What Is The New Testament Definition Of "Christian"

[Darren10]

Those who are saved aren't special.

Thank you!!! It's sillyto suggest them as being "special", isn't it?

Doesn't the LDS Church teach everyone is here to be tested so we can prove ourselves worthy for exaltation?

Yes. So does your faith.

So why would God not answer someone and confirm the reality of the test?

You keep asking the same question. The answers have been consistent: nobody knows. Do you know why not everyone on this earth is not Christian? Meaning, not everyone who has investigated Christianity has received a witness to its truth? Can you tell me why that is? Can youtell mey why people have felt inspired to reject Christianity?

I know other people who've had similar experiences. They heard some LDS teaching and were willing to try it out, so they read and prayed about it and nothing happened.

That's probably the majority of people I taught on my mission. Nobody knows why this happens.

If I was taking a class and the teacher told me I needed to improve my grade to pass, I would be willing to do that. It might hurt my pride a bit redoing some basic stuff and I probably wouldn't like the work, but I would still do it so I could pass. But how am I supposed to do it when the teacher isn't giving me any info? I asked him about it, and he didn't say anything about how to do better or what areas I need to work on. Then what's the point of being in the class at all? If the teacher really wants me to prove myself in this subject and pass, why isn't he helping me? Isn't that his job? Would you really blame the student in this case?

Since you reposted this scenario, i'll repost my response ot it found in post #54:

The best advise I can give you is to sincerely read and ponder the Book of Mormon. When you sincerely accept the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon then ask God the Father in the name of the Son if it is true. My guess is tha this is how you came to know the truthfulness ofthe bible and of Christianity as a whole.

Do what you think and feel is right.

I think I'm about done with these circular responses.

[djholmess]

I am saying that *Jesus* called the Jews gods and they are so because they are "children of the most High". Were this passage in John 10 not "exegent" (a word you like to use) I'd most likely agree with your inpterpretation of Psalms 82. Nevertheless, the reason I posted Psalms 82 and John 10 was not to declare to you that there are "actual gods" but rather that the Father has other sons besides Jesus Christ.

But the context of Psalm 82 is totally different to the NT. In the OT the Jews seen themselves as children of God because of they were Gods chosen people out of the nations. In the NT Jesus takes the title Son of God as a title-even the Jews who seen themselves as children of God recognised Jesus was claiming something totally different wanting to stone him for it.

Similar to the OT when the NT talks about believers being sons of God it is as adopted sons of God as a result of being justified.

Where in the NT is there ever a presentation that we are sons of God in the way you say we and Jesus are?

Edited August 6, 2012 by djholmess

[Akboy]

Yes. So does your faith.

No, I've heard thousands of sermons and bible studies and none of them mentioned being 'tested' or 'exaltation.'

You keep asking the same question. The answers have been consistent: nobody knows. Do you know why not everyone on this earth is not Christian? Meaning, not everyone who has investigated Christianity has received a witness to its truth? Can you tell me why that is? Can youtell mey why people have felt inspired to reject Christianity?

No one knows for sure when end times will be or what will happen in them, but that's fine because those doctrines don't directly affect following Christ. But this does. According to your church, this issue is step 1 of following Christ. So why isn't there more info about it? The Bible never tells us to find out which faith to follow by praying about it, and it certainly doesn't give any details on why God wouldn't let someone prove himself in this test. And none of the new revelation talks about it either? How can an issue this fundamental be left up to 'nobody knows'?

It's not that hard to figure out why many people reject Christianity because they're often open about it. They give a variety of reasons like not wanting to be accountable for their actions or not wanting to follow a God obsessed with morality. Some people just don't like the idea of supernatural beings. Scientists claim to search for knowledge with open minds, yet many dismiss any notion reality other than one that can be observed. I even talked to a coworker who liked the idea of God, but she admitted she trusted her own judgment far more than God's, so she only wanted to follow herself, not God.

But I DO want to follow God.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Akboy

[Akboy]

Do what you think and feel is right.

