Offenders for a Word

[coolrok7]

coolrok, rather than your usual litany of copy/pasting, maybe you could continue the discussion we were having.

The "copy/pasting" has to do with the thread title of which Dr. Peterson is the co-author. The discussion is about his book. I don't agree with it (which is not to say some of the points made are not true) for the reasons mentioned so far.

I chose to raise the issue here instead of in the Trinity thread that ended up being closed. The "bridge building", a subtitle of the Trinity thread of Dr. Peterson, is tore down before it is started in the case of Mormonism. Those who have been addressesd as apostates, believers in pagan doctrine/teaching according to Mormonism is a discervice to the "Truth" of God. already delivered to the saints in the first century:

Following the death of the apostles, revelation ceased. The authority of God was no longer among men. Christianity sickened and died. In time, a new religion grew up in its placeâ??a religion that professed to be Jesus Christâ??s Church, but which in reality was a conglomerate of pagan worship and Greek philosophy, â??having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.â?. . .that eventually led to the complete apostasy of the true church and the eventual creation of an apostate religion that has been responsible for the extermination of the Messiahâ??s true followers and the persecution of his chosen people, the Jews. . . . (APOSTASY AND RESTORATION pamphlet, p.9)

Joseph Smith- for they were all wrong; . . .all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt;â?

While I was laboring under the extreme difficulties caused by the contests of these parties of religionists, I was one day reading the Epistle of James, first chapter and fifth verse, which reads: if any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God. For how to act I did not know, and unless I could get more wisdom than I then had, I would never know, for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passage of scripture so differently so as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible, . . .I at length came to the determination to â??ask of Godâ? (POGP, JOSEPH SMITH-HISTORY 1:11-13)

Searching the Scriptures believing as I was taught, that they contained the word of God. . .thus from the age twelve years to fifteen I pondered many things. . .and by Searching the Scriptures I found that. . .there was no society or denomination that built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded in the new testament. . . (An Analysis of the Accounts Relating Joseph Smithâ??s Early Visions, by Paul R. Cheesman, Masterâ??s thesis, Brigham Young University, 1965, pp.127-28)

The premise is that the Mormon Church is "Christian" and that those who attack it as not being "Christian"(actually a "Christian" heretical movement) are wrong on the basis of playing "word games". The "Mormonism" of Joseph Smith I believe, and there is evidence for it not being so, is in the Bible of declaring him to be a false prophets/teachers as warned about by Jesus and His chosen people who wrote what is now part of the New Testament. Mormon leadership has declared the following:

But either Jesus Christâ??and the disciples touched and inspired by His spiritâ??spoke the truth or they did not. We believe that they spoke the truth, and that the truth they spoke was the Word of God. (Mormon Church Readers Digest Christmas advertisement, 1972)

[LifeOnaPlate]

Oddly, you continue to avoid actually confronting any of Peterson's arguments in the book.

[LeSellers]

Oddly, you continue to avoid actually confronting any of Peterson's arguments in the book.

"Oddly" (unless you forgot to include the sarcasm emoticon) is the wrong word here.

"Oddly" implies a rarity, and it is far from rare for coolrok to avoid confronting anything, and exactly his modus to paste long, useless segments in "response" to any topic.

Lehi

[Tanyan]

Oddly, you continue to avoid actually confronting any of Peterson's arguments in the book.

LOAP, coolrok also while pounding at our front door to unheretical our supposed unBiblical Doctrines/Teachings he ignore's those non LDS Christians that are pounding at his front and back door to unhereticalize his false unBiblical Doctrine/Teachings.

Motes and Beams.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan - LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

[coolrok7]

LOAP, coolrok also while pounding at our front door to unheretical our supposed unBiblical Doctrines/Teachings he ignore's those non LDS Christians that are pounding at his front and back door to unhereticalize his false unBiblical Doctrine/Teachings.

Motes and Beams.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan - LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

Mormon missionaries are the ones who knocked on my door. I'm not pounding on the "door", you invited me here remember (from ZLMB)? I was invited there by Kevin Graham.

The following is part of a past conversation I had with Kevin [Wayne] Graham from his Mormon Answers website (first my statement, then his response; this was from back in May of 1999):

When your Church teaches that what I believe as a Protestant Christian is â??paganâ? and â??hereticalâ? and that Iâ??m wrong, my point back is to give a defense of both what I believe from scripture (the Bible) and what I have been told officially by members of the LDS Church.

