If You Received An Answer...

[LDSToronto]

Not sure what you mean by "our question"--since this appears to be your only post on the thread. If you're asking me whether I intend to make a reply to every single post, my answer is no (but I will read them all and give them due thought and consideration and reply to some of them). I've got to go to work now, so I'll check back in the evening. If there's a particular question you'd like me to answer, call it out for me and I'll answer it. And I will get back to ryanelwood--since I specifically said I would.

So 'playing games' it is... Ulysses, you are good at holding court and extremely weak at discourse. I appreciate the way you lay your questions out, and am less inclined to participate in your threads because you rarely reciprocate with answers that are posed to you. You have mastered diversion in your responses; now you need master engagement.

H.

[cdowis]

Not sure what you mean by "our question"--since this appears to be your only post on the thread...................

And I will get back to ryanelwood--since I specifically said I would.

Thanks

By convention, all posts are directed to all individuals in the forum. Thus, "us" is ryanelwood, and ryanelwood is "us".

If you want a personal conversation with someone, you can PM them, but utterwise any statement made to one individual is made to everybody --- to the entire world.

De nada.

[Avatar4321]

Not sure what you mean by "our question"--since this appears to be your only post on the thread. If you're asking me whether I intend to make a reply to every single post, my answer is no (but I will read them all and give them due thought and consideration and reply to some of them). I've got to go to work now, so I'll check back in the evening. If there's a particular question you'd like me to answer, call it out for me and I'll answer it. And I will get back to ryanelwood--since I specifically said I would.

Thanks

Honestly, i think most of us would simply be happy if you responded to atleast one or two of the posts with an actual substantive response.

[sleepyhead]

i shouldnt laugh but its kinda funny that if you do get an answer tthat the book of mormon is true then its supposedly obvious that we are deceiving ourselves?

are you afraid its true? if it is will you be devastated? you wont. you will be a changed person. changed by the spirit of God. try it. it's great.

Hello annewandering,

I don't know who you were responding to but I'm an ex mormon. I've only stopped believing in the book of mormon in the last couple years, as I've been able to learn more from the internet. In answer to your question no I'm not afraid of it being true. I don't see any basis for your claim that it would be. If the book of mormon is true than fine. Why should I be afraid if the book of mormon is true?

[cdowis]

Here is the situation.

We can give you a answer which makes sense only when you give us your own personal test for truth. When you give us an answer on how you know that the Bible is true, we can then give an answer in that context.

[sean0scott]

By convention, all posts are directed to all individuals in the forum. Thus, "us" is ryanelwood, and ryanelwood is "us".

How incomprehensible!

[Flyonthewall]

What a strange day we live in when asking God for knowledge, wisdom, and truth is mocked as heretical whereas mocking the Holy Spirit and relying on the understanding of the flesh is proclaimed to be the only way to God.

I also find it interesting that the very crowd that states there is no more need of prophets because the Holy Spirit dwells within us and communicates directly to us, now claims that we cannot know that the Holy Spirit is really communicating with us. Essentially, the Holy Spirit cannot teach us anything we don't already know, but can only confirm our own interpretation of the scriptures.

[semlogo]

As a Christian I view Scripture, the revealed Word of God, as the highest authority. So if someone presented me with a text that I understood to contradict Scripture (e.g., â??saved by grace after all you can doâ?) and asked me to pray about it, Iâ??d be unwilling to put God to such a test. But supposing in a moment of weakness I did exactly thatâ??I prayed about the LDS Book of Mormon. And suppose further that I subsequently felt a â??burning in the bosomâ?â??affirming its validity, per the LDS.

The obvious question: What is the source of that affirmation? Of course Iâ??d turn to Scripture to answer the question. Jeremiah 17:9 would remind me my own heart (my feelings, my instincts, my inclinations) is â??deceitful above all things.â? And the Apostle John would remind me that â??evil spiritsâ? are in the world and that I should â??test the spirits (vis-

[zerinus]

So the question I submit to the LDS on the boardâ??how do you know you havenâ??t been deceived?

