Log Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 I live in Jesus' Presence today. Isn't that a nice teaching of ours?It is a nice teaching; we have a similar one for them who have been received into his baptism and received of his spirit. I just wish I could feel the love of Christ through your posts.
saemo Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 It is a nice teaching; we have a similar one for them who have been received into his baptism and received of his spirit. I just wish I could feel the love of Christ through your posts.Look, you are reading into my posts what's in your own head.Obviously, I disagree with Mormonism. That you choose to be all wittle feewers hewrt rather than address anything I say, says more about you than it does me.
nathansoz Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 It is a nice teaching; we have a similar one for them who have been received into his baptism and received of his spirit. I just wish I could feel the love of Christ through your posts.Agreed Saemo. I think that some of your posts have been rather sarcastic and uncaring. If we want to show the love of Christ, being rude is not the way to do it.
saemo Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 I believe you have all the answers you need with respect to the notion of authority to perform an ordinance; obviously a devout Catholic and an equally devout Mormon are going to disagree on who has what authority. Furthermore, I think you would find that, while baptism is an outward sign of Christianity, and is an initial ordinance in the Church, it is not how most of us Mormon's will define a Christian.I did not say that is how I define Christian, I said, baptism is how one is initiated into Christianity. Got it...you just want to launch sarcasm-laced barbs. Carry on with someone else then.I assure you, sarcasm was not the intent of anything I have said.If you prefer to go on acting like you know where a non-Mormon view comes from, while simultaneously feeling all offended over a view that you have no understanding of...that is of course, your choice.Agreed Saemo. I think that some of your posts have been rather sarcastic and uncaring. If we want to show the love of Christ, being rude is not the way to do it.What exactly did I say that was sarcastic and uncaring?
Log Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Look, you are reading into my posts what's in your own head.Obviously, I disagree with Mormonism. That you choose to be all wittle feewers hewrt rather than address anything I say, says more about you than it does me.Wow. This is an example of what I am talking about. Cya.
ttribe Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Just for the sake of completeness, I'll repeat what I've already said on this topic in the OTHER thread about whether Mormons are Christians:It seems I most often hear that in order to be Christian, I must have a personal relationship with Christ. Well, I have that, and I believe that His Atonement is the only means by which I can enter God's Kingdom. As a consequence, I believe I am a Christian. What matters is that I have that relationship and it is beyond presumptuous for any human being to say that I am not a Christian based on his or her interpretation of scripture coupled with the fact that I am a member of a church which espouses doctrines they find objectionable - they simply have no such right. I am a Christian, and aside from Christ Himself, I am the only person who gets to make that determination.
Billy Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 As most people on this board know this is a play on semantics between the traditional Christians and the LDS, which leads to confusion on both sides. To the traditional Christian, when you say Christian they think traditional Biblical Christianity and the ability to live with God again by following those beliefs and actions. When a Mormon hears the word Christian they think about believing in Christ and of course they do because Christ is in the title of their name. But LDS also believe that a non LDS christian has absolutely no chance to live with God again unless they convert and receive the LDS ordinances in this life of the next.A=ChristianityB=MormonismA=beliefs and actions that lead to living with GodB=beliefs and actions that lead to living with God (Celestial Kingdom)A is very distinct from B (and vice versa) A=only A and can't call itself BB=A and B (but A by itself you can't live with God unless you also adopt B )
nathansoz Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 What exactly did I say that was sarcastic and uncaring?...You get tone through text? Cool.I thought that was slightly sarcastic. I could be wrong. As a brother in Christ I just felt like the tone should be a little more positive thats all. No judgement made or anything.
ttribe Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 If you prefer to go on acting like you know where a non-Mormon view comes from, while simultaneously feeling all offended over a view that you have no understanding of...that is of course, your choice.Please point out where I was "acting like you know where a non-Mormon view comes from" or demonstrated a lack of understanding ("a view that have no understanding of"). Or is it just a REALLY broad brush you are trying to paint me with?
Log Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Actually, I begin to wonder whether certain posters are Aspies...
saemo Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 I thought that was slightly sarcastic. I could be wrong. As a brother in Christ I just felt like the tone should be a little more positive thats all. No judgement made or anything.Perhaps I need to use more emoticons.I am a techie person by training and trade, so yeah, I do indeed believe that tone through text would be cool. And no, I don't believe people can discern "tone" through text, as "tone", is an auditory distinction.Suffice it to say, my view can be summed up as, Christ did not stop people from doing works in His name. At the same time, I believe a valid Christian baptism is required to unite a person to Christ, His Church and all Christians.I believe Mormons are doing good works in Christ's name, yet, lack the graces of a valid baptism.Being on a Mormon forum, I realize that most here will disagree. That does not mean I am trying to sarcastically beat anything into anyone's head.At any rate, I seem to have a trend of offending people, without meaning to. And so I will leave it at that.
