An Angel Of Light

[Phinehas]

There is a difference in the idea of justification and sanctification. A person who is justified by faith in Christ is considered perfect in the eyes of God, not because of the individuals righteousness but because of the righteousness of Christ that is imputed onto the believer through faith. This justification allows one to go to heaven (Celestial equivalent) despite no real works in that persons life, if that person were to die after becoming a new believer. Sanctification is a process of becoming more and more like God through time during the life of the believer, so a long term Christian would be further along in terms of following the things that Christ would want him to do, but make no mistake, the new believer and the older believer are BOTH justified and both will go to the same heaven based not on their individual works but because of their faith.

Well said Billy

i might add that Justification happens in an instant, while Sanctification takes a lifetime

Justification doesn't' require anything on our part but to accept the gift of eternal life by Faith.

Sanctification includes us doing our part along with God working in and through us.

[Phinehas]

If I only give you a birthday present when it is your birthday, is the present still a gift?

it is still a 'birthday gift"

The problem with saying it is a gift ... as long as you do X Y Z... is that it is not a gift any longer but a wage for services rendered.

It is either a gift or something you earn. it can't be both.

We seem to agree that you cannot earn this gift, so where is the hang up?

[MormonMason]

Well said Billy

i might add that Justification happens in an instant, while Sanctification takes a lifetime

Justification doesn't' require anything on our part but to accept the gift of eternal life by Faith.

Sanctification includes us doing our part along with God working in and through us.

The Greek text of the Book of James disagrees with you. Before you try to cite Paul in defense of your claim regarding justification please remember Peter's warning concerning the writings of Paul, his writings' difficulties and the fate of those who wrest them, as well as Peter's other warning as to how one makes one's own calling and election sure by ones efforts and deeds. Faith and works must form a synergy in order for one to receive justification before God. So says the Greek text of James at any rate, such as it is.

By the way, a synergy occurs when two or more principles work together and feed into each other to continue synergy. The moment one or more parties to the synergy fail to work together the synergy is broken. James formula is justification = faith + works + grace. Just as a fire cannot continue to burn without three things--fuel, heat and oxygen--so one cannot continue in a state of justification without three things--faith, works and grace.

According to Peter, one can become blind and forget that one was saved (past tense) if one does not improve in growing in grace by doing. So says the Bible as a whole. Many evangelicals forget that or do not at all realize it due to their oft-taught and oft-touted "easy-believeism" (or, as Bonhoeffer names it, "cheap grace").

[Billy]

The Greek text of the Book of James disagrees with you.

What chapter and verse are you talking about? James 2:26 (James 2:25 in the JST)

Lets look at the JST to see how he translated this verse.

KJV James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

JST James 2:25 For, as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead.

Before you try to cite Paul in defense of your claim regarding justification please remember Peter's warning concerning the writings of Paul, his writings' difficulties and the fate of those who wrest them, as well as Peter's other warning as to how one makes one's own calling and election sure by ones efforts and deeds.

Note that Peter calls Paul "our dear brother" and never states that Paul's writings are incorrect. He does say that his writings may be hard to understand, but not incorrect. But Christ in the gospels also talks about those who have ears yet can't hear, so this is not specific to only Paul's writings. Also a large percentage of the Christian world seems to understand the concept of justification by faith and not by works, the LDS are among the minority opinion on this matter.

2 Peter 3

15And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

According to Peter, one can become blind and forget that one was saved (past tense) if one does not improve in growing in grace by doing. So says the Bible as a whole. Many evangelicals forget that or do not at all realize it due to their oft-taught and oft-touted "easy-believeism" (or, as Bonhoeffer names it, "cheap grace").

It is called sanctification, which I noted above. But despite the works, these works will not save you. You may call it "cheap grace" but that cheap grace was paid for by Christ who paid for your sins and mine.

