volgadon Posted January 27, 2011 Posted January 27, 2011 Also, stating that grace and faith were terms rooted in the patron-client relationship is not necessarily meant to imply that our relationship with God is one of patron and client (though that seems to be the case in some instances of the New Testament). Other analogies are offered, including that of parent and child, bride and groom. The point is that grace was a secular as well as religious term. It had a meaning that was known to the readers of the New Testament. It didn't magically change definitions once Jesus came. It didn't suddently become, as one CARM poster put it-and I'm not making this up, "Christian grace." It had a meaning and was employed for that very reason. To try to make it into something else is to be unfaithful to the text and cultural context.Exactly. If grace had a meaning completely different to that used in the world of the NT, then the NT authors would have been at great pains to point out said difference. The NT authors were not shy of polemic!Some thoughts on love.Mishneh Torah, considered to be among Maimonides' greatest works, is divided into various books. One of these books is entitled the book of love. Mishneh Torah is a codification of Jewish law, as found in the Mishnah, talmuds, and Tosefta. In the book of love, Maimonides sets forth the regulations governing prayer, blessings, phylacteries, mezuzot, Torah scrolls, fringes on garments, and circumcision. Prayer is seen as a substitute for temple service, and consists of praising God, making any requests, and concluding by expressing gratitude to God. The blessings are the priestly blessing (the priests offer Israel blessings in YHWH's name), and the blessing after a meal, which is an expression of gratitude for what God has given. Phylacteries, mezuzot, Torah scrolls, and fringes all are physical reminders of one's allegiance to God. Circumcision is the means by which one enters into the covenant. There is one more chapter I did not mention, leaving it for last. The saying of the Shema. Hear oh Israel. This was a declaration of allegiance and loyalty to God. all these are classified by Maimonides under love. The reason I saved the Shema for last is because it brings us to Rabbi Akiva. His matyrdom is said to have occured at the time when the shema should have been said, and that he went to his death saying the Shema, loyal to God to the end. His entire philosophy was based on love of God. He wanted to fulfil all of the commandments, on the basis of what is said in the Shema.Love was always bound up with doing somthing. Like you mentioned, children had a debt to their parents. There is a talmudic anecdote about a man who let his mother walk on his hands because her sandal broke. the sages said that this (and I am paraphrasing) isn't even half of the honour due parents. Look at Christ's parable of the two sons. Which loved his father, the one that said yes but then did nothing, or the one that said no but then repented, went and did what the father asked of him?
Theo Posted January 27, 2011 Posted January 27, 2011 Brad said, "No, I would say that the only condition for salvation is faith, in which God uses as an agent to credit Christ's perfect life unto the believer. This is what "justifies" him or her before God. Any attempts at righteousness of our own do not contribute to our right standing with the Father."This kind of thinking worries me. I have faith that when I flip on the light switch that the light will come on. I have faith in electricity but if I don't do something to take advantage of it well...I'm stuck in the dark.Even though it's right there and I know it. I can choose not to take advantage of it!Like I said before...salvation is something we hope for, not something we are given. No one will be "saved" until after the resurrection and judgment.We will be judged by our works. That alone implies there is a possibility of "falling from Grace" which in turn implies that something will have to be done in order to qualify for God's Grace once again.Still don't see what's so hard to understand/accept.Brad, to me your alternative paradigm "makes reason stare".Theo
Vance Posted January 27, 2011 Posted January 27, 2011 Speaking of Aaron "foam at the mouth" Shafovaloff, does anyone have the link to the video where he was foaming at the mouth while street anti-Mormon preaching? It appears that in the update I have lost it.
WalkerW Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 For an excellent review of the Sinai covenant as a Near Eastern suzerainty treaty, see Joshua A. Berman, Created Equal: How the Bible Broke with Ancient Political Thought (Oxford University Press, 2008); specifically Ch. 1 "Egalitarian Theology: The Commoner's Upgrade from King's Servant to Servant King." This lays out the concept of covenant, grace, and loyalty quite well.
Robert F. Smith Posted January 28, 2011 Posted January 28, 2011 Here is an excerpt from my paper on love:Very nice, and precisely what we need to hear. In return, here is a comment from an unpublished paper of mine on covenants:George Mendenhall sees the Eucharist as a loyalty-oath, including symbolic oath-taking, as suggested by Latin sacramentum = Hebrew zakar (Aramaic dakar & Arabic dakar),
Vance Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Speaking of Aaron "foam at the mouth" Shafovaloff, does anyone have the link to the video where he was foaming at the mouth while street anti-Mormon preaching? It appears that in the update I have lost it.No one has the link?
ERayR Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Or in other words, three "who's" and one "what". Please define what being God is. God is what?