justinmartyrjr Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 So anyone who calls himself a follower of Christ is a Christian.So you would include in this list; Moonies, Branch Dividians, Jim Jones's followers, and the FLDS?I looked but could not find where it states that the Apostles had the Aaronic or Melchezidek priesthood, could you give me that reference?The priesthoods by those names, are ones that LDS give to them. Christ's apostles & followers, however, where given priesthood powers. A good book in the NEW Testament to read is Paul's book of Hebrews & the Book of Acts, 1 Cor. 11-12; the spiritual gifts.AS for who's a Christian, I've posted the same types of questions on a different board, lets go to it so see if any one has responded. http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/latter...NJBKELKJJUGP8GOJust visited it, no responses, WHY?Here's what I asked:What qualifies a person or sect to being Christian?What they believe?How they live their life?The rituals they perform?How they interpret the scriptures?How they accept the creeds (Nicene especially)?Do all "Christians" have to agree with each other to qualify as being Christians? Or just on a few things only?Obviously Calvinists, Baptists, Lutherans, Protestants, etc., don't all agree on everything.On another thread, "debater" brings up a misinformed misinterpretation of passages to suggest Mormons are racists heretics!http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/latter...OCKA9GJI7L74SMJIs another qualification for being a Christian that you have to believe in the Nicene Creed 3 in 1 "real Jesus,"? But you can't or shouldn't believe in the part (of the Fathers who gave us that creed, who also wrote) about becoming gods!?In other words, to qualify as being a Christian, must we have to believe in the extra-biblical formulas presented not by prophets or apostles; but a formula that was hashed out through debates & councils of 325 AD Council of Nicene!?While the biblical doctrine of becoming gods,(as also presented by those very same Fathers who gave us the creed, & earlier ones), if believed upon; or if one has a restored version of deification,(alleged to be given by modern prophets); this disqualifies the sect as being "Christian"?!http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/latter...4IQ0I2QS056K98ISee my references to early Christians who cite the bible in their own defenses of their own versions of early Christian deification.http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/latter...0I2QS056K98I/p6http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user...artyrJr&p=r If another "Christian" sect can show that another sect's symbols have similar ones being used by bad groups, would that disqualify that sect to being a "Christian"?Even though that sect's own interpretations of the same types of symbols, are about Christ & biblical types?Even though the "Christians" drawing attention to the same types of symbols found in bad groups, also have symbols of their own that could be misinterpreted & associated with bad groups too!
nathansoz Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Perhaps I need to use more emoticons.I am a techie person by training and trade, so yeah, I do indeed believe that tone through text would be cool. And no, I don't believe people can discern "tone" through text, as "tone", is an auditory distinction.Suffice it to say, my view can be summed up as, Christ did not stop people from doing works in His name. At the same time, I believe a valid Christian baptism is required to unite a person to Christ, His Church and all Christians.I believe Mormons are doing good works in Christ's name, yet, lack the graces of a valid baptism.Being on a Mormon forum, I realize that most here will disagree. That does not mean I am trying to sarcastically beat anything into anyone's head.At any rate, I seem to have a trend of offending people, without meaning to. And so I will leave it at that.Nice! That felt really positive, and stated what you believed. What do you mean by baptism is nessisary. I know i just go to a mainline protestant church and I think we teach that while baptism is good, it wont make or break salvation.
Billy Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 The priesthoods by those names, are ones that LDS give to them. Christ's apostles & followers, however, where given priesthood powersNo doubt the Apostles had power, they healed the sick and raised the dead.But can you give me a verse in the Bible that shows that they had the priesthood?
ttribe Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 No doubt the Apostles had power, they healed the sick and raised the dead.But can you give me a verse in the Bible that shows that they had the priesthood?Can you give one that says they didn't?
Flyonthewall Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 What initiates a person into Christianity? If, say, a Buddhist were to convert to Mormonism, what is the first step in becoming a Mormon Christian?I was a missionary in Japan, and it has a large Buddhist population. The first step in becoming a Mormon is converting them to Christianity.For a Catholic, it is baptism. We believe baptism brings a person, physically and metaphysically, into full communion with Christ's Church, which is lead by Christ. And so, our baptism brings us into full communion with Christ Himself.Terrific.This is the first step in becoming a Catholic Christian.The Catholic church states that a Mormon baptism is not a valid Christian baptism. And so, a convert to Catholicism from Mormonism is re-baptized.This is understandable. Catholics believe they have the proper authority to baptize, and I would expect that.This is why I say, if you (the collective you) are baptizing an already baptized Christian, that is a clear statement that you do not believe the person to be a Christian. Except for that proper authorization thing. We believe we have the proper authorization. You must go to those who have the proper authorization, to have an ordinance performed, or it is not recognized. Just as legal tender must be printed at an authorized mint or it is not valid, an ordinance must be performed by one having authority or it is not valid. In the sense of the word, the definition in the dictionary, certainly I believe that you consider a Catholic a Christian. But in the deeper sense, the baptismal sense, which is where Christian initiation occurs, neither of us believes the other to be a Christian. I would disagree with baptism being where conversion takes place. Someone should be converted first, before they are baptized.I live in Jesus' Presence today. Isn't that a nice teaching of ours? That's great, next time you are in His presence, take a picture and post it on the board.
