Dutch Protestant Pastor Does Not Believe In God, In Jesus, In Resurrection, In Nothing!

[Gervin]

post withdrawn

Edited August 6, 2011 by Gervin

[Gervin]

Obviously, the world of the traditional Christian does not believe in Christ's visitation described by Joseph Smith and it does not believe that that Christ condemned the traditional Christian church, its members or its teachers. So, it follows that the traditional Christian sees the Christ described by Joseph Smith as a false Christ.

As a Christian I don't take exception to what is claimed that Christ said to Joseph Smith as much as I take exception to the claim that it was Christ speaking to Joseph Smith. I don't worship that Christ. I would call that a false Christ (and more). A Latter Day Saint claiming that he and I worship the same Christ only makes the claim for himself, not me. Perhaps he could rectify the dichotomy of calling Christ the Father of Lies while calling Christ the rock on which I worship and giving my entire being; that type of double-mindedness seems (to me) to favor the former.

[mfbukowski]

Obviously, the world of the traditional Christian does not believe in Christ's visitation described by Joseph Smith and it does not believe that that Christ condemned the traditional Christian church, its members or its teachers. So, it follows that the traditional Christian sees the Christ described by Joseph Smith as a false Christ.

As a Christian I don't take exception to what is claimed that Christ said to Joseph Smith as much as I take exception to the claim that it was Christ speaking to Joseph Smith. I don't worship that Christ. I would call that a false Christ (and more). A Latter Day Saint claiming that he and I worship the same Christ only makes the claim for himself, not me. Perhaps he could rectify the dichotomy of calling Christ the Father of Lies while calling Christ the rock on which I worship and giving my entire being; that type of double-mindedness seems (to me) to favor the former.

I'm done with you. You have shown your fruits Mr "Christian". Worship whatever you please.

Edited August 6, 2011 by mfbukowski

[thesometimesaint]

Gervin:

You may believe William Jefferson Clinton the former President of the US was the greatest thing since sliced bread, and I may believe him to be the exact opposite. But we are still talking about the same man.

I believe Jesus is the Christ, the only begotten son of The Father in the flesh. He is my personal Savior, and Savior to the whole world, my Redeemer, the Promised Messiah. That He will again return in power and glory someday. That is STANDARD LDS BELIEF just as JS taught. So get off your high horse.

[zerinus]

Though I disagree strongly with the Reverend in the article, I think it is important to understand that his beliefs are just as well (or poorly) intellectually justified as any religious belief.

We rely on direct personal experience as Mormons, and so does he.

So though I differ with him on "what" I believe- as far as what I think is "true" about Jesus and the resurrection etc- looking at his point of view is useful for understanding that his "methodology" is no better or worse than ours- he is relying on personal experience for what he believes.

We may believe in a stronger personal experience than he does- my spiritual experiences have left no doubt in my mind about God's "existence"- but yet, those experiences ARE ultimately personal experiences which are not fully expressible to anyone else except by the Spirit- ie- through their own personal "verification" of things we might share. That communication is what "happens" between us- sharing the spirit.

So though we would disagree about beliefs, certainly I think we can see this guy as holding the same positions we do on questions like whether or not science and religion are in conflict.

So I think it is important that we distinguish that- don't confuse what he believes with his religious methodology.

We cannot "know" that Jesus is the Christ except by personal revelation- personal experience, so in many ways, I think I would agree with him in those limited areas.

So what is your take on these verses then:

2 Nephi 28

:

22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no heII; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none—and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.

23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and heII; and death, and heII, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.

Mormon 8

:

35 Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing.

38 O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? Why are ye ashamed to take upon you the name of Christ? Why do ye not think that greater is the value of an endless happiness than that misery which never dies—because of the praise of the world?

[zerinus]

I went to a Dutch Reformed High School and believe it or not this was actually more common than some would think. I knew quite a few who were active in Dutch Reformed congregations, such as music ministers, etc. who were agnostic or athiest. When I asked them why they bothered with the religion, they told me that they were involved just in case it was true, that they believed more than likely there was no God or Jesus and that the Bible was probably not true, but they enjoyed the social interactions of church and thought of it as a sort-of "fire insurance" just in case there was a God.