How do you know that you have not been deceived by the Evangelical Protestants who distort the Bible, donâ??t have a clue what it really teaches (or don't want to), and teach a false, corrupted, perverted, abominable, Satanic doctrine under the guise of Christianity, and want to force it down everyoneâ??s throat? In reality you are the one who has been deceived, and so are they in whom you trust.

zerinus

[ttribe]

How do you know that you have not been deceived by the Evangelical Protestants who distort the Bible, donâ??t have a clue what it teally teaches (or don't want to), and teach a false, corrupted, perverted, abominable, Satanic doctrine under the guise of Christianity, and want to force it down everyoneâ??s throat? In reality you are the one who has been deceived, and so are they in whom you trust.

zerinus

Umm, while I don't disagree with the general point of your post, the tone was a little over the top...IMO.

[selek]

How do you know that you have not been deceived by the Evangelical Protestants who distort the Bible, donâ??t have a clue what it teally teaches (or don't want to), and teach a false, corrupted, perverted, abominable, Satanic doctrine under the guise of Christianity, and want to force it down everyoneâ??s throat? In reality you are the one who has been deceived, and so are they in whom you trust.

zerinus

Overwrought and overdone, zerinus.

Save the bomb throwing and eevie bashing for a more appropriate forum.

There is a difference between being deceived and being a deceiver.

Gotcha questions, willful distortions, and a steadfast desire to ignore answers that don't fit one's preconceptions may be the hallmark of the OP, but are hardly characteristic of Evangelical Protestants as a whole.

Do not smear an entire (subset of) faith because of one bad actor.

[zerinus]

Umm, while I don't disagree with the general point of your post, the tone was a little over the top...IMO.

That is the language they understand.

zerinus

[semlogo]

Umm, while I don't disagree with the general point of your post, the tone was a little over the top...IMO.

Over the top, but amusing. An ironic take on the evangelical style of proselyting.

[Bat-Man]

As a Christian I view Scripture, the revealed Word of God, as the highest authority.

Scripture is the revealed word of God, but God and those who reveal God's word are the highest authorities.

So if someone presented me with a text that I understood to contradict Scripture (e.g., â??saved by grace after all you can doâ?) and asked me to pray about it, Iâ??d be unwilling to put God to such a test.

The fact that you understood some words to be in contradiction to scripture wouldn't mean those words were in contradiction to scripture, though... at least not necessarily.

If you believe your understanding of anything is the understanding that God has given to you, your belief in that regard is either right or it is wrong, depending on whether or not God had actually given you that understanding, and to find out if God actually did share His understanding with you you would need revelation from God to you, personally, wherein God would be sharing his understanding with you, and if and when you got it, you would then be claiming, along with us, that God actually does reveal His will and understanding to people in this day and age, just like He did that in the past, including God giving people His authority to speak for Him.

But supposing in a moment of weakness I did exactly thatâ??I prayed about the LDS Book of Mormon.

Heh, in a moment of weakness, you prayed to God? You call that a moment of weakness???

You should be praying to God... with you talking with Him, and Him talking to you... about everything.

You should not be relying upon your own understanding, but in all of your ways acknowledging God and leaning upon Him for your support.

And suppose further that I subsequently felt a â??burning in the bosomâ?â??affirming its validity, per the LDS.

The obvious question: What is the source of that affirmation?

It would either be from God or from Satan, I think.

Do you know the difference between God (good) and Satan (evil) ?

If you don't, you need to find out, and I personally recommend that you learn from God.

Of course Iâ??d turn to Scripture to answer the question.

That would be good, as long as you know those words which people call "scripture" are actually words which were revealed by God or by those who are authorized to speak for God.

... and also as long as you correctly interpreted those scriptures.

Jeremiah 17:9 would remind me my own heart (my feelings, my instincts, my inclinations) is â??deceitful above all things.â?

Yes, so instead of trusting your own feelings, or your own instincts, or your own inclinations, I would suggest that you trust what God actually tells you, rather than only what you think God is telling you.

And the Apostle John would remind me that â??evil spiritsâ? are in the world and that I should â??test the spirits (vis-

[Cold Steel]

When I received my testimony of God, Christ and the Bible I wasn't expecting a yes, I was hoping for an answer. I thought that the Bible might be fiction and wanted to know if it was true, if it is then I had to follow. For the record, it is.

It's something that if one hasn't experienced, one doesn't understand. The light of Christ is put into all men, something my father referred to somewhat unceremoniously as an "automatic a$$ kicker." In a day when many people believe in genetic memories as a way of explaining our fear of heights, spiders, snakes, etc., they question that anything of a spiritual nature could be built into men.