Billy Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Can you give one that says they didn't?This is negative proof"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
Log Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 This is negative proof"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proofThat cuts your own argument down in exactly the same fashion.
saemo Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Nice! That felt really positive, and stated what you believed. What do you mean by baptism is nessisary. I know i just go to a mainline protestant church and I think we teach that while baptism is good, it wont make or break salvation.John 3:5Jesus answered, "Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit.Matthew 2819 Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Billy Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 That cuts your own argument down in exactly the same fashion.I am not arguing, I am asking. LDS make the claim that the Apostles have the priesthood. I am simply asking do you have a verse in the Bible that you base this off of, or is this strictly from modern day revelation?
saemo Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 I would disagree with baptism being where conversion takes place. Someone should be converted first, before they are baptized.I didn't say conversion happens with baptism, I said Christian initiation begins with baptism. That's great, next time you are in His presence, take a picture and post it on the board. A very atheist pov, I have to say.
ttribe Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 This is negative proof"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proofSorry, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Besides, your wiki-evidence does not address what my argument would be since (obviously) I believe there are more sources of "evidence" - namely, modern revelation. You are the one who has limited yourself to the NT and have to live with that restriction. Hence, my challenge to you - to show that the Bible specifically says that they didn't have the Priesthood is both valid and still stands unanswered.
ttribe Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 I am not arguing, I am asking. LDS make the claim that the Apostles have the priesthood. I am simply asking do you have a verse in the Bible that you base this off of, or is this strictly from modern day revelation?I think you know that there are numerous scriptures that LDS cite as "evidence"; however, I suspect what you want is a verse of scripture that blatantly says - "Peter received the Melchizidek Priesthood." In the absence of that, you are going to argue that sufficient evidence does not exist in the Bible. Therefore, I am going to hold you to the same level of "evidence" and require you to find me a scripture in the NT that specifically says Peter and the other Apostles DID NOT hold the Priesthood (preferably from the KJV).
justinmartyrjr Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Most modern Christians who make it a point to vilify Mormons as not being "Christian" but a "cult," have to use, or end up using early anti-Christian & Atheistic types of disinformation & propaganda methods to so. Anti-Mormon "Christians" spreading the myths that Mormons don't believe in Christ, or that their "Christ" is evil, cause "he's the spirit brother to the devil." Present shocking generalizations, it would be like saying against the Christians, as Atheists, have that: Christians drink blood, (without explaining the sacrament). The temple endowment is also vilified too. Done by those with Christian roots, these critics continue to ignore, down play, or discredit their own roots by saying that the thousands of artifacts, archaeological, monuments, art works, earlier scriptures, writings of the Fathers that mention temple type aspects, now restored in Mormonism; to this the critics say that such evidences are "gnostic stuff." This shows us that they haven't paid attention to the early Christian writings that wrote against heretics or gnostic, while expounding on their own versions of the mysteries.http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=JustinMartyrJrhttp://www.topix.com/forum/religion/latter...CUSKLFIO/post34If all of the doctrines that the LDS believe are some kind of sin, did Christ pay for those "sins?" If he did, Mormons ought to at least be able to call themselves Christians, cause of the historic biblical early Christian beliefs that were restored, refreshed & brought back. Pre-existence, Christ's world wide trekings, preaching to the spirits in prison; temple type work; deification, etc., etc., etc. If Mormons aren't Christians because of these beliefs & rituals, then modern Christians can be Christians either! Why, cause inasmuch as the same types of beliefs & rituals are found in historic biblical early Christianity, (and thus they can't be Christians either), then the modern "Christians" that reject these, as restored in Mormonism, would have to then turn around and disown their own historic biblical Christian roots. For if the ancient are thus not! The modern aren't also!Who then is a real Christian?
Billy Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 Sorry, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Besides, your wiki-evidence does not address what my argument would be since (obviously) I believe there are more sources of "evidence" - namely, modern revelation. You are the one who has limited yourself to the NT and have to live with that restriction. Hence, my challenge to you - to show that the Bible specifically says that they didn't have the Priesthood is both valid and still stands unanswered.I have no problem if you tell me that the infomation is from modern day revelation. I think that is a fair answer, the issue that I have is that people try to say that it is from the Bible, then can't give any support of that position. We know that the Levitical priesthood was a hereditary priesthood passed down the tribe of Levi. We also know that Christ came down the line of Judah which is the royal line. Christ did not have the Aaronic priesthood, but he did have the Melchezidek priesthood. You will likely tell me that Christ has the Aaronic because it is under the Melchezedek, but this is also from modern day revelation not from the Bible. John the Baptist is from the Levitical line on both his mother and his father's side, but he can't pass this priesthood on to non Levites. God could change this rule, but again there is no basis in the Bible that states that this is the case.Heb 7:14 14For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.