Many people think and feel it's right to live a homosexual lifestyle and have a gay leader at a church. Many people feel like whatever brings them pleasure is good, so they get drunk, do drugs and sleep with as many people as they can because it feels right.

It's mind boggling to me how a church can seriously base following God on what 'feels right.'

[Storm Rider]

Many people think and feel it's right to live a homosexual lifestyle and have a gay leader at a church. Many people feel like whatever brings them pleasure is good, so they get drunk, do drugs and sleep with as many people as they can because it feels right.

It's mind boggling to me how a church can seriously base following God on what 'feels right.'

The working of the Holy Spirit and "what feels right" have nothing in common with each other. In Matthew 16, it is interesting how Jesus discusses gaining a spiritual testimony:

15 He saith unto them, But whom say

a

ye

that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the

a

Christ

, the

b

Son

of the

c

living

God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon

a

Bar

-jona: for flesh and blood hath not

b

revealed

it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

The Bible, Jesus, tells us that we are blessed for gaining a spiritual witness about him and his teachings. It is just as "mind boggling" to me that any Christian would deride the work of the Holy Spirit or contend with the Son of God that such testimonies are of little worth.

In fact, using the scriptures, can you show us anywhere Jesus teaching his disciples the superiority of ignoring all working of the Holy Spirit and focus solely on the arm of flesh and its understanding? Better, can you please share with us what God thinks about the arm of flesh and the understanding of man?

[Darren10]

Many people think and feel it's right to live a homosexual lifestyle and have a gay leader at a church. Many people feel like whatever brings them pleasure is good, so they get drunk, do drugs and sleep with as many people as they can because it feels right.

It's mind boggling to me how a church can seriously base following God on what 'feels right.'

This really is pointless with you. Do what you think is right. Period. If you tihnk and feel it's right to be a homosexual, be a homosexual (like I was worried you'd become one). If you think and feel it's right to serve God than serve God. If you think and feel it's right to study the scriptures and apply its holy principles in your life than study the holy scriptures and apply the holy principles in your life. Of these choices some will get my support others not. I think and feel it is right to be LDS. I'm LDS. You think and feel it is right to be a Protestant. You're a Protestant. That's all I meant. I said nothing of being gay, doing drugs, nor prostituting yourself. Nor have I ever given any hint that I'd mean any such thing.

This was a very weird hyperbolic response from you.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Darren10

[Darren10]

Storm Rider;

I get your point but the Holy Spirit reveals the will of God to a person's mind and spirit. Thus I ask Akboy to do what he thinks and feels is right. I've no idea how or why he came to the wild conclusions that this means doing drugs, being some wanton dude, or gay.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Darren10

[Akboy]

This really is pointless with you. Do what you think is right. Period. If you tihnk and feel it's right to be a homosexual, be a homosexual (like I was worried you'd become one). If you think and feel it's right to serve God than serve God. If you think and feel it's right to study the scriptures and apply its holy principles in your life than study the holy scriptures and apply the holy principles in your life. Of these choices some will get my support others not. I think and feel it is right to be LDS. I'm LDS. You think and feel it is right to be a Protestant. You're a Protestant. That's all I meant. I said nothing of being gay, doing drugs, nor prostituting yourself. Nor have I ever given any hint that I'd mean any such thing.

This was a very weird hyperbolic response from you.

The point is doing what 'feels right' in many cases leads to bad choices, maybe even destructive behavior. Of course, I have zero interest in doing any of the examples I listed, but many people have justified similar choices because they feel right. So why should I approach a religious question with a similar mindset?

Plus, it sounds like a self-centered, man-focused reasoning. If I'm focusing on what feels right, then I'm focusing on myself. Yes, you're saying the Holy Spirit is intervening in how I feel, but that reasoning is based on a witness you got, basically another feeling. It's a self-supporting argument. How do you know your feelings are reliable? You got a feeling telling you feelings are reliable. How can you be so sure you're focusing on something more than just your feelings?