LDS Guy 1986 Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Does he [ Or any LDS critic ] get it ?.No, a requirement to be an Anti-Mormon is to never think about the scriptures in depth, once you start reading things like "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." (James 2:26) and thinking about it you would have to abandon man made doctrine like grace is sufficient. Grace is sufficient if you have faith in Jesus Christ and there is no faith without works! Another good example of works being required to be saved is, "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father
Robert F. Smith Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 Exactly. If grace had a meaning completely different to that used in the world of the NT, then the NT authors would have been at great pains to point out said difference. The NT authors were not shy of polemic!Some thoughts on love.Mishneh Torah, considered to be among Maimonides' greatest works, is divided into various books. One of these books is entitled the book of love. Mishneh Torah is a codification of Jewish law, as found in the Mishnah, talmuds, and Tosefta. In the book of love, Maimonides sets forth the regulations governing prayer, blessings, phylacteries, mezuzot, Torah scrolls, fringes on garments, and circumcision. Prayer is seen as a substitute for temple service, and consists of praising God, making any requests, and concluding by expressing gratitude to God. The blessings are the priestly blessing (the priests offer Israel blessings in YHWH's name), and the blessing after a meal, which is an expression of gratitude for what God has given. Phylacteries, mezuzot, Torah scrolls, and fringes all are physical reminders of one's allegiance to God. Circumcision is the means by which one enters into the covenant. There is one more chapter I did not mention, leaving it for last. The saying of the Shema. Hear oh Israel. This was a declaration of allegiance and loyalty to God. all these are classified by Maimonides under love. The reason I saved the Shema for last is because it brings us to Rabbi Akiva. His matyrdom is said to have occured at the time when the shema should have been said, and that he went to his death saying the Shema, loyal to God to the end. His entire philosophy was based on love of God. He wanted to fulfil all of the commandments, on the basis of what is said in the Shema.Love was always bound up with doing somthing. Like you mentioned, children had a debt to their parents. There is a talmudic anecdote about a man who let his mother walk on his hands because her sandal broke. the sages said that this (and I am paraphrasing) isn't even half of the honour due parents. Look at Christ's parable of the two sons. Which loved his father, the one that said yes but then did nothing, or the one that said no but then repented, went and did what the father asked of him?Yes, and Shim'on haTzadik used to say: "The world is founded upon three things: Upon the Torah, upon Temple Service, and upon Deeds of Lovingkindness" (Pirqe Abot 1:2).
Robert F. Smith Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 Here is an excerpt from my paper on love:Very nice.
ed2276 Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 This indicates that when someone is saved, they become dead to their sin. Not in the manner that they will never sin again, but that their life will in turn be one full of repentance and a striving to love and serve the God that first loved them.Then you admit that after initially becoming being saved and "dead to sin" in order to maintain a "saved" condition one must continue in works of salvation...repentance, striving to love, and serving God? You would also be aware of: John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.and,1 John 2:3-4 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.It would seem that you tend more toward the LDS view of grace and salvation, than toward the unmerited, once-saved-always-saved doctrine. LDS don't reject the "regeneration" aspect of being saved in their lives. I am sure you can find instance-after-instance of LDS who would tell you that accepting the Gospel, having faith in Christ, repenting of their sins, and being baptized, by which they have become "dead to sins" has indeed had a "regenerative" and transforming effect on their lives.
Obiwan Posted March 13, 2011 Posted March 13, 2011 We as layman can make the argument as many times as we can, but as long as the interpretation by prophets and apostles and official church publications is different, than it carries no weight.You don't know what you are talking about.Anti-mormons only make arguments like this stick by "quoting out of context" LDS leaders teachings.They not only quote out of context the talks themselves, but quote out of context of the Restored Gospel itself.Leaders of the Church "commonly" teach one aspect of the Gospel, and then teach another another time.Then anti-mormons go and try to claim we "only" teach that one aspect with their bearing false witness quote mining.Mormonism teachs ALL aspects of the Gospel and scripture, not just the anti-mormon lies about us.
Anakin7 Posted March 13, 2011 Author Posted March 13, 2011 You don't know what you are talking about.Anti-mormons only make arguments like this stick by "quoting out of context" LDS leaders teachings.They not only quote out of context the talks themselves, but quote out of context of the Restored Gospel itself.Leaders of the Church "commonly" teach one aspect of the Gospel, and then teach another another time.Then anti-mormons go and try to claim we "only" teach that one aspect with their bearing false witness quote mining.Mormonism teachs ALL aspects of the Gospel and scripture, not just the anti-mormon lies about us. Reminds me several years ago I kept seeing this quote from anti's regarding a past Prophet/ Apostle/Seventy, [i do not recall which one] regarding salvation and the quote posted by the LDS critic was to quote the LDS Authority - 'We earn It". Does anyone recall who and where this quote comes from ?. In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT
Anakin7 Posted March 13, 2011 Author Posted March 13, 2011 Here is LDS critic Bill McKeevers take and criticism of LDS Apologists Defense of 2 Nephi 25:23 http://www.mrm.org/2-nephi-25-23 In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.