But Jesus said, "My sheep know my voice." Protestants, many of them, say there's an "elect" and that if one is a member of God's elect they'll be saved and if they're not, then too bad. Many LDS converts speak of the gospel and say, "It sounds so familiar"â??almost like they've heard it before. And many non-LDS experience near death experiences and they talk about existing before they came to Earth, and they think nothing of it.

The Brother of Jared experienced many manifestations of God's power and was frustrated because he couldn't find an adequate way of conveying them. Praying to the Lord, he said, "Thou hast also made our words powerful and great, even that we cannot write them; wherefore, when we write we behold our weakness, and stumble because of the placing of our words; and I fear lest the Gentiles shall mock at our words. And when I had said this, the Lord spake unto me, saying: Fools mock, but they shall mourn; and my grace is sufficient for the meek...." (Ether 12:25-26) So at times our task is similar as that of an astronaut called to speak to a gathering of the Flat Earth Society.

[Thunderfire]

As a Christian I view Scripture, the revealed Word of God, as the highest authority. So if someone presented me with a text that I understood to contradict Scripture (e.g., â??saved by grace after all you can doâ?) and asked me to pray about it, Iâ??d be unwilling to put God to such a test.

I wanted to take a moment and address the bolded verse that is disagreed with. For me, this is a biblical statement in that "after all we can do, we are still saved by grace". There is no such thing as grace if it has to be earned. I understand how some view this verse as saying we must earn grace through works, but (for me) that is not what it is saying. If anything it is saying, we must still repent of our sins and that the most we can ever do is repent. But grace is the unwarranted love of God which cannot be earned, it just is.

So to say we are unwilling to pray about the truth presented here is a grave mistake (my opinion). Because it shows we have not thought carefully about the need for repentance, which of course is vital and biblical. Next we can add the need for baptism. To say we are saved by grace alone (per biblical instructions), negates the importance of baptism as well. So we can then say if someone disagrees with this statement (saved by grace after all we can do), we can say their scriptural belief is not biblical because it shows no need for repentance and baptism.

Just wanted to stir the pot on this one a little!

But supposing in a moment of weakness I did exactly thatâ??I prayed about the LDS Book of Mormon. And suppose further that I subsequently felt a â??burning in the bosomâ?â??affirming its validity, per the LDS.

The obvious question: What is the source of that affirmation? Of course Iâ??d turn to Scripture to answer the question. Jeremiah 17:9 would remind me my own heart (my feelings, my instincts, my inclinations) is â??deceitful above all things.â? And the Apostle John would remind me that â??evil spiritsâ? are in the world and that I should â??test the spirits (vis-

[Muc'ul Ajwalil]

As a Christian I view Scripture, the revealed Word of God, as the highest authority. So if someone presented me with a text that I understood to contradict Scripture (e.g., â??saved by grace after all you can doâ?) and asked me to pray about it, Iâ??d be unwilling to put God to such a test. But supposing in a moment of weakness I did exactly thatâ??I prayed about the LDS Book of Mormon. And suppose further that I subsequently felt a â??burning in the bosomâ?â??affirming its validity, per the LDS.

The obvious question: What is the source of that affirmation? Of course Iâ??d turn to Scripture to answer the question. Jeremiah 17:9 would remind me my own heart (my feelings, my instincts, my inclinations) is â??deceitful above all things.â? And the Apostle John would remind me that â??evil spiritsâ? are in the world and that I should â??test the spirits (vis-

[Mark Beesley]

So the question I submit to the LDS on the boardâ??how do you know you havenâ??t been deceived?

I have been deceived, in the past. Lucifer was very clever in his deception, and unfortunately I became very familiar with the methods he uses, and what he sounds like.

Now then, because I have learned by my own experience Satan is the only one I can count on to lie to me, and I know him, intimately, I know that the spiritual communications that I have received concerning the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, the Temple, missionary work, forgiveness and host of other matters did not come from him. They came from my Father in Heaven. I know that they came from my Father in Heaven because Satan is unable to do what was done in my life.

I hope this answer helps you.

[Ulysses]

I owe some responses, I know. But I got off late from work tonight, and then the doula came over to meet with us (we're having a baby, due later this month). And now the wife needs to go to bed--so no more posting on the message board for me tonight. For those who have put questions back to me--I need to ask for your patience. It's all a bit crazy right now (but it's a good kind of crazy)...

[ryanelwood]

I owe some responses, I know. But I got off late from work tonight, and then the doula came over to meet with us (we're having a baby, due later this month). And now the wife needs to go to bed--so no more posting on the message board for me tonight. For those who have put questions back to me--I need to ask for your patience. It's all a bit crazy right now (but it's a good kind of crazy)...