[cjcampbell]

Evangelical critics of the Church often like to quote that passage in Galatians that speaks of how even an "angel of light" can deceive us and bring "a different Gospel". They also like to apply this to Joseph Smith and his story of the angel Moroni coming and revealing to him the Book of Mormon which, in turn, is a different Gospel because of one pesky verse in 2 Nephi that speaks about how we are saved "after all we can do".

Personally, I think that those who use that argument against Joseph Smith and the Church of Jesus Christ do so to their own condemnation.

This is what the restoration is all about. All the churches in Joseph's day were in apostasy -- they were preaching "another gospel." This is why God and Jesus Christ condemned their creeds as an abomination. Their creeds mixed the doctrines and philosophies of men with scripture.

[Billy]

All the churches in Joseph's day were in apostasy -- they were preaching "another gospel." This is why God and Jesus Christ condemned their creeds as an abomination. Their creeds mixed the doctrines and philosophies of men with scripture.

Such as?

[cjcampbell]

Such as?

Don't play philosophical games with me. I am not in the mood.

You know very well where your religion of men differs from that revealed by God Himself to Joseph Smith. In fact, you argue it here constantly.

[Phinehas]

Personally, I think that those who use that argument against Joseph Smith and the Church of Jesus Christ do so to their own condemnation.

This is what the restoration is all about. All the churches in Joseph's day were in apostasy -- they were preaching "another gospel." This is why God and Jesus Christ condemned their creeds as an abomination. Their creeds mixed the doctrines and philosophies of men with scripture.

Have these other churches changed to the mormon way of thinking?

No

So then by your say so all these churches are STILL in apostasy!

they are still preaching another gospel!

We are according to mormonism ALL ABOMINATIONS !!!

Now do you wonder why there are always challenges to the Mormon faith?

I don't know why you even bother to want to be called Christian with this thinking LOL

Mormons are quick to throw out the traditions of the gospel in favor of a man who only claims to be the mouthpiece for God on earth.

Talk about your following the arm of flesh

[cjcampbell]

Have these other churches changed to the mormon way of thinking?

No

So then by your say so all these churches are STILL in apostasy!

they are still preaching another gospel!

We are according to mormonism ALL ABOMINATIONS !!!

Now do you wonder why there are always challenges to the Mormon faith?

I don't know why you even bother to want to be called Christian with this thinking LOL

Mormons are quick to throw out the traditions of the gospel in favor of a man who only claims to be the mouthpiece for God on earth.

Talk about your following the arm of flesh

I am sorry if you are offended by the truth.

But the truth is that the whole history of Christianity from the time of Christ down to the restoration of the gospel has been one of violence, rape, murder, oppression, seeking after political power and the honors of men, political meddling by every monarch and thug in both doctrine and leadership, schism, the adoption of Greek philosophies and pagan rituals as 'doctrine,' the suppression of the Bible (even Tyndale was murdered by the church, simply for attempting to translate the Bible into English), forced conversion, suppression of science, and war and genocide. All of it in the name of God. Why would not God and Jesus Christ find that this is abominable? I don't know why you even bother to be called a follower of Jesus Christ -- but I am not laughing.

Which of the commandments of God have the modern churches of the world not broken? Which ones are they not breaking today? When will they stop deceiving people, taking their money under false pretenses, preaching hatred against the prophets and priesthood of God, making films like The Godmakers, desecrating the sacred things of God, and taking His name in vain? Go ahead, tell me about the arm of flesh.

[Billy]

I am sorry if you are offended by the truth. . .the adoption of Greek philosophies and pagan rituals as 'doctrine. . .

Their creeds mixed the doctrines and philosophies of men with scripture.

Can you list some of these pagan rituals and philosiphies for us? I asked this before but you said "I am not in the mood". Maybe you could answer this for us if you are feeling better now.

. . . taking their money under false pretenses. . .

Thank goodness you have modern day prophets that revealed to you how a 2 billion dollar mall will help further the kingdom of God.

[Flyonthewall]

Can you list some of these pagan rituals and philosiphies for us?

LOL...The first one that comes to mind is "All I have to do is believe to be "saved".