Edited August 6, 2012 by Akboy

[djholmess]

The working of the Holy Spirit and "what feels right" have nothing in common with each other. In Matthew 16, it is interesting how Jesus discusses gaining a spiritual testimony:

15 He saith unto them, But whom say

a

ye

that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the

a

Christ

, the

b

Son

of the

c

living

God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon

a

Bar

-jona: for flesh and blood hath not

b

revealed

it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

The Bible, Jesus, tells us that we are blessed for gaining a spiritual witness about him and his teachings.

Ok first of all what makes you think Jesus is talking about a 'spiritual witness' as you define it in your LDS context?

More importantly how do you judge when something is a spiritual witness or not?

Look at the verses you just quoted again from Matthew 16

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.....

21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

In verses 15-17 Peter speaks of who he believes Jesus to be. Jesus commends him and says that flesh and blood did not reveal it to Peter but God did. How did Peter know this-well it seems Jesus had to tell him it was from the father.

In verses 21-23 Peter speaks of what he believes Jesus should do. Jesus rebukes him and attributes Peters words to Satan. How did Peter know this-well it seems Jesus had to tell him it was from Satan.

So how do you know whether what you are saying is from God or from Satan? -even though Peter had just said something that was revealed to him by the father in verse 16 he was unable to discern that what he was saying in verse 22 was from Satan.

Edited August 6, 2012 by djholmess

[KevinG]

1) Assert something false about the Latter-day Saints beliefs.

2) When contradicted ask why someone who doesn't believe false assertion is LDS.

3) Rinse and repeat.

[altersteve]

Could you briefly explain your beliefs about grace? As you've pointed out multiple times, you disagree with multiple things LDS prophets have said. I would be glad to answer your question if I knew what you believe about grace.

What do you believe 'saved' means?

How do you believe grace works in relation to salvation?

I never said that I "disagree with multiple things LDS prophets have said." I just don't believe some of the traditional ideas held by some Church members, beliefs which we are not required to hold in the first place and which I have found are being less emphasized and less believed throughout the Church. I do believe all the things I feel I am required to hold as a member of the Church, however (which, again, does not include God having once been a sinful man who "became" God).

To answer your questions, though, my beliefs on grace are derived straight from the Bible and other scriptures, and are summarized here. See also the following articles at LDS.org:

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1981/04/salvation-by-grace-or-by-works?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/topics/salvation?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1998/05/have-you-been-saved?lang=eng

[altersteve]

Doesn't the LDS Church teach everyone is here to be tested so we can prove ourselves worthy for exaltation?

No. Most of our reason for being here is to learn and grow, and to study for said test. The actual test comes much later.

[Vance]

Are the "sons of God" as found in the OT brethren, in some way, of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son?

John is the only Biblical author to describe Jesus as the "only begotten Son".

1. John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
   
2. John 3:16 ¶ For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
   • • •
   18 ¶ He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
   
3. 1 Jn. 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
   

Other "sons of God" are mentioned in the NT. From the context, these are those that accept the Gospel.

1. John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
   
2. Rom. 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
   • • •
   19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
   
3. Philip. 2:15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;
   
4. 1 Jn. 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
   2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
   

In other places Jesus is said to have "brethren".

Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he (Jesus) also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

It is clear, that these "brethren" of Jesus existed prior to Him partaking of "flesh and blood". How could they be His "brethren" without being "sons of God"?

Edited August 6, 2012 by Vance

[altersteve]

Ok first of all what makes you think Jesus is talking about a 'spiritual witness' as you define it in your LDS context?

We believe our definition is Christ's definition. So there's no logical reason for you to ask this question, since the answer is so obvious. But before we can even discuss it, we need to know how you think we define what a "spiritual witness" is -- and it's NOT simply "good feelings" or a "burning in the bosom." It's difficult for Latter-day Saints to openly discuss their spiritual experiences (kind of a "pearls before swine" type thing), and these experiences are difficult to adequately describe anyway, which is why we use terms like that.

