more charitable to those who consider me the problem, both in my real world and in the internet world.
- This conference really helped me divide between the gospel and the Church. The gospel to me is true, no ifs ands or buts. The Church I see as very flawed.... not in that it is faulty or damaged or in apostacy..... no nothing like that. But rather we are all on various places on a spectrum and while many the speakers talk to me at the place where I am at, and others still are ahead of me begging me to move forward, I also realize some are simply in another place and their words, council, and "truth" simply is not my "truth" and doesn't meet my needs. In the past this made me angry. I would think "Don't they know what they are saying is hurting me" This conference something clicked and I just understood that is where they are at... so be it.
- I am determined to be better and now, for the first time, I feel I see the road to get there.
Scott, ERAY, Bob Crockett, and others - While I still strongly disagree with your approach and will continue to disagree, I am determined to disagree much more softly.
=============================================================
WHAT DID YOU TAKE FROM CONFERENCE????
I'm feeling broken and contrite. My attitude about the church has been driven down by my own petulance.
I did not get to see Saturday because of Internet issues, So Sunday I went to the Stake Center. Because I could not get Utah, and Oregon time straight, I missed about 20 minutes of the morning session. As we finished up morning session I was feeling pretty sassy, thinking that "I am just like spit on a hot griddle" or "I am just like a feral cat". Nothing really wrong.
When the Afternoon Session started it was like being corrected by someone I love, and being caught out in my impertinence and snottiness. After a lot of reflection, it is clear to me that there will be another General Conference for me as soon as I can get my band width issues worked out on Monday.
And, as far as my Temple Recommend? What was I thinking in saying that it was "MY" Temple Recommend? With the myriad problems that I present to the GA on the issue, I would not give me a Temple Recommend. Now I hope that they teach me and those like me how to be pleasing to Heavenly Father with out it? Maybe there is no way?
2 -
Catholics are way ahead of us on accepting human evolution.
And both are way ahead of the EV denomination I belonged to.
There is a great deal of work being done on human genetics as it relates to birth defects, gender, and mental health issues.0 -
Women have crashed the Priesthood Party!
And at BYU, no less!!!
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58487302-78/women-priesthood-session-ordain.html.csp
Oh, goodness what has been unleashed? Being an old fashioned woman, this is not understandable.
What if women are forced to be Bishops some day? I would not do what Bishops do. Mine has taken money to someone at 3:00 AM, been yelled at and threatened, and is much more patient than I am.
0 -
Elder Oaks said in 1995, "While I am not qualified as a scientist, with the aid of scientific literature and with the advice of qualified scientists and practitioners"
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1995/10/same-gender-attraction?lang=eng
Notice that Elder Oaks did not say blogs or internet websites (like AnswersinGenesis).
Elder Oaks said "scientific literature" and "qualified scientists"
Elder Oaks read the scientific literature to read about the evidence about homosexuality, he found that the evidence is not conclusive according to the scientific literature. (Back in 1995)
The scientists and the scientific literature told Elder Oaks that there was a scientific debate, it was not the internet websites and blogs that told him that.
Elder Oaks taught us that it is very important to trust the qualified scientists and the scientific literature. If we are not going to do scientific research, we should trust the experts.
The Scientific Consensus is important according to Elder Oaks
He said, "most scientists concede"
He also said, "let alone a consensus"
and "a prominent scientist observed"
Elder Oaks also said, "We know that our inheritance explains many of our physical characteristics"
Mormon Newsroom
"From estimating the genealogical relationships among fleas to understanding the population genetics of crayfish, DNA sequence information can provide clues to the past and allow scientists to test very specific hypotheses in a way that was unapproachable even a few years ago. The announced completion of the Human Genome Project is not really a completion of DNA work at all, but simply one step on the road toward a better understanding of ourselves as biological organisms, our shared genetic history as humans, and the genetic history we share with all living organisms" - Mormon Newsroom
To my knowledge, the Mormons are the only religious group to actually embrace science as a part of rational thought. Learning to ask the correct questions and to get answers from appropriate sources is the next hurdle. Science is generally quite compartmented, so as an example, asking a Marine Biologist about Equine pregnancy would not yield proper answers. As upset as I get at the church at times, this man sometimes makes me speechless.
