Calm Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Yes, but when you speak of "living works" you are speaking of "justification through faith":Justification by faith excludes boasting or exulting in one's goodness achieved by works according to the law. The way God justified Abraham by faith demonstrates that trust as a way of relating to God preceded seeking to relate to Him by the works of the law, meeting the Jewish objection that God requires works for justification (3:27-4:25).(From Holman Bible Dictionary.
Zakuska Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Yes, but when you speak of "living works" you are speaking of "justification through faith":Justification by faith excludes boasting or exulting in one's goodness achieved by works according to the law. The way God justified Abraham by faith demonstrates that trust as a way of relating to God preceded seeking to relate to Him by the works of the law, meeting the Jewish objection that God requires works for justification (3:27-4:25).(From Holman Bible Dictionary.
Palerider Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Presuming that by "works" you are referring to ordinances and the laws by which we live, I would say that all these things are part of the baptism by fire and are preparatory to the culmination of that process of sanctification.The process of receiving the Holy Ghost which begins at baptism culminates in the return to our Father's presence which is foreshadowed within the temple. The laws we keep are preparatory, designed to teach us about God's nature and help us acquire His attributes. The ordinances are a reflection of our deepening commitment and His continuing tutelage.It's not as demanding as we make it out to be.But according to your previous statement I could be saved without ever doing baptizms for the dead, taking out my temple endowments, doing my home teaching etc. etc. Are you revising that position or are you going to redefine being "saved" now?
volgadon Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 If you are allowed to characterize my non-belief in the biblical narrative as a "bitter litany," may I refer to your cherished beliefs as a "childish superstition"? Just asking for a clarification of board rules.I think this rather reinforces my point about reading comprehension. Here is what comes under the "bitter litany". But the necessity of having rituals performed for you by someone who has priesthood authority and obedience to church leaders in every aspect of your life----including accepting any and every job they give you ("calling") is not a universally accepted interpretation of "the scriptures" (whatever scriptures are accepted by one's denomination).As you can see, that list of gripes (if you prefer), has nothing to do with your views of the Bible and restoration scriptures.The issue is not whether there is some nominal action of manifesting faith for God to have mercy on people, but whether the LDS Church places an inordinate amount of requirements on what is required of believers to be "worthy."Please define inordinate. Is there anything there that one should not be doing? Is there anything there that when puurposefuly left undone, or avoided, doesn't speak to the motives and priorities of the individual?
Palerider Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 But Abrahams "justifying faith" was much more than mental ascent. Each of the 3 instances from Abrahams life concerning his faith and him being declared righteous. Were accompanied by "Trust in God". What did the trust entail?1) God commanded Abraham to pack up the caravan and leave UR. Abraham did and God blessed him for it. It was "living Faith" which entailed belief, trust AND action.But it wasn't enough for Abraham to get his name changed.2) God commanded Abraham to multiply and he believed which included going into the tent like a viral bull (did they have Viagra and Cialus back then?) and emprgnating his wife who had a malfunctioning oven. (Romans 5 IIRC)3) Then the incident with Isaac (Heb 11) was what finally got God to declare him his "friend" and one who would do all that God commanded him too.Please re-read the dictionary post more carefully.
Hestia Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Consig never fails to let me down..... His mormonism is so much to often a perversion of actual mormonism.Board rules: Personal attacks. You may dispute a member
Jeff K. Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 We sang "Amazing Grace" in the temple prior to beginning our shift as ordinance workers. If its appropriate there, I can't see how it is inappropriate anywhere else.Elder Cook of the Quorum of the 12 likes the song Amazing Grace, and deems it appropriate also.As to the question of "Grace" itself.Some Christians accuse Latter-day Saints who give this answer of denying the grace of God through claiming they can earn their own salvation. We answer this accusation with the words of two Book of Mormon prophets. Nephi taught,
mercyngrace Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 But according to your previous statement I could be saved without ever doing baptizms for the dead, taking out my temple endowments, doing my home teaching etc. etc. Are you revising that position or are you going to redefine being "saved" now?Not only am I not revisiting that position, I'm going to quote Joseph Smith with regard to it:Sunday, May 1, 1842.
Zakuska Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Because we trust in God and his promises?I wonder if grace is compatible with Peters preaching?Acts 1034
Palerider Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Because we trust in God and his promises?No, because someone has to ask a general authority whether caffeine from a can and caffeine from a cup of coffee are synonymous (among many other things). "straining at gnats, swallowing camels"
mercyngrace Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 No, because someone has to ask a general authority whether caffeine from a can and caffeine from a cup of coffee are synonymous (among many other things). "straining at gnats, swallowing camels"No one has to ask. Some do. And that is a reflection of their own spiritual maturity.