Jesus did it all for me so I don't have to do anything...I am not responsible for anything...not even keeping the commandments...besides they are no longer the "10 commandments", but the "10 suggestions"...optional so we cannot boast of our own effors.

[Billy]

LOL...The first one that comes to mind is "All I have to do is believe to be "saved".

Jesus did it all for me so I don't have to do anything...I am not responsible for anything...not even keeping the commandments...besides they are no longer the "10 commandments", but the "10 suggestions"...optional so we cannot boast of our own effors.

The only problem is that justification by faith is Biblical.

John 6

28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

47Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

Can you try again and list some of these pagan rituals and philosiphies for us?

[Cold Steel]

Can you really call it a gift it is has a long list of conditions associated with it?

Absolutely. Can you really call it a gift if there's even one condition associated with it? Have you forgotten all the scriptures talking about the importance of obeying the commandments? The definition of gift is: 1. Something that is bestowed voluntarily and without compensation. 2. The act, right, or power of giving.

We do not compensate God by living His commandments. We only compensate ourselves. Even so, no one can live the commandments perfectly, so the atonement compensates when we fall behind or if we backslide. The Lord is always in the position of willing to forgive, but it would be contemptuous to try to avail ourselves of the atonement, then not do the Lord's will. If a man accept Jesus, is baptized, receives the gift of the Holy Spirit, then turns around and fires an employee so as to not have to pay his pension, do you really believe that man is worthy of the gift of the atonement or the gift of the Holy Spirit? He is not. For no man can say he is an heir of salvation and not live the commandments of God.

Either salvation is by faith in Christ made possible via the atonement, or it is not. Both can't be true, either works are required or they are not required as part of the entrance requirement to live with God again. ... We both agree that the atonement of Christ was required.

I think what you're saying is that both faith and works cannot be required, but, as we see from the scriptures, this is the case. "He that saith, I know Him, and keepeth not His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." (I John 2:4).

Again, who do the commandments benefit? In the case of each, it benefits us, not God. Back in the early days of Salt Lake City, a bishop visited an old woman to collect tithing; however, upon entering her home, he saw that she had put buckets around the floor to catch the leaks from the roof during a recent rain storm. Feeling sorry for her, he suggested that she not pay tithing but, instead, let the church provide for her. But she would hear none of it. "Would you really deny me the right to my blessings of paying a full and honest tithe," she asked him. She didn't have much, but she forced the bishop to accept it and subsequently was able to save enough to send her son to school and live out her days in a nice comfortable home.

God doesn't benefit from our tithes. We do. God doesn't benefit from our keeping the law of chastity; again, we do. And the same can be said for every other commandment and gift that we receive. Thus, the gospel we preach is no different than that of the ancient saints.

[Flyonthewall]

The only problem is that justification by faith is Biblical.

John 6

28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

47Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

Can you try again and list some of these pagan rituals and philosiphies for us?

And faith without works is DEAD. This too is Biblical. One cannot sit on their duff proclaiming their faith in Christ, but not lifting a finger to follow the commandments, and still expect to be "justified". Dead faith won't get you anywhere.

John 14

21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

James 2

14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,

16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

[Jason]

Thank goodness you have modern day prophets that revealed to you how a 2 billion dollar mall will help further the kingdom of God.

No tithing funds are being used on the Citycreek project, if that is what you are referring to.

[MormonMason]

What chapter and verse are you talking about? James 2:26 (James 2:25 in the JST)

Lets look at the JST to see how he translated this verse.

KJV James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

JST James 2:25 For, as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead.

Nope. I was speaking to James 2:22-24--in the Greek text. The English is plain enough to those who will read and understand but the Greek is much more forceful on the point. The key words at the end of verse 24 are NOT BY FAITH ALONE. Check them out in the Greek (NOT using Strong's, by the way, look at a Greek text) and consider.