0 -
You're so right, I need to keep all of what you've said in mind, except it is the reason for my constant fencesitting.
Well, I am the consummate fence sitter. Um not actually fence sitting, but how many Mormon women do you know that walks the streets in Hijab, has many Muslim friends and talks to them about Isa PBUH (Jesus Christ) and Allah SWT (God) and areas that we can come to agreement on. Much to my amazement, no Mormon has chewed me out. If I was Evangelical, I would be back in the circle of sin.
1 -
I wish I was. I grew up near Manti, Utah. From the time I was very young I listened to this stuff. I'm old enough to have watched the arguments change somewhat, but mostly remain the same. I guess after decades of trying to reason with these people, I really just found myself (yesterday) realizing that many of them don't even believe it themselves. Like I said, there is plenty there that is true to argue about. If you have to make stuff up, you must fear the truth. Reminds me of what the pharisees did to Jesus. I find myself wanting to do a Jack Nicholas imitation, "You can't handle the truth!"
I'm 67. It is never too late to join the church.
1 -
Maybe they don't want to find out the truth about what we believe because they may actually start to believe it themselves.
They are cautioned to avoid any other doctrine than that of Jesus Christ, not realizing how far off they themselves are. And, if you are going to confront a Pastor with scripture he will mostly go to that denominations interpretation of the scripture that is often far from what we would think.
0 -
Today, I had my pre-baptismal interview with a Church elder. I am scheduled to be baptized this Sunday (October 5th)
Previously, I practiced the Jewish faith and am a citizen of Israel. Once I am baptized into the LDS church, will I cease
to be a member of the Jewish faith?
I was Muslim before being baptized into the Mormon church. I'm still Muslim and now I am Mormon. Only men say that we can not do that. Lately, am more observant of Muslim practices but still attend Mormon services. No Mormon has said a thing. I do not think that our Heavenly Father believes in denominational lines. The fact that some Muslims are busily killing each other pains me but I will not renounce Islam. We all seek knowledge of the same God.
0 -
I mean I get it... Mormons are peculiar. We believe that Jesus appeared to a 14 y.o. boy in New York. We believe in modern revelation and scripture. We believe we have a living, actual prophet today. We believe in modern day miracles and visions and the restoration of the ancient church. Why then do so many of my evangelical friends need to make stuff up? Isn't the truth enough to highlight our differences? But the whole, "I know your beliefs better than you" and "did you know that Brigham Young once said 160 years ago that..." I don't know I mean if you are truly representing Christ, shouldn't there be a little honesty to go along with it.
I'm sorry to vent. I'm just getting Facebook messages from some friends, and it seems so unchristian to hear some of the bunk they've been fed by their pastors and at their anti-mormon seminars. The true differences are stark enough. You don't have to bear false witness to show that there are fundamental differences. Just sayin'
I was Evangelical from 1974 to 2004, you do the math.
There was a brief stint in the RLDS church. We were searching.The Bible can be spun, and to add to the confusion, there are some EV folk who actually do seek Jesus the Christ, but they are largely silent. So, the Pastors go to Bible College and then to Seminary, it's confusing. I have a dear friend who is a Four-Square Pastor, and to keep his license, he must tow the church line. He can't preach about compassion for gays and "other sinners" One of the things that propelled me out of the ranks of the EV was a certain TV Evangelist shouting and pounding the pulpit and saying "All Muslims are going to HELL!" After that and a few other things, the church did not seem real, and Jesus did not either.
Still, the first Commandment in the OT is clear. "I am the Lord thy God and thou shall have no other God's before me". It was also very clear to me that the slash job that the Media and our government was doing on all Muslims was just bogus. And after years of vague hate filled generalities, Islam seemed like the only true religion.
It hurt me a lot that Pastors can get up there and demean women (In some EV churches, woman can not mount the pulpit unless a man is there too). Most unnerving to me is that Pastors can yell from the pulpit. I have heard them shout about gays, Muslims, and it has made me ask, where is Jesus in all this hate speech?