In reference to the word â??someâ? Paul as you know wrote both 1&2 Timothy as well as 1&2 Thessalonians. The word apostasy in Thessalonians and some that would fall away in Timothy is speaking about the same thing. . .There will always be people falling away from the truth which will eventually culminate in the final delusion of the last anti-Christ (Paul identifies as the son of perdition)(there have been many anti-Christâ??s as John says), who will be destroyed at the appearing of Jesus in the clouds. The point being there was and always will be the truth as contained in the Bible, preserved by the Holy Spirit of God. . . .

Excellent post Roy, and I do agree with most of what you stated. You have made an interesting argument about the two epistles to Timothy, and I do appreciate this, since I have never heard this as a defense for â??someâ? apostasy. It is well noted! But I do have to say that the â??Falling awayâ? passage never literally said â??Completeâ? either, and is perhaps one of the weaker scriptures used to defend the LDS position of a â??complete apostasyâ?, although it is probably the most cited. . . .

I've been making this point all along Tanyan. You're supposed offering the "right hand of fellowship" is often a stab in the back has been my experience with you.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Tanyan has only had nice things to say about you in personal conversation, coolpaste.

[coolrok7]

Tanyan has only had nice things to say about you in personal conversation, coolpaste.

I can acknowledge that he's been nice at times, it's the other times he's not.

In one relatively recent thread I was having a conversation with someone and he brought up that I had been given time off which had nothing to do with the conversation as I remember it (for things which I didn't view as correct for the reasons given but still the mods right to do so. I had acknowledged the one time I violated the rule concerning bringing up Hitler in contrast to others. I apologized for this as I did it in ignorance of the rule).

I've had personal experiences with him that says otherwise. I have no personal problem with his right to believe as he sees fit. I do object to his and other Mormons who misrepresent what I believe as a Christian (Protestant Lutheran Missouri Synod). I've provided the evidence which is constantly ignored here and in the past at ZLMB.

[Tanyan]

Mormon missionaries are the ones who knocked on my door. I'm not pounding on the "door", you invited me here remember (from ZLMB)? I was invited there by Kevin Graham.

The following is part of a past conversation I had with Kevin [Wayne] Graham from his Mormon Answers website (first my statement, then his response; this was from back in May of 1999):

I've been making this point all along Tanyan. You're supposed offering the "right hand of fellowship" is often a stab in the back has been my experience with you.

Yes LDS Missionaries knock on your Door [Not looking for a fight] but to invite you [As I did invite you here knowing full well your agenda to show us our falsehoods] to come unto Christ and offer you truth springing as a well of Rightiousness. Yes I offer the Right Hand of fellowship and the supposed "stab" is a reality check for you to see yourself as others see you. I tried to give you a BIG HUG at Mariners Church during the LDS/Evangelical event but when I hugged you you became stiff/fridged and stared at my person.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan - LDS JEDI KNIGHT

[volgadon]

I can acknowledge that he's been nice at times, it's the other times he's not.

In one relatively recent thread I was having a conversation with someone and he brought up that I had been given time off which had nothing to do with the conversation as I remember it (for things which I didn't view as correct for the reasons given but still the mods right to do so. I had acknowledged the one time I violated the rule concerning bringing up Hitler in contrast to others. I apologized for this as I did it in ignorance of the rule).

I've had personal experiences with him that says otherwise. I have no personal problem with his right to believe as he sees fit. I do object to his and other Mormons who misrepresent what I believe as a Christian (Protestant Lutheran Missouri Synod). I've provided the evidence which is constantly ignored here and in the past at ZLMB.

And I object to people defining Christianity as only, or primarily, Protestant Lutheran.

[Tanyan]

I can acknowledge that he's been nice at times, it's the other times he's not.

In one relatively recent thread I was having a conversation with someone and he brought up that I had been given time off which had nothing to do with the conversation as I remember it (for things which I didn't view as correct for the reasons given but still the mods right to do so. I had acknowledged the one time I violated the rule concerning bringing up Hitler in contrast to others. I apologized for this as I did it in ignorance of the rule).

I've had personal experiences with him that says otherwise. I have no personal problem with his right to believe as he sees fit. I do object to his and other Mormons who misrepresent what I believe as a Christian (Protestant Lutheran Missouri Synod). I've provided the evidence which is constantly ignored here and in the past at ZLMB.

Ah coolrok thank you for your your admitance to your error, I to am a knuckhead in some of my posts. My personal encounters face to face with you were not so bad, on the board here may be different but I am trying to get you to see yourself and how others see/view you. I also have no personal problem with your right to believe as you see fit but other non LDS Christians have provided Truth to the errors of Martin Luther and Lutheranism and you as a Christian in the "Protestant Lutheran Missouri Synod". And thank you for trying to help us with the misunderstanding about your belief system, please return the favor.