It reminds me of a Muslim friend I had many years ago who broke all the rules, but always carried a miniature copy of the Koran in his pocket just to be on the safe side!

[zerinus]

Groan. I was hoping no one would say something like this. If you're thinking of evangelicals, you could not be more wrong. Any so-called church that denies the existence of God is not a Christian church. Period.

What about the ones who fight against God's only true Church?

[zerinus]

If I say I worship Christ and claim that the Christ of Joseph Smith's First Vision is the Father of Lies would you say that you and I worship the same Christ? Just curious.

No, I would say that you do not worship Christ at all.

[zerinus]

Allow me to simplify. Do you believe in and worship the Christ of Joseph Smith's First Vision?

I do.

[zerinus]

Obviously, the world of the traditional Christian does not believe in Christ's visitation described by Joseph Smith and it does not believe that that Christ condemned the traditional Christian church, its members or its teachers. So, it follows that the traditional Christian sees the Christ described by Joseph Smith as a false Christ.

As a Christian I don't take exception to what is claimed that Christ said to Joseph Smith as much as I take exception to the claim that it was Christ speaking to Joseph Smith. I don't worship that Christ. I would call that a false Christ (and more).

And I would classify your religion as the church of the devil.

A Latter Day Saint claiming that he and I worship the same Christ only makes the claim for himself, not me.

I wouldn't make that claim. I would claim that you do not worship Christ at all. You can't be worshipping Christ and be the enemy of His only true Church at the same time. Your claim is a false pretence. You are worshipping the Father of Lies disguised as Christ.

[jo1952]

Unfortunatly my wife had another medical emergency and I was unable to listen to any of todays presentations.

Hi ERayR:

I just read your post. How is your wife doing???? I will pray for her and for you.

God bless!!

Love,

jo

[Gervin]

You may believe William Jefferson Clinton the former President of the US was the greatest thing since sliced bread, and I may believe him to be the exact opposite. But we are still talking about the same man.

Bill Clinton does not claim himself as the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world who is worthy of our worship.

I believe Jesus is the Christ, the only begotten son of The Father in the flesh. He is my personal Savior, and Savior to the whole world, my Redeemer, the Promised Messiah. That He will again return in power and glory someday. That is STANDARD LDS BELIEF just as JS taught.

If you read my posts carefully, you'd see that I didn't attempt to challenge or make claims about STANDARD LDS BELIEF.

So get off your high horse.

The Christ of Matthew 5:44 instructs me to not even get on a horse. Your reaction is telling.

[Gervin]

And I would classify your religion as the church of the devil.

Thanks. I don't know you but I can say that you are loved and I love you.

I wouldn't make that claim. I would claim that you do not worship Christ at all. You can't be worshipping Christ and be the enemy of His only true Church at the same time. Your claim is a false pretence. You are worshipping the Father of Lies disguised as Christ.

I understand your position and appreciate your openness. As I gather with fellow-worshipers tomorrow I hope God lays a reminder of your words on my heart.

[zerinus]

If you read my posts carefully, you'd see that I didn't attempt to challenge or make claims about STANDARD LDS BELIEF.

Ummm. So Joseph Smith's First Vision is not STANDARD LDS BELIEF?

The Christ of Matthew 5:44 instructs me to not even get on a horse. Your reaction is telling.

Jesus of Matthew 5:44 is the same as Jesus of Matthew 12:34. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Gervin]

Ummm. So Joseph Smith's First Vision is not STANDARD LDS BELIEF?

Sorry if I was obtuse. I wasn't attempting to judge the LDS perspective of belief in Christ of the First Vision. Only my own. Though the words may come across as harsh I think it's important that our belief in Christ not contain double mindedness.

Matthew 12:34.

A good verse to remind us that the words we speak should be agreeable to the professing character of the Christian. Thanks.

[Jeff K.]

If I say I worship Christ and claim that the Christ of Joseph Smith's First Vision is the Father of Lies would you say that you and I worship the same Christ? Just curious.

I would say we have different perspectives of the same Christ. Not that you did not worship Christ. If you stated you did not believe in the existence of Christ, would that make you a Christian?

