2 Nephi 25:23 Remix

[coolrok7]

We are Saved by Charis [Grace] alone though [Pistis] Faith Alone, the definition of "Faith" [Pistis] as used by you is not how the Anchient Saints Read/Understood "Faith" Pistis. we believe that Grace is a "Gift", and it needs to be unwrapped/used in rightiousness to bless the one useing it and those who's lives it touches as used by the individual themself. Law Of The Harvest.

We do good works to show we want to stay Saved [No Eternal Security] and to give Glory to God and Jesus Christ.

Your statements about the BofM authorship are as those of the Atheist/Humanist house that say the same thing about the Bible that they are stories bound together written by men.

Bruce R. McConkie:Salvation Comes In And Through His Atoning Blood And In No Other Way.

April 1985 General Conference, last talk he gave about The LORD OF LIFE JESUS CHRIST.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

Iâ??ve never said that faith is by itself because faith without works is dead as James said. You never seem to accept the fact that I agree Tanyan. It follows that when someone believes God then they would want to do the things God would have us do. We donâ??t teach â??once saved always savedâ?. One call fall away from the truth or believe a lie and not really be saved.

Elder McConkieâ??s rendition of â??faith aloneâ? is not the way Lutherans teach it and is misrepresenting us (they donâ??t like it when it is done to them):

I wonder how many of us are aware of one of the great religious phenomenon of the ages, one that is now sweeping through Protestant Christianity, as only one other thing has ever done in the whole Christian Era. . . .let me first identify the original heresy that did more than anything else to destroy primitive Christianity.

This first and chief heresy of a now fallen and decadent Christianity- and truly it is the father of all heresies-. . .pertains now to the nature and kind of being that God is. . . .a spirit essence called the Trinity. . . .The adoption of this false doctrine about God effectively destroyed true worship among men and ushered in the age of universal apostasy. . . .

This second heresy-and it is the prevailing delusion and mania that prevails to this day in the great evangelical body of Protestantism- is the doctrine that we are justified by faith alone, without the works of the law. . . .It is the doctrine that we may be born again simply by confessing the Lord Jesus with our lips while we continue to live in our sins.

As always, there are self-appointed spokesman who scoff at what we believe and misrepresent what we teach. (The Ensign, Elder Boyd K. Packer, Nov. 1984, p.66)

But at the LDS Churchâ??s General Conference in October 1983, Elder Gordon B. Hinckley of the churchâ??s ruling First Presidency lashed out at those â??who have taken upon themselves as their mission to belittle and demean and destroy the faith of the weak, with a badly flawed argument that we are not Christians.â? (Newsweek, March 4, 1985, p.65)

I was handed a tract the other day. It was written by a critic, an enemy of the Church whose desire is to undermine the faith of the weak and the unknowing. It repeats fallacies that have been parroted for a century and more. It purports to set forth what you and I, as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, believe. (The Ensign, President Gordon B. Hinckley, Nov. 1986, p.49)

â??By faith alone we are savedâ? (without the works of the law) is to be understood in the context of the verse Luther found while reading in the book of Romans, â??The just shall live by faith.â? This became the â??Battle Cry,â? so to speak, of the Protestant Reformation.

It came to be known in the following three Solas (Latin for only)- Sola Gracia (only Grace), Sola Fide (only Faith), Sola Scriptura (only Scripture).

We do good works because we are saved. Good works are part of Sanctification, not Justification when it comes to making payment for sin that Jesus accomplished on the cross, Jesus said, â??it is finishedâ?!

Mormonism is wrong when it teaches that Exaltation is â??eternal lifeâ?. It is the gift not earned/merited/worked for (â??work outâ? our salvation not â??work forâ? our â??Exaltationâ?). Resurrection becomes the gift in place of eternal life. Exaltation is equated to â??eternal lifeâ? which it is not:

. . .it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do. . . (2 Nephi 25:23b; JOSEPH SMITH JUNIOR, AUTHOR AND PROPRIETER- from the first printing of the Book of Mormon)

By revelation, our Savior made known again the plan of salvation and exaltation. Resurrection comes as a gift to every man through Jesus Christ, but the reward of the highest eternal opportunities you must earn. It is not just enough to believe in Jesus Christ. You must work and learn, search and pray, repent and improve, know his laws and live them. (YOUR PRE-EARTH LIFE pamphlet, p.10)

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 6:23)

Being resurrected is not a guarantee of receiving eternal life with God in His presence. Being saved by grace through faith is:

Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. (John 5:28-29)

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: , lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:8-10)

In Mormonism â??Exaltationâ? is gained by obeying the laws/ordinances of Mormonism:

REQUIREMENTS FOR EXALTATION

. . .There are specific ordinances we must have received to be exalted:

1. We must be baptized and confirmed a member of the

Church of Jesus Christ.