In verses 15-17 Peter speaks of who he believes Jesus to be. Jesus commends him and says that flesh and blood did not reveal it to Peter but God did. How did Peter know this-well it seems Jesus had to tell him it was from the father.

How do you know Peter didn't know it? How do you know Jesus wasn't simply confirming to Peter something he already knew?

[Vance]

If Jesus came to earth to show us what God (the Father) is really like. Then why would we expect God, the Father to be something different from what Jesus is?

https://www.google.c...lient=firefox-a

Edited August 6, 2012 by Vance

[KevinG]

More than a feeling:

Gifts of the Spirit: (Credit: http://www.ldsgifts.com/gifts-of-the-spirit for the compilation and references)

• “To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world” (D&C 46:13)
  

• “To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful” (D&C 46:14)
  

• “To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know the differences of administration, as it will be pleasing unto the same Lord, according as the Lord will, suiting his mercies according to the conditions of the children of men” (D&C 46:15)
  

• “To some to know the diversities of operations, whether they be of God, that the manifestations of the Spirit may be given to every man to profit withal” (D&C 46:16)
  

• “To some is given, by the Spirit of God, the word of wisdom” (D&C 46:17; 1 Cor 12:
  

• “To one is given by the Spirit of God, that he may teach the word of wisdom” (Moroni 10:9)
  

• “To another is given the word of knowledge, that all may be taught to be wise and to have knowledge” (D&C 46:18; 1 Cor 12:
  

• “To another, that he may teach the word of knowledge by the same Spirit” (Moroni 10:10)
  

• “To some it is given to have faith to be healed” (D&C 46:19; 1 Cor 12:9)
  

• To some “the gift of faith” (Moroni 10:11)
  

• “To others it is given to have faith to heal” (D&C 46:20; 1 Cor 12:9; Moroni 10:11)
  

• “To some is given the working of miracles” (D&C 46:21; 1 Cor 12:10; Moroni 10:12)
  

• “To others it is given to prophesy” (D&C 46:22; 1 Cor 12:10; Moroni 10:13)
  

• “To others the discerning of spirits” (D&C 46:23; 1 Cor 12:10; Moroni 10:14)
  

• “To some to speak with tongues” (D&C 46:24; 1 Cor 12:10; Moroni 10:15)
  

• “To another is given the interpretation of tongues” (D&C 46:25; 1 Cor 12:10; Moroni 10:16)
  

• The gift of translation (D&C 5:4)
  

[Zakuska]

Correct, both of us cannot be correct. While God will never send out as false witness man can very well a) misinterpret God's voice to him, b) not be ready to receive God's word, c) dismiss God's word and yet remain convinced that he has never reveiced God's word in the first place or a whole lot of other reasons to conclude that God's truth is not true. Some ex LDS have become athiests. They purport all scripture as a falsehood. Is this because God sent them a false witness (as oxy-moronic that may sound)?

Why would you even ask about God sending out a false witness. Nothing here suggest God would do sucha thing. Well, except you in the fact that you keep bringing this hypothetical up.

Huh?

2 Chron.18

18 Again he said, Therefore hear the word of the Lord; I saw the Lord sitting upon his throne, and all the host of heaven standing on his right hand and on his left.

19 And the Lord said, Who shall entice Ahab king of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one spake saying after this manner, and another saying after that manner.

20 Then there came out a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, I will entice him. And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith?

21 And he said, I will go out, and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And the Lord said, Thou shalt entice him, and thou shalt also prevail: go out, and do even so.

22 Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil against thee.

What?! God authoring a lie?!

I think God likes to keep us on our toes.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Zakuska

[djholmess]

We believe our definition is Christ's definition. So there's no logical reason for you to ask this question, since the answer is so obvious. But before we can even discuss it, we need to know how you think we define what a "spiritual witness" is -- and it's NOT simply "good feelings" or a "burning in the bosom." It's difficult for Latter-day Saints to openly discuss their spiritual experiences (kind of a "pearls before swine" type thing), and these experiences are difficult to adequately describe anyway, which is why we use terms like that.