[Gervin]

I would say we have different perspectives of the same Christ. Not that you did not worship Christ.

If I, on the one hand, call you my trusted friend and on the other say that I believe you are deceptive do I simply have two perspectives of you? If I say I will die for you but I won't die for you then I'm double-minded.

If you stated you did not believe in the existence of Christ, would that make you a Christian?

No.

[thesometimesaint]

Gervin:

So now the LDS are liars. Good Bye.

[mfbukowski]

So what is your take on these verses then:

2 Nephi 28

:

22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no heII; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none—and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.

23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and heII; and death, and heII, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.

Mormon 8

:

35 Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing.

38 O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? Why are ye ashamed to take upon you the name of Christ? Why do ye not think that greater is the value of an endless happiness than that misery which never dies—because of the praise of the world?

These seem to have nothing to do with how we know the BOM is true.

That is the issue for me. The pastor is talking about how he experiences God- I experience God differently than he does, but I think all of us- including you- go by your testimony- ie: how we experience God.

The issue I was discussion is about HOW we know "truth" not what the truth is.

[Jeff K.]

Obviously, the world of the traditional Christian does not believe in Christ's visitation described by Joseph Smith and it does not believe that that Christ condemned the traditional Christian church, its members or its teachers. So, it follows that the traditional Christian sees the Christ described by Joseph Smith as a false Christ.

As a Christian I don't take exception to what is claimed that Christ said to Joseph Smith as much as I take exception to the claim that it was Christ speaking to Joseph Smith. I don't worship that Christ. I would call that a false Christ (and more). A Latter Day Saint claiming that he and I worship the same Christ only makes the claim for himself, not me. Perhaps he could rectify the dichotomy of calling Christ the Father of Lies while calling Christ the rock on which I worship and giving my entire being; that type of double-mindedness seems (to me) to favor the former.

I would also add, that there is no exclusivity to those perspectives, it is recognized as distinct by the many churches and views that sprang up both anciently and in the reformation period. Do we worship the same Christ? I would say you worship the one in your mind and create an artificial exclusion to those who do not meet the parameters you have arbitrarily placed in your mind, or the mind of your group. As such one is forced to question the lack of charity and artificial clarity within your definition. Did Joseph Smith receive a vision of Christ? Is there something in the teachings of Christ that would disallowed such communication? Perspectives differ.

The touchstone of Christianity is whether we accept our discipleship in Christ, that we seek to follow Him and do as he commands. This is very personal and it makes our relationship with Christ personal. It becomes dangerous when we begin to place limits to that acceptance. Is one who is ignorant of all knowledge regarding Christ except the desire of follow Christ and make every attempt to live as He does worthy of being called Christian, or for his ignorance or error would you deny him the hope and faith you seem to so easily judge others?

Catholics and others often share different perspectives of what Christ asks of them. They seek sincerely to follow Christ even as their perspectives change and in some ways grow farther apart. They remain Christians, brothers and sisters seeking to understand and follow the Lord in the best way they know how. We can of course narrow the focus, some exclude Catholics from being Christian, some will exclude Epsicopalians whose doctrine is splitting based on teachings. And some will of course exclude the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is the arbitrary judgement of each of us to follow our hearts to Christ in the best way we can with what our heart tells us. When we do so, showing love for our fellow man and seeking to do God's will we are Christians. When we deny the recognition to those who choose to follow God with their greatest understanding of virtue, we take away a key part of the virtue we claim, that is charity, and without charity, can we be called Christians?

[Jeff K.]

If I, on the one hand, call you my trusted friend and on the other say that I believe you are deceptive do I simply have two perspectives of you? If I say I will die for you but I won't die for you then I'm double-minded.

There is a false dichotomy there. I wonder if you can understand and find it? If you say that Christ has blond hair and I say Christ's physical attribute is black, does that make you unchristian? If I embrace you as a brother in Christ even with your strange and outrageous belief in blond hair, realizing that we seek to do His will, even as our approaches may differ. That we seek to care for our brethern as Christ commanded of His followers, even as my strange belief in His eyes being dark rather than blue. Do we deny the other is Christian, do we simply jettison charity? One supposes we should clarify what importance charity has with the importance of physical attributes. To Christians the answer is simple.