2. We must receive the Holy Ghost.

3. We must receive the temple endowment.

4. We must be married for time and eternity.

In addition to the required ordinances, there are also many laws we have to obey to qualify for exaltation--We must . . . (p.291)

This is the way our Heavenly Father became a God. . . .Joseph Smith taught, â??it is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. . .he was once a man like us, . . .God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself didâ? (p.293; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp.345-46[King Follet Discourse])

You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. (Galatians 5:4)

This idea of earning exaltation is reflected in these following statements by an LDS apostle/BYU professor:

Thus, brothers and sisters, along with the great and free gift of the universal and personal resurrection there is also the personal possibility of meriting eternal life. (The Ensign, Elder Neal A. Maxwell, 1997, p.23)

It is through the grace of the Lord Jesus, made possible by his atoning sacrifice. . .This grace is an enabling power that allows men and women to lay hold on eternal life and exaltation after they have expended their own best efforts. . . .(AFTER ALL WE CAN DO. . .GRACE WORKS, Robert L. Millet, p.18)

At the point Joseph went to the grove of trees (for Muhammad it was a cave), he left the Christian faith along with Muhammad (and others) and listened to a lying angel. Mormonism like Islam, is a Christian heresy, not a â??restorationâ?!

Muhammad (PBUH) used to visit the cave (ghar) of Hira frequently for spiritual meditation. . . .The first revelation had descended on Muhammad (PBUH) through the angel Jibril (Gabriel). In this way Muhammad (PBUH) overcome with fear, hurried home and related to his beloved Khadija all that had happened. She comforted him assuring him that what he had received was true revelation from Allah. . . .The first revelation was shortly followed by a second one, which came to Muhammad (PBUH) when he was shivering and had been covered by a mantle at home. The command was: â??O thou enveloped in thy cloak, Arise and warn! Thy Lord magnifyâ??. . .(Qur'an 74:1-3). Muhammad (PBUH), through Allahâ??s Word, had been chosen to spread His message (Islam and Christianity, p.41).

The Qur'an testifies that there has been earlier revelation before it. It says: He hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before it, even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel aforetime, for a guidance to mankind (Qur'an 3:3-4a). . . .Therefore, the Qur'an, as the final revelation, is the perfection and culmination of all the truth contained in the earlier Scriptures (Revelations). . . .The purpose of the Qur'an is to guard the previous revelations by restoring the eternal truth of Allah. . . .The Qur'an is a unique Book of Divine guidance. The Qur'an is the very Word of Allah. It was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), through the archangel Jibril (Gabriel) from an archetype preserved in the seventh heaven. . . .What is especially surprising is that the Qur'an was revealed to Muhammad who was unlettered (Islam and Christianity, pp.26-27)

While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, . . .a personage appeared. . .He. . .said unto me. . .he was a messenger. . .from. . .God. . .name was Moroni. . .commanded me to go to my father and tell him of the vision and commandments which I had received. I obeyed; I returned to my father in the field, and rehearsed the whole matter to him. He replied to me that it was of God, and told me to go and do as commanded by the messenger (POGP, JOSEPH SMITHâ??HISTORY 1:30, 33, 49, 50).

The Bible sits on the pulpit of hundreds of religious sects. The Book of Mormon, the record of Joseph, verifies and clarifies the Bible. It removes stumbling blocks, it restores many plain and precious things. . . .the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passage of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible. (The Ensign, Nov. 1984, p.8; THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITHâ??S TESTIMONY pamphlet, p.2)

[Tanyan]

I've never said that faith is by itself because faith without works is dead as James said. You never seem to accept the fact that I agree Tanyan. It follows that when someone believes God then they would want to do the things God would have us do. We don't teach "once saved always saved". One call fall away from the truth or believe a lie and not really be saved.

Elder McConkie's rendition of "faith alone" is not the way Lutherans teach it and is misrepresenting us (they don't like it when it is done to them):

"By faith alone we are saved" (without the works of the law) is to be understood in the context of the verse Luther found while reading in the book of Romans, "The just shall live by faith." This became the "Battle Cry," so to speak, of the Protestant Reformation.

It came to be known in the following three Solas (Latin for only)- Sola Gracia (only Grace), Sola Fide (only Faith), Sola Scriptura (only Scripture).