Note that Peter calls Paul "our dear brother" and never states that Paul's writings are incorrect. He does say that his writings may be hard to understand, but not incorrect. But Christ in the gospels also talks about those who have ears yet can't hear, so this is not specific to only Paul's writings. Also a large percentage of the Christian world seems to understand the concept of justification by faith and not by works, the LDS are among the minority opinion on this matter.

2 Peter 3

15And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

In Peter's time that was true that they were more correct in his time than they are now. Heck, they even had all Paul's letters to the Corinthians instead of the two scrambled versions we now have containing mere fragments of at least four of the originals! This is all interesting but I was not addressing the problems with the writings of Paul, only that people even in their own times misunderstood the message Paul was giving. How much worse is it today with Evangelicals and others of Protestant stripe?!?

It is called sanctification, which I noted above. But despite the works, these works will not save you. You may call it "cheap grace" but that cheap grace was paid for by Christ who paid for your sins and mine.

You misunderstand. This is more than sanctification, it is the keeping of one's salvation and eternal life. It is the necessity of making effort so as to retain justification, be sanctified, and make one's calling and election to eternal life sure.

Read the verses very carefully. One cannot make sure by deeds what already is assured by faith--unless it really isn't assured (contrary to Evangelical views concerning various passages in the Bible). If one must give one's own diligence to make it sure by their deeds in addition to their faith--and cause their faith to work together with their works (synergy), as James teaches us--it is obvious to the careful and mindful reader that it is not all done by faith with nothing else or by grace with nothing else.

We are told by the passage that we must give diligence to make our callings and elections sure. Contrariwise, most evangelicals take the early Gnostic idea that it is all on faith alone. And, no, we are not in the minority on this issue. Various Protestants in reality are in the minority on their views of certain proof-texts gleaned from the Bible.

[MormonMason]

Such as?

Well... such as the doctrine of the Trinity taught in many of the Churches of today! The earliest mentions of such a doctrine come not from early Christian documents of the so-called Orthodox stripe, but from pagan-Gnostic-Christian documents. Some of the later Gnostics even developed a name for it--the Trimorphic Protennoia. Prior to this time the apologists and others of the time spoke of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as a Triad rather than as a consubstantial Trinity. Through years of debate and so forth the Gnostic doctrine eventually was adopted by the early Church as its own and these doctrines read back onto the writings of the earlier fathers of the church--some of them even being rewritten to match with later theology!

Don't believe that such happened? Go check out the writings of the earliest Fathers and compare them with the several other versions of themselves. I guarantee that your eyes will be opened if you will make the effort.

[MormonMason]

No tithing funds are being used on the Citycreek project, if that is what you are referring to.

And, even if they were it would still go a long way toward the building of the kingdom. I can see it. Why cannot Billy and Phinehas? For example, non-member tourists can and often do become members of the Church. A cleaner city with more amenities closer to Church headquarters invites greater tourism. The area will be cleaner and more tourist-friendly. More members of the Church will be less afraid they will be mugged on the way to the temple. The list can go on and on....

[MormonMason]

LOL...The first one that comes to mind is "All I have to do is believe to be "saved".

Jesus did it all for me so I don't have to do anything...I am not responsible for anything...not even keeping the commandments...besides they are no longer the "10 commandments", but the "10 suggestions"...optional so we cannot boast of our own effors.

Actually, that is a correct observation. The Bible as a whole does not teach that doctrine--only isolated passages ripped from the context of the whole seems on the surface to teach such a thing. On the other hand, Gnostic groups of various stripes did hold to that belief. But, the source of the doctrine can be found in the Bhagavad Gita. Seriously! It is spelled out in black and white in no uncertain terms that mere belief in Sri Krishna absolves us of the necessity of all deeds including sacrifices and so forth. One need only believe to be saved. So says the Bhagavad Gita, which predates the New Testament!

[MormonMason]

I never thought about it like that. On the face of it that seems like a pretty good analysis.