Sadly hoow difficult it must be for some.

[ERayR]

Hi ERayR:

I just read your post. How is your wife doing???? I will pray for her and for you.

God bless!!

Love,

jo

Thank you.

She is slowly recuperating but setbacks seem common.

[zerinus]

These seem to have nothing to do with how we know the BOM is true.

That is the issue for me. The pastor is talking about how he experiences God- I experience God differently than he does, but I think all of us- including you- go by your testimony- ie: how we experience God.

The issue I was discussion is about HOW we know "truth" not what the truth is.

There are two points here. Firstly, the pastor was not just talking about “methodology,” but making statements about the truth. He was making belief statements that, if the Bible and the Book or Mormon are true, leads to damnation rather than salvation—and he was doing it under the aegis of the Christian faith. I can think of more than one scripture that tells me there is something wrong with that. Verses to do with hypocrisy especially seem to come to mind. The problem there is not just with his beliefs; but with what he is doing with them—hence the scriptures I had quoted from the Book of Mormon. His beliefs being wrong are just his problem. It doesn’t affect anybody else. But practising priestcraft makes it more than just his problem. It becomes somebody else’s problem.

Secondly, let’s talk about his “methodology”. This is what you said:

Though I disagree strongly with the Reverend in the article, I think it is important to understand that his beliefs are just as well (or poorly) intellectually justified as any religious belief.

We rely on direct personal experience as Mormons, and so does he.

So though I differ with him on "what" I believe- as far as what I think is "true" about Jesus and the resurrection etc- looking at his point of view is useful for understanding that his "methodology" is no better or worse than ours- he is relying on personal experience for what he believes.

We may believe in a stronger personal experience than he does- my spiritual experiences have left no doubt in my mind about God's "existence"- but yet, those experiences ARE ultimately personal experiences which are not fully expressible to anyone else except by the Spirit- ie- through their own personal "verification" of things we might share. That communication is what "happens" between us- sharing the spirit.

So though we would disagree about beliefs, certainly I think we can see this guy as holding the same positions we do on questions like whether or not science and religion are in conflict.

So I think it is important that we distinguish that- don't confuse what he believes with his religious methodology.

We cannot "know" that Jesus is the Christ except by personal revelation- personal experience, so in many ways, I think I would agree with him in those limited areas.

So you think that his “methodology” of knowing the truth is the same as ours—no better or worse—even though in his case it leads him to error, but in our case it leads to the truth? Ummm, I sense something wrong with that as well, not sure why. Can somebody else help me out with this one? I seem to be stuck here.

Edited August 6, 2011 by zerinus

[jo1952]

There are two points here. Firstly, the pastor was not just talking about “methodology,” but making statements about the truth. He was making belief statements that, if the Bible and the Book or Mormon are true, leads to damnation rather than salvation—and he was doing it under the aegis of the Christian faith. I can think of more than one scripture that tells me there is something wrong with that. Verses to do with hypocrisy especially seem to come to mind. The problem there is not just with his beliefs; but with what he is doing with them—hence the scriptures I had quoted from the Book of Mormon. His beliefs being wrong are just his problem. It doesn’t affect anybody else. But practising priestcraft makes it more than just his problem. It becomes somebody else’s problem.

Secondly, let’s talk about his “methodology”. This is what you said:

So you think that his “methodology” of knowing the truth is the same as ours—no better or worse—even though in his case it leads him to error, but in our case it leads to the truth? Ummm, I sense something wrong with that as well, not sure why. Can somebody else help me out with this one? I seem to be stuck here.

You have asked the million dollar question! Though today that is probably only worth about---well, not even the paper it has been printed on. But that's another story....sigh.

This is the classic argument which anti-LDS apologists use against us. They claim that the Holy Ghost could not be giving them a different answer than we think we are receiving. IOW, they claim the Holy Ghost has, in no uncertain terms, told them that the BoM is a fake; or that Joseph Smith is NOT a Prophet of God. Then they point to what at first blush appears to be a reasonable argument. That is, there is only one Truth. So either they are right and we are wrong; or they are wrong and we are right.