We do good works because we are saved. Good works are part of Sanctification, not Justification when it comes to making payment for sin that Jesus accomplished on the cross, Jesus said, "it is finished"!

Mormonism is wrong when it teaches that Exaltation is "eternal life". It is the gift not earned/merited/worked for ("work out" our salvation not "work for" our "Exaltation"). Resurrection becomes the gift in place of eternal life. Exaltation is equated to "eternal life" which it is not:

Being resurrected is not a guarantee of receiving eternal life with God in His presence. Being saved by grace through faith is:

In Mormonism "Exaltation" is gained by obeying the laws/ordinances of Mormonism:

This idea of earning exaltation is reflected in these following statements by an LDS apostle/BYU professor:

At the point Joseph went to the grove of trees (for Muhammad it was a cave), he left the Christian faith along with Muhammad (and others) and listened to a lying angel. Mormonism like Islam, is a Christian heresy, not a "restoration"!

coolrok7, thanks for agreeing with us on the Faith/Works should not be seperate with one another. We also are not OSAS.

It could be that Bruce R. McConkie is addressing that Christianity that perverts the Gospel even by your standards [Lutheran] that once inside the Salvation House you can do whatever and still be Saved no matter what.

Yes we are not Saved by the works of the "Law' but by "Faith"= Pistis [of which has a pro dynamic action ] to stay in that covenant of Jesus Christs Blood Sacrifice for all of mankind. Works do not Save us but they show we want to be Saved and stay in that Grace. It's our way of saying thank you to GOD and Jesus Christ for what was done for us.

Yes it is Finished [What was done for us through Jesus Sacrifice] we must all activate/access that free Gift to make a part of our very nature/being to bless the lives of others and ourselves.

Thanks for your sharing your thoughts again on your percieved problems with our exhaltation/eternal life problem.

Eternal life must be strived/struggled/battled for to stay in Grace, cheap it is not. It cost our LORD his life and he asks that we do the same for him and others.

May Grace Shine on you and yous this day.

In His Debt/Grace Tanyan LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

[JDave]

To me, "after all this" in the temporal sense has little meaning. It seems to make more sense when taken in the concessive form---i.e.: "In spite of the fact that I have a good reputation, family and friends, and riches, I still haven't known much about God."

Thoughts?

I agree that the usage in Alma 10:4-5 makes more sense with 'in spite of'. I don't know if that works quite so well with 2 Nephi 25:23.

"In spite of all the good things you did, you were still saved."

This just doesn't sound quite right either. I like the view I read somewhere (sorry, I don't know where) arguing that 2 Nephi 25 sounds much more exhortatory than explanatory. Taking the whole chapter and situation into account, it is not an explanation of how grace and works function within the atonement. Not at all like 2 Nephi 31, where Nephi basically says "I will now provide doctrinal statements of how the gospel works."

[JDave]

It's a made up book that came out of Joseph Smith, it doesn't matter what it says, even in context.

That is amazing.

[robuchan]

I agree that the usage in Alma 10:4-5 makes more sense with 'in spite of'. I don't know if that works quite so well with 2 Nephi 25:23.

"In spite of all the good things you did, you were still saved."

This just doesn't sound quite right either. I like the view I read somewhere (sorry, I don't know where) arguing that 2 Nephi 25 sounds much more exhortatory than explanatory. Taking the whole chapter and situation into account, it is not an explanation of how grace and works function within the atonement. Not at all like 2 Nephi 31, where Nephi basically says "I will now provide doctrinal statements of how the gospel works."

No, not at all.

"In spite of all the good things you did, it is by GRACE OF CHRIST you are saved"...therefore all the emphasis we put on teaching and preaching Christ.

IT works perfect.

[JDave]

No, not at all.

"In spite of all the good things you did, it is by GRACE OF CHRIST you are saved"...therefore all the emphasis we put on teaching and preaching Christ.

IT works perfect.

The Grace of Christ does work perfectly. But Christ does ask us to accept His grace through covenant. We aren't save in spite of the covenants we make. My only point is that trying to theologically define how grace and works interact using 2 Nephi 25:23 seems like it requires some straining -- and Nephi problably wasn't trying to define it for us there.

[robuchan]

The Grace of Christ does work perfectly. But Christ does ask us to accept His grace through covenant. We aren't save in spite of the covenants we make. My only point is that trying to theologically define how grace and works interact using 2 Nephi 25:23 seems like it requires some straining -- and Nephi problably wasn't trying to define it for us there.

We're not saved in spite of the covenants. I didn't say that. And my interpretation of the scripture doesn't require that. The "in spite of" is to show who's the driving force behind it. Who's the main piece. It's not us even after all we do or in spite of all we do.