Only on the surface does it appear to be a good analysis. On engaging the facts and the context, that is not what happened at all. The word that needs to be highlighted was "THESE." The rich man did not say he kept all the commandments from his youth up but only the specific commandments that Jesus listed in answer to the man's query as to what he needed to do to inherit eternal life. The man did not lie and I do not believe that he did.

By the way, this would have been the perfect opportunity to teach the rich man that he would be saved only by faith. Instead, Jesus' own reply to the question was to do the commandments! When the rich man asked which ones, Jesus stated the commandments, which the man kept from his childhood to that time.

The only thing lacking was that the man 1) was focused on his riches and 2) he did not want selling all he had as a prerequisite to following Jesus.

Interestingly enough, even the tradition has Paul teaching that the rich should be taught to do good works and also to distribute their wealth as a means of inheriting eternal life.

17 Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy;

18 That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate;

19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

Note the words "that they may lay hold on eternal life" in the passage. If eternal life is given apart from all works, this passage would seem to teach contrary to such a view as it places prerequisites on laying hold on eternal life. Either Paul was schizophrenic or the evangelicals have wrested his writings as Peter warned would happen.

Frankly, Luther--the source (but not the ultimate source, who really was satan) of the doctrine of sola fide (English: "faith alone")--was one of the most unstable individuals in history, right along with Jean Calvin who also advocated the selfsame view under Luther's influence, all the while hunting Severus like Ahab did the whale in Moby **** and using the doctrine as a cover for his murderous activities. Both of these individuals wrested the writings of Paul and most all evangelicals uncritically have followed suit.

[MormonMason]

You would be surprised if you knew how many Evangelicals I have spoken with or read who say that this verse is enough for them to reject the Book of Mormon.

My favorite example is Shawn McCraney, who, in a moment of candor, said that even if the Book of Mormon had all of the archaeological evidence in the world behind it he would still refuse to accept the Book of Mormon because of that single verse. This, he said, is enough to constitute "another Gospel" despite all of the evidence for it.

So I don't think it is really that farfetched.

I agree. I also think that the most annoying thing is that the critics make much ado about nothing regarding this passage. If everyone just would remember that this afore cited text was written during Old Testament times, it all would make perfect sense.

Then again, many critics have problems with the above cited verse but have no qualms about accepting this from Paul:

13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

Don't know about you but this passage looks to me a lot like the one from 2 Nephi!

[coolrok7]

I agree. I also think that the most annoying thing is that the critics make much ado about nothing regarding this passage. If everyone just would remember that this afore cited text was written during Old Testament times, it all would make perfect sense.

Then again, many critics have problems with the above cited verse but have no qualms about accepting this from Paul:

Don't know about you but this passage looks to me a lot like the one from 2 Nephi!

The context is Sanctification not Justification (Salvation/Justification is what God does for us, Sanctification is our response in faith to what we are called to believe/do which are evidences of faith that enables one to be saved):

Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; above all, taking the shield of faith with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saintsâ??and for me, that utterance may be given to me, that I may open my mouth boldly to make known the mystery of the gospel, for which I am an ambassador in chains; that in it I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak (Ephesians 6:10-20)

[MormonMason]

Suggestion for coolrok7:

Read James 2 from the Greek text.

James is by NO means speaking of sanctification there.

As to Paul, read that passage very carefully and note the phrase "having done all, to stand." The implied negative of that is not standing due to failure to do all. Only those who overcome get to sit with God in his throne and rule over angels and cosmos. Note that in each instance in even the above passage you cite, there are things to do that will enable one to stand.

Justification comes as a result of what God does and what we and God working together--our faith and works working together as well--accomplishes. We are not omitted from the equation. Like I said, read the Book of James from the Greek text's perspective. Faith and works form a synergy that brings about justification. James says so in the Greek text, even going so far as to use the very word from which our word synergy comes to make his point. Why not believe him?

Sanctification comes as a result of what we do in response to our salvation and enables us to keep it and make our callings and elections sure. One cannot "make" something sure that already is sure. Please re-read the writings of Peter again, too. His own words clearly state that there are things we must do in order to make our callings and elections sure, by which we have eternal life.