So, this leads to what all men "perceive" to be Truth. The Holy Ghost is not going to sit us down and have a long drawn-out conversation with us. We may "hear" an occasional "yes" or "no"; but generally, we receive influences and/or impressions. To a very direct a distinct question, we may receive a feeling of peace which helps us understand that we have either received an affirmative replay, or that we are at least headed in the correct direction. As we continue to "experience" the Holy Ghost's "guidance" (we don't receive an actual detailed road map), it becomes easier for us to discern His influence in our lives. If we blessed and extremely fortunate, we will experience great epiphanies along the way.

Our perception of all of these things are unavoidably effected by our own previous life experiences, upbringing, social status, where we grew up, the religious traditions of our parents and families, our world view, our personality, preconceptions, etc. Then there is the "layer" of understanding which each one of us is ready for: the difference between milk and meat understandings...whatever it is that Father deems we are ready to have revealed to us. And all of these things...for all the millions and millions of spirits that have come to the earth to receive their physical body....are being coordinated in order for God's purposes to be accomplished, and for the best benefit of each individual in order for us to have the best shot at receiving the best Glory we can. It is Father's desire that we ALL be able to return to Him in His presence. Yet we are taught that wide is the gate but narrow is the way; and few there be that find it (to the Celestial Kingdom).

Now, we have a merciful God; but mercy cannot rob justice. In His mercy, God counts our righteousness against our faithfulness to what we believe or know (either actually spiritually revealed; or merely believed that we know due to the influence of our teachers) to be True; regardless of whether what we believe or know is actually correct or not. If what we believe is what we are faithful to, then this is how our righteousness is counted. If we are not faithful to what we believe, then this is counted as unrighteousness against us. Then there are other factors such as have we been cleansed from our sins? Have we continued to repent? Have we endured? How much has been revealed to us by the Holy Ghost? How well did we understand what was revealed? What was the intent of our heart? Were we good or were we evil? Did we love God or not? Did we love our neighbor as ourselves or not? Did we serve others? Did we walk in faith? Or did we look for evidence and place our faith there? ALL these things effect how and what we will hear when the Holy Ghost does communicate with us. ALL these things effect our ultimate destiny and the level of Glory we will receive in our resurrection. They all effect our salvation; but they do not rob us of it (unless we become a Son of Perdition).

We have been taught that Truth is EVERYWHERE! Not just in the LDS Church. We do not have a monopoly on Truth; in fact, we search for it everywhere - which means that at least elements of Truth are in ALL places, denominations, nations, tongues, peoples, etc. Now, consider how it is that our "perception" of Truth could possibly ever be 100% in agreement with every other individual? It simply cannot be that way while we are in the flesh. We are still in the world, even if our spirits are in God's camp.

So it is that people who are not LDS can appear to be receiving a different "truth" then we are. Even inside the Church, individuals argue about what they believe to be "true" once we get into the nitty-gritty of what our beliefs look like to each of us. You see, we are each on our own private and individual journey with God - no two of us are ever in the exact same place at the same time along that path; though we DO share much Truth at the same time when the Holy Ghost is opening the kingdom of Heaven to our minds when we are in groups together, and we experience that sharing of joy as "one".

Therefore, it is not different Truth that various believers have or understand at any given time. It is just that not ALL Truth has been revealed yet; and we each individually receive the portion of Truth which we are ready and able to bear. At least this is how I see it at this point in my own personal journey.

Best regards,

jo

[zerinus]

You have asked the million dollar question! Though today that is probably only worth about---well, not even the paper it has been printed on. But that's another story....sigh.

This is the classic argument which anti-LDS apologists use against us. They claim that the Holy Ghost could not be giving them a different answer than we think we are receiving. IOW, they claim the Holy Ghost has, in no uncertain terms, told them that the BoM is a fake; or that Joseph Smith is NOT a Prophet of God. Then they point to what at first blush appears to be a reasonable argument. That is, there is only one Truth. So either they are right and we are wrong; or they are wrong and we are right.