Salvation Comes In And Through His Atoning Blood And In No Other Way.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan - LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

[coolrok7]

Ah coolrok thank you for your your admitance to your error, I to am a knuckhead in some of my posts. My personal encounters face to face with you were not so bad, on the board here may be different but I am trying to get you to see yourself and how others see/view you. I also have no personal problem with your right to believe as you see fit but other non LDS Christians have provided Truth to the errors of Martin Luther and Lutheranism and you as a Christian in the "Protestant Lutheran Missouri Synod". And thank you for trying to help us with the misunderstanding about your belief system, please return the favor.

Salvation Comes In And Through His Atoning Blood And In No Other Way.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan - LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

I've addressed those other issues before with you. What Luther taught in the catechism is what I was confirmed in as far as what I believe is Biblically justified.

When I was out for those two weeks I admitted it already (when I was allowed back in) in that I had violated Godwin's rule without realizing the specifics of the rule.

I can see on my own how I'm viewed here and while at ZLMB. It's not a surprise to me and I don't need your help in that, I can read just fine.

I can only say what I believe in contrast to what Mormonism itself teaches, those who are in authority that "officially" teach the doctrine of Mormonism of which I don't see as being "Christian". What you believe as an individual (I'm not obligated to accept unless it is Biblical at which point I would have no problem with) in which you do not speak officially for the Mormon Church:

The following statement was contained in an in-house letter of correction to Eugene England (February 19, 1981), a professor at BYU (now deceased), who had been instructing certain things in relation to the concept of God always increasing in knowledge. In response, writing as an LDS apostle, Elder McConkie was in disagreement with that idea. I think it is instructive in how the recognized leadership of the Church views their authority in establishing what doctrine the Church teaches:

Dear Brother England: This may well be the most important letter you have or will receive (p.1). . . .It is not in your province to set in order the Church or to determine what its doctrines shall be. . . .This means, among other things, that it is my province to teach to the Church what the doctrine is. You do not have a divine commission to correct me or any of the Brethren. The Lord does not operate that way. If I lead the Church astray, that is my responsibility, but the fact remains that I am the one appointed with all the rest involved so to do. The appointment is not given to the faculty at Brigham Young University or to any of the members of the Church. . . .And those at (p. the head of the Church have the obligation to teach that which is in harmony with the Standard Works (p.9). . . .â? (Bruce R. McConkie)

It would be nice if all of you would deal with the issues as I raised them insread of the name calling.

[Joseph Antley]

I've gotta admit, I read the OP and got a giggle out of the quotation marks before I read the other posts in the thread.

[Brade]

Coolrok7, will you please formulate a valid argument with premises and a conclusion. For example, something along these lines:

Premise 1: If it's a cat, then it's a mammal.

Premise 2: It's a cat.

Conclusion: Therefore, it's a mammal.

If you're criticizing an argument, which it looks like you are, please formulate the argument that you're criticizing. Then, pick a premise of that argument and show how it is problematic or false. You can do this by, for example, giving a counterexample to what that premise is claiming. If all the premises of the argument you intend to criticize are acceptable, then please show that the logic from the premises to the conclusion is faulty.

Even the most complicated arguments can be made in a few sentences. If it turns out that certain premises need support, support can be provided. It's difficult to see exactly where you're going and what you're trying to show when you dump paragraphs and quotes all over the page.

[Tanyan]

I've addressed those other issues before with you. What Luther taught in the catechism is what I was confirmed in as far as what I believe is Biblically justified.

When I was out for those two weeks I admitted it already (when I was allowed back in) in that I had violated Godwin's rule without realizing the specifics of the rule.

I can see on my own how I'm viewed here and while at ZLMB. It's not a surprise to me and I don't need your help in that, I can read just fine.

I can only say what I believe in contrast to what Mormonism itself teaches, those who are in authority that "officially" teach the doctrine of Mormonism of which I don't see as being "Christian". What you believe as an individual (I'm not obligated to accept unless it is Biblical at which point I would have no problem with) in which you do not speak officially for the Mormon Church:

It would be nice if all of you would deal with the issues as I raised them insread of the name calling.

How about the issues that are raised by other non LDS Christians [ At your Front/Back door/windows] about Martin Luther and Lutheranism as - satanical, non christian, heretical ?. Motes and beams to ya, stone casting come to mind as well.

But Love ya anyway coolrok !.

In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan LDS JEDI KNIGHT.

[volgadon]

Well, the warnings in Revelation simply don't apply to Luther.

I wish protestants would tell us WHY.

[Doctor Steuss]

[Deleted. Meh.]