Of course, none of this would be advantageous to anyone without the underlying atonement of Christ as the foundation. Without Christ, neither faith nor works nor the synergy of faith and works is advantageous. As I wrote elsewhere, just as a fire requires heat, fuel and oxygen, so salvation, justification and sanctification all also requires the grace of Christ, faith in Christ, and works, faith and works working together like heat and fuel to bring fire in oxygen. Take away any of the three elements and the fire is extinguished. Likewise is it with justification, salvation and sanctification. Take away any of the three elements of faith, works, or grace, and salvation cannot be accomplished.

So teaches the Bible as a whole when not wrested as Peter warned before that the unstable would do.

[Billy]

Well... such as the doctrine of the Trinity taught in many of the Churches of today!

Is it possible to come up with the idea of the Trinity without the creeds etc.? I think the answer to that question is obviously yes. Below is a simple explanation that I gave in July reposted below.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php...mp;p=1208462656

The word Trinity is not in the Bible but the concept is. Other important words are not in the Bible, like Bible is not in the Bible, or monotheism is also not in the Bible.

Trinity concept from the Bible

Father is God

Jesus is God

Holy Spirit is God

The three make up one God.

The Bible say that there is only one God (not just one in purpose), but only one God. No Gods formed before me, and no Gods formed after me. I don't even know any other Gods. If Jesus and the Holy Spirit are separate Gods, you would think that God the Father would know them.

The Trinity is hinted at in Gen 1, let US make man in OUR image. Who is the US. In the LDS concept Jesus is a we (as in our spirit brother, not a us).

At Christ's baptism all three are present and separate, so this rules out a modalistic view of the Godhead. Also the fact that Jesus prays to the Father would rule out a modalistic view of the Trinity (which is the view of a lot of LDS members, including myself prior to leaving the fold).

Also note the verse in Matthew, it say baptize in the NAME of Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost, not the NAMES of all three which would be grammatically correct. LDS also use the singular NAME not NAMES of form.

Matthew 28:19

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the NAME of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:"

Although it is not perfect, I think that you can come up with a basic understanding of the Trinity strictly using the Bible.

[Billy]

Only on the surface does it appear to be a good analysis. On engaging the facts and the context, that is not what happened at all. The word that needs to be highlighted was "THESE." The rich man did not say he kept all the commandments from his youth up but only the specific commandments that Jesus listed in answer to the man's query as to what he needed to do to inherit eternal life. The man did not lie and I do not believe that he did.

Mark 10

19Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.

20And he answered and said unto him, Master, ALLl these have I observed from my youth.

Luke 18

20Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

Just to recap I feel that this rich young ruler says that he has kept ALL the commandments, which I feel is extremely unlikely, so not only was this man lying but he was also guilty of pride. 1 John 1:8 "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."

MormonMason's contention is that this rich young ruler told the truth that he indeed has KEPT ALL the commandments that Christ listed in the above verses.

1. Honour thy father and thy mother-Is it possible that this man completely obeyed and honoured his parents completely for his whole life? Any parent will know that this is highly unlikely.

2. Do not commit adultery--with the additional stipulation in Matthew 5 27Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. Is it possible that this man never once looked upon a women to lust after her?

3. Do not steal--Do you believe that this man never once took anything in his whole life that was not his, even if it was a small item?

Lets take this theory even further, lets just assume that this man was perfect and kept all the commandments that Christ had listed. Why do you think that Christ drove him away if he was so perfect in his conduct. And the way that Christ drove him away was by asking him to do something that he never asked anyone else to do, namely sell ALL that he owned and give it to the poor.

So which theory is more plausible. MormonMason's who contends that this rich young ruler was perfect in all the things that Christ listed, and that Christ then drove this near perfect person away by asking him to give everything that he owned to the poor, something that has not been required by anyone else. Or that this young man did break the commandments, like everyone else on earth except Christ, but was too proud to admit it.