So, this leads to what all men "perceive" to be Truth. The Holy Ghost is not going to sit us down and have a long drawn-out conversation with us. We may "hear" an occasional "yes" or "no"; but generally, we receive influences and/or impressions. To a very direct a distinct question, we may receive a feeling of peace which helps us understand that we have either received an affirmative replay, or that we are at least headed in the correct direction. As we continue to "experience" the Holy Ghost's "guidance" (we don't receive an actual detailed road map), it becomes easier for us to discern His influence in our lives. If we blessed and extremely fortunate, we will experience great epiphanies along the way.

Our perception of all of these things are unavoidably effected by our own previous life experiences, upbringing, social status, where we grew up, the religious traditions of our parents and families, our world view, our personality, preconceptions, etc. Then there is the "layer" of understanding which each one of us is ready for: the difference between milk and meat understandings...whatever it is that Father deems we are ready to have revealed to us. And all of these things...for all the millions and millions of spirits that have come to the earth to receive their physical body....are being coordinated in order for God's purposes to be accomplished, and for the best benefit of each individual in order for us to have the best shot at receiving the best Glory we can. It is Father's desire that we ALL be able to return to Him in His presence. Yet we are taught that wide is the gate but narrow is the way; and few there be that find it (to the Celestial Kingdom).

Now, we have a merciful God; but mercy cannot rob justice. In His mercy, God counts our righteousness against our faithfulness to what we believe or know (either actually spiritually revealed; or merely believed that we know due to the influence of our teachers) to be True; regardless of whether what we believe or know is actually correct or not. If what we believe is what we are faithful to, then this is how our righteousness is counted. If we are not faithful to what we believe, then this is counted as unrighteousness against us. Then there are other factors such as have we been cleansed from our sins? Have we continued to repent? Have we endured? How much has been revealed to us by the Holy Ghost? How well did we understand what was revealed? What was the intent of our heart? Were we good or were we evil? Did we love God or not? Did we love our neighbor as ourselves or not? Did we serve others? Did we walk in faith? Or did we look for evidence and place our faith there? ALL these things effect how and what we will hear when the Holy Ghost does communicate with us. ALL these things effect our ultimate destiny and the level of Glory we will receive in our resurrection. They all effect our salvation; but they do not rob us of it (unless we become a Son of Perdition).

We have been taught that Truth is EVERYWHERE! Not just in the LDS Church. We do not have a monopoly on Truth; in fact, we search for it everywhere - which means that at least elements of Truth are in ALL places, denominations, nations, tongues, peoples, etc. Now, consider how it is that our "perception" of Truth could possibly ever be 100% in agreement with every other individual? It simply cannot be that way while we are in the flesh. We are still in the world, even if our spirits are in God's camp.

So it is that people who are not LDS can appear to be receiving a different "truth" then we are. Even inside the Church, individuals argue about what they believe to be "true" once we get into the nitty-gritty of what our beliefs look like to each of us. You see, we are each on our own private and individual journey with God - no two of us are ever in the exact same place at the same time along that path; though we DO share much Truth at the same time when the Holy Ghost is opening the kingdom of Heaven to our minds when we are in groups together, and we experience that sharing of joy as "one".

Therefore, it is not different Truth that various believers have or understand at any given time. It is just that not ALL Truth has been revealed yet; and we each individually receive the portion of Truth which we are ready and able to bear. At least this is how I see it at this point in my own personal journey.

Best regards,

jo

Thank you, but I find that even more confusing. I asked that question a bit tongue in cheek. I think I already know the answer; I just wanted to see what responses I might get from others.

I see absolutely no comparison between his "methodology" and ours. LDS methodology always leads to the truth, and nothing but the truth, without variation or exception. It is foolproof. It has God's guarantee behind it, Who does not lie. It is a guaranteed check that does not bounce. His "methodology" leads to nothing but error.

The LDS "methodology" is entirely faith based. Without faith it does not work. "Having faith in Christ," says Moroni (10:4); and "nothing wavering," says James (1:6). Faith and sincerity are the essential ingredients. His "methodology" is based on no faith. It is absolute zero faith. His starting premise is that there is no God, no Jesus Christ, nothing supernatural, nothing beyond the grave, no life after death. It is almost negative faith. It never leads to the truth, but always to error. How in the world these two "methodologies" can be considered equivalent is beyond my comprehension.

Edited August 6, 2011 by zerinus