Palerider Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 I wonder if grace is compatible with Peters preaching?Acts 1034
bluebell Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 I am well aware that when apologetics kicks in, the plain meaning of what someone said is not a reliable indication of what they meant. So feel free to offer an alternative interpretation.I already offered the interpretation earlier in the thread. So please feel free to read it.But whether or not the LDS Church teaches that grace is something that is earned, not freely given, is not a matter of opinion.E.g., http://lds.org/new-era/2005/03/tough-topics-are-you-saved-by-grace-or-works?lang=engOnly Calvinists teach that grace is freely given. For every other sect of Christians, LDS included, there are conditions that one must meet before Grace is given.What is in dispute is what the conditions are-not whether or not they exist.It is the nature of the conditions that is open to interpretation and which is often interpeted wrong, as you yourself have demonstrated.
Palerider Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 No one has to ask. Some do. And that is a reflection of their own spiritual maturity.The question grows out of the individual's sincere desire to do exactly right, and a culture that promotes that approach, when in a less "Law of Moses" culture, someone could explain that with "grace" precision is not so important as intent. I might have a tendency to agree with you if this mentality were not so prevelant in the church.
Calm Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 No one has to ask. Some do. And that is a reflection of their own spiritual maturity.Okay, that is spooky because that is exactly what I was going to so (and I do mean exactly for the first two sentences...the last was similar in meaning, but not identical in words).
Calm Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 The question grows out of the individual's sincere desire to do exactly right, and a culture that promotes that approach....in large part by instructing people to go ask the Lord what he wants of them.
Palerider Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 I already offered the interpretation earlier in the thread. So please feel free to read it.Only Calvinists teach that grace is freely given. For every other sect of Christians, LDS included, there are conditions that one must meet before Grace is given.What is in dispute is what the conditions are-not whether or not they exist.It is the nature of the conditions that is open to interpretation and which is often interpeted wrong, as you yourself have demonstrated.I do think there comes a time when God expects a return on His word, but I think He gives His Grace much more freely than you (or we) believe.<LI>Matthew 5:45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
Palerider Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 in large part by instructing people to go ask the Lord what he wants of them."follow the prophet" is the more practised mantra.
mercyngrace Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Okay, that is spooky because that is exactly what I was going to so (and I do mean exactly for the first two sentences...the last was similar in meaning, but not identical in words).It's because we are part of the collective....
bluebell Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 I do think there comes a time when God expects a return on His word, but I think He gives His Grace much more freely than you (or we) believe.<LI>Matthew 5:45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.That's a great scripture, but I don't think it's applicable to this conversation.We are talking about 'saving grace' specifically (at least, that's what i'm talking about) and no where do the scriptures teach that God grants His saving grace to the evil as well as the good, to the just as well as the unjust.I agree that God grants grace to many, but i think that the grace that justifies us is conditionally given only when we do the things He has told us we must do to access that.If you've got scriptures that speak against that in regards to THAT kind of grace, then i would be very happy to see them (and i'm not saying that in a snide or snarky manner).
TAO Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Grace is a wonderful thing, that it is... and I think it applies to everyone. However, I think, perhaps, those who perform works receive more from grace than those who do not, because they are willing to trust in the Lord.Grace is given freely, and yet, I think God rewards those whom act in gratitude with more of this wonderful thing.
CV75 Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 the grace has (almost) never been taught, but the demands are hammered home on a weekly basis.The absolutely most important thing we do on Sunday is partake of the sacrament, where grace is taught, remembered, reflected upon, witnessed, rendered, and received in an astoundingly personal, spiritual manner:O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it, that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him and keep his commandments which he has given them; that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them; that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.I see no greater outpouring of grace than in the Atonement and the covenants and ordinances that grew out of it, and obviously in the wonderful privilege we have in renewing them with the sacrament weekly.
gtaggart Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Last Sunday we had a surprise for sacrament meeting. The two adult speakers were assigned to talk on the subject of
Darth J Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 I already offered the interpretation earlier in the thread. So please feel free to read it.Only Calvinists teach that grace is freely given. For every other sect of Christians, LDS included, there are conditions that one must meet before Grace is given.What is in dispute is what the conditions are-not whether or not they exist.It is the nature of the conditions that is open to interpretation and which is often interpeted wrong, as you yourself have demonstrated.I dispute whether or not those conditions exist, as do other people who do not believe that there is any necessity of performing rituals or conforming to the social norms of a particular denomination to be at peace with God. And feel free to explain what I have interpreted incorrectly in saying---and supporting it with reference to LDS teachings---that the Church teaches that receiving grace from God depends on receiving priesthood ordinances and continuing obedience to church leaders. As soon as you can show me that LDS doctrine that says we do not have to obey church leaders and participate in ordinances for Jesus to extend grace to us, I will find your unsupported assertions more compelling.
LeSellers Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 the Church teaches that receiving grace from God depends on receiving priesthood ordinances and continuing obedience to church leaders. Priesthood ordinances are "grace". That's why one of them is called "the Endowment", "the gift". Lehi
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.