Nephi's emphasis in the verse and the verses that follow is on Christ, not our works. The simplest reading IMHO is "in spite of". I don't see the strain at all.

[J Green]

I agree that the usage in Alma 10:4-5 makes more sense with 'in spite of'. I don't know if that works quite so well with 2 Nephi 25:23.

"In spite of all the good things you did, you were still saved."

This just doesn't sound quite right either. I like the view I read somewhere (sorry, I don't know where) arguing that 2 Nephi 25 sounds much more exhortatory than explanatory. Taking the whole chapter and situation into account, it is not an explanation of how grace and works function within the atonement. Not at all like 2 Nephi 31, where Nephi basically says "I will now provide doctrinal statements of how the gospel works."

Hi, JDave.

This, of course is the next question. The first step is to recognize that the word "after" is used several different ways in the BOM. Then we can tackle 2 Ne 25:23 and look at THAT verse in light of the possibilities. I personally think that it could be understood as "later" or "in spite of." That may seem contradictory, but it really isn't as long as you realize that there are several ways you could describe any single event or process.

Regards

[J Green]

The discussion between JDave and robuchan is intriguing because I don't think their views are mutually exclusive, although they seem to. I have a degree in translation and have worked almost exclusively on translation projects for the military for the last fifteen years. Whenever I look at a source text, I try to find the the meaning component behind the expressed thought. That's not necessarily possible in this case. I don't know exactly what Nephi was thinking. But from a theological perspective, I actually think that both interpretations are valid. By way of illustration, I give you Naaman.

Naaman travels all the way to the Northern Kingdom for a cure for leprosy. Elisha gives word that Naaman needs to bathe seven times in the river Jordan to be cured, but our hero thinks that this is not very dramatic. In fact, he has better rivers in Syria. He is not going to follow the prophet's guidance, but in the end his servants convince him that this is really an easy request with whcih to compy. He gathers a modicum of faith and bathes seven times, finding a cure upon doing so.

If you start with an assumption of some type of free will involved on the part of Naaman, then there can be several ways to look at this event. I think all of us would agree that there is nothing redemptive per se in the waters of Jordan or in the number seven itself. (Okay, Backyard Prof may disagree with the last.) In other words, the request could have been to create paper boats and float them down the Jordan. in spite of whatever Naaman did or was asked to do, he was healed because God decided to heal him. God asked Naaman to do something, but the thing he asked him to do in and of itself had no redemptive or cleansing power. Truly, in spite of whatever he did, Naaman was cleansed by God.

Now, would God have decided to hear Naaman's plea if he had not followed Elisha's advice? The story doesn't tell us. However, if we still assume free will on the part of Naaman---that he could choose to follow or not follow God's guidance through his mouthpiece---then we can readily uderstand the perspective of those who cared for Naaman. His servants pled with Naaman to follow the request of the Prophet. How simple is this task, they say (just like the easiness of looking at the serpent raised in the wilderness, as per Nephi). Just follow this pathway laid out by the prophet. Truly, he was cleansed "after" (in a "later" sense) he did what was asked by God through his prophet. This is truly an "after" in a "later" sense that doesn't (I think) contradict an "after" in the "in spite of" sense.

I truly think both perspectives are valid and linked. Depending on our own role, and the purpose of the setting, we may use the language of either perspective.

Thoughts?

[robuchan]

Doctrinally, either interpretation works. The two doctrinal points are not mutually exclusive. There are plenty of other scripture to support either interpretation.

I think it's just a language and context issue. Which interpretation sounds right based on the context. One puts the emphasis on man's role. One puts the emphasis on Christ's role. Since the surrounding verses are about the importance of Christ it seems pretty logical which way you should interpret. "In spite of" reinforces the importance of Christ which is why Nephi is teaching and preaching Christ to his children and others.

[JDave]

I was arguing to make a point, but along with robuchan I don't think they are mutually exclusive.

My preferred interpretation is to read the whole chapter, and then leave it open for both. If you read the whole verse, or even better the whole chapter, either usage of "after" falls in line pretty well. With the emphasis already so much on Christ, it really doesn't matter whether Nephi meant "in spite of" or "temporally following". Nephi was emphasizing Christ, and he does it so adamantly that he makes it pretty hard for someone arguing the opposing view -- that Mormons believe our works save us.

For the interaction of grace and works, I think that we actually need both "in spite of" and "temporally following". Not only are they not mutually exclusive, if you limit yourself to one usage you are losing the other side of the picture.