I don't believe you, just kidding, congratulations on your baby.

[Mudcat]

How do you know that you have not been deceived by the Evangelical Protestants who distort the Bible, donâ??t have a clue what it really teaches (or don't want to), and teach a false, corrupted, perverted, abominable, Satanic doctrine under the guise of Christianity, and want to force it down everyoneâ??s throat? In reality you are the one who has been deceived, and so are they in whom you trust.

zerinus

Hi Zerinus,

That is the best tu quoque statement I have seen you present, so far.

You know what they say, "Practice makes perfect."

Respectfully

Mudcat

[Brade]

I owe some responses, I know. But I got off late from work tonight, and then the doula came over to meet with us (we're having a baby, due later this month). And now the wife needs to go to bed--so no more posting on the message board for me tonight. For those who have put questions back to me--I need to ask for your patience. It's all a bit crazy right now (but it's a good kind of crazy)...

I understand how things get busy. You guys are in the home stretch I guess (referring to the baby). I'd like to outline a few things I'm most intersted in when you do get a chance to respond.

First, I've already admitted that it's possible I may be wrong about my putative spiritual experiences. In short, I don't know that haven't been decieved. Having said that, It's unclear to me what you want me to conclude as a result. As I said in an earlier post, just about every non-LDS Christian philosopher agrees that putative spiritual experiences are a good reason for belief. Notice here that I didn't say kowledge.

Second, you claim in your first post that "As a Christian I view Scripture, the revealed Word of God, as the highest authority" but you give no reason for why you believe that. I understand that you're purpose is to ask Mormons a question. Nevertheless, it seems as though you're failing to appreciate that either (1) you're in a worse position than us, or (2) you're in the same position as us.

You would be in a worse position than us if your reasons for thinking the Bible is the revealed Word of God are non-spiritual. I'll offer two examples but I don't think these cover all of the "bad" reasons for thinking the Bible is the Word of God. You might believe the Bible is the Word of God because the Bible says so and what the Bible says is true because it is the Word of God. This is obviously and very tightly circular and for that reason it is a bad argument for the conclusion that the Bible is the Word of God. You might say that the Bible is the Word of God because there is historical evidence to back it up. But the fact that places and people in the Bible can be historically verified does not show that, say, Jesus turned water into wine or that His death allows your sins to be forgiven.

Now you might say this, "I believe the Bible is the Word of God because I've had spiritual experiences that confirm that." This I see as the best reason for holding that belief and, as I keep repeating, just about every Christian philosopher agrees. But, notice that if that's your justification for your belief that the Bible is the Word of God you're not on any firmer ground than the Mormon that believes the Book of Mormon is the Word of God by virtue of some putative religious experience to that effect.

Having said all that, my question is do you hold your belief in the Bible based on a putative spiritual experience of the Holy Ghost or based on a bad circular argument or unjustified inference from historical information? If it's the former, then how do you know you haven't been decieved? My position is that if each of our beliefs are based on putative religious experiences then we're both justified in our beliefs and neither of us knows we haven't been decieved.

[Bat-Man]

I owe some responses, I know.

No, not really.

You only owe us your full attention when we try to teach you the truth.

You don't need to actually say anything, in response. That is optional.

But I got off late from work tonight, and then the doula came over to meet with us (we're having a baby, due later this month). And now the wife needs to go to bed--so no more posting on the message board for me tonight.

I hope the best for your wife and your baby, as well as yourself.

... and, of course, the only way to have the best is to totally accept the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, as well as all of the ordinances, including the ordinance of being sealed to your wife and your baby so that you can be with them and any other children you might have throughout all eternity.

... if, of course, you would be interested in something like that.

... and I mean interested to the point of actually doing all things in God's way.

[Billy]

But the fact that places and people in the Bible can be historically verified does not show that, say, Jesus turned water into wine or that His death allows your sins to be forgiven.

Then do you agree that you can't show that Joseph saw an angel, Jesus, God the Father, or that the witnesses ever saw what they said they saw?

[Deborah]

Then do you agree that you can't show that Joseph saw an angel, Jesus, God the Father, or that the witnesses ever saw what they said they saw?

Do you agree, that you can't show that Jesus Christ actually rose from the dead, that Paul actually had his spiritual awakening on the way to Damascus or that all the other Apostles were witnesses to what they claim they saw?