So, after being gone from their ranks for a decade, I can see some moderation in their ranks. The "Stop Murdering Us" campaign had some effect, and then the Evangelical Discovery of Mormons was pure shock for them. There was a gathering of one of the main bodies of Evangelicals in which one of their members, gave a message complaining that Mormons are doing a better job than us. This was really surprising because one of my issues with EV folk is that they like to predatorize others, even members of their own flock. I have just moved, so please do not ask me to locate the printed copy. One of these days, the person who loaned it to me will ask for it back and I live in fear of that.
One thing that is absolutely unique about Mormons is no matter what I have done, I've never been made to feel guilty or devalued. They always speak of moving on and growing. If you have never sat in an Evangelical "Circle of Sin", you have never lived. It is comprised of a circle of chairs with one in the middle. The sinner is placed in the middle and the righteous occupy the the outer circle. I made it through several "correctors", got up and left and went straight to Islam.
Yes, Mormons are peculiar, delightfully so!
0 -
Sounds familiar:
"Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean." (2 kings 5: 14)
To add to the confusion, I was baptized 3 times in America. Once in the RLDS church, and twice in two EV community churches. The 4th time was on a Missionary trip to Kenya and then to Israel. It was in the Jordan River. The 5th time I was Baptized was in a Mormon Ward, and I did it just to get them to stop pushing me. One person in the church said I did all the right things for the wrong reasons ...
So, as mad as I get about a few issues, every time I want to break my plate and stalk off, this event brings me to submission and obedience.
1 -
I have two questions regarding the blessing and healing of the sick with respect to using the priesthood:1. Is the priesthood an actual power that can in some supernatural way initiate the healing process inside a person (like "the force" in Star Wars) or is it just the authority to call upon God to heal the person?2. The scriptures say: "And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up;" (Jame 5: 14-15)If all we need to do is pray with faith to cause a sick person to be healed by God, why do we need the priesthood to do it?"If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you." (Matt 17: 20)Why is using the priesthood a better way to go?
I'm of two minds on this as I too am aware of those scriptures. However, I did not receive healing from a certain painful, life long issue until a Mormon Elder Missionary baptized me. That was almost three years ago. There is some sort of Mojo there that is beyond explanation.
1 -
It used to be, not that long ago, that so-called anti-Mormons were the only ones who asked the questions on this board that self-professed Mormons are asking today.
Some of you remember and participated in answering the non-LDS anti-Mormons who used to frequent this board and ZLMB before it, with gusto and sound reason. But it is almost as thought they slipped into your own camp and are identifying themselves as LDS. Your own people are asking about and complaining of the same lame stuff that has been answered satisfactorily many times. As a non-LDS who has been around LDS sites for almost as long as there have been sites, it bewilders me how distrustful and disrespectful supposedly devout Latter-day Saints now seem to feel about the leadership of those who they say are the Apostles of Jesus Christ.
It seems like a sea-change to me. That is because it seems like you used to do such a good job of answering your critics. But now that your critics are Mormon...It leaves me bewildered and in a way dismayed, to see Mormons doubtful and critical of Mormonism for all the wrong reasons.
Rory
I am not ready to be called Anti-Mormon. I feel like downward communication within the church is Godly and well placed. I just wish that I felt like there was some upward communication, and when I say that some one is sure to come out with prayer is your upward communication path. Perhaps I just need more patience. Yes, there are those who want some things changed and I just don't know what the issues are. The one issue that I really cared about, I just decided that God was welcome to. I feel like there were some mistakes made, but I can do nothing, so that is the end of it.
0
Dear Evangelical Friends: Can A Mormon Be A Christian?
in General Discussions
Posted
I like your take on this and wish that we could sit and study. That however is not possible.
The Trinity idea was first espoused around 325 AD. It seems that by that time Constantine was busy taking the church on an Apostate course. The thing that interferes with the Trinity for me is the first Commandment back in Exodus 20:3, and my partial adherence to Islam.
In my opinion, the truth is skillfully concealed in a nightmare of truth and deceit from centuries of historians pitching the story to suit the needs of their group or the one who paid them. In my opinion, the Mormons are about as close as anyone to correcting this.