So you can't point out a biblical verse that sets out what a spiritual witness is? How then can you ascert it is Christ's defination, what kind of argument is that anyway? If you can use that line of reasoning then why can't I.

me: I believe your concept of God being an exalted man is wrong and the trinity is right.

You: why?

Me: because I believe Christ's defination of who God is is the trinity.

How do you know Peter didn't know it? How do you know Jesus wasn't simply confirming to Peter something he already knew?

So it is your belief that Peter knew what he was going to say to Jesus was from the devil and yet he chose say it anyway?

[KevinG]

So you can't point out a biblical verse that sets out what a spiritual witness is?

See my last post. ...and while playing "find it in the Bible" is fun - you know that the Latter-Day Saints have additional personal and written revelation to bolster their relationship with Christ.

The ultimate answer to "where did you get that from" is "God". If critics choose to ignore the voice of the living God and claim it is merely "feelings" that has no bearing on our ability to receive and act upon revelation just like the Saints in the Old and New Testament did.

And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

—Luke 24:32

My heart was hot within me, while I was musing the fire burned: then spake I with my tongue.

—Psalms 39:3

Edited August 6, 2012 by KevinG

[bluebell]

Yes, I've been in multiple bible studies where we open with a prayer asking for guidance. My pastor has opened sermons by praying for guidance so he can clearly communicate the message and guidance for the audience to help them hear the Holy Spirit's voice in the message. My pastor has also asked us to pray that he would have wisdom in preparing the sermon.

That's great! But it leaves me with questions.

You've said before that if you felt the Holy Spirit was trying to teach you something that you believe goes against something you've been taught about the bible, you would automatically dismiss it as not being the Holy Spirit.

How can the Holy Spirit guide you in your beliefs if you are not open to be corrected?

For as long as I can remember, the Holy Spirit has been emphasized as a guide in following God and life in general, and prayer has always been the primary way to access that guidance. We may not use the same terms as you, but the concept is very much there.

So why do you (general, protestant 'you') ridicule the LDS teaching that we must pray to find out God's truths for ourselves, and you (personal you, has as been demonstrated in this thread) even went so far as to claim any scripture in the bible which teaches that the Holy Ghost is supposed to teach us truth was meant only for the apostles?

You have thoroughly and completely confused me here.

I don't know about Catholics, but Protestants probably don't word it like that because they see their foundation as more than just praying about it. Our foundation is based on educated exegesis guided by the Holy Spirit and prayer. I don't want it to sound like I'm downplaying or underestimating the role of the Holy Spirit. The problem isn't that the Holy Spirit is unwilling or unable to give better guidance. The problem is we are fallen humans fighting against our sin nature. We think the foundation of our faith is far too important to leave it up to something as subjective as prayer.

But leaving it up to the scholarship and study of fallen men who are also fighting against their sinful nature and who deny any witness that disagrees with them, that's a strong foundation to build upon?

Can you see why I'm confused?

Maybe it was an answer from God? So maybe God lied to me? I prayed and asked if some major passages in the BoM were true. If the answer was 'No,' then wouldn't that be a lie?

First, you have to recognize that getting no answer is not the same thing as getting 'no' for an answer. That's important to realize no matter what issue a person is praying about.

Second, i've already said, there is absolutely NO way for me to judge your experience so don't ask me to. I can't judge your sincerity when you prayed, i can't judge the answer or non-answer that you got. I can't even know if you actually prayed or not.

I'm responsible? If the Holy Spirit's role is to teach us all things, then isn't it His responsibility to answer us when we ask a sincere question?

Yes, but being sincere means that you are willing and prepared to act on the knowledge received. If you are not open to the consquences of the answer, you aren't asking with a sincere heart.

Answers to prayers are like the parables that Jesus taught. Once they are given, we are responsible for that knowledge. That's the reason God waits for us to be sincere before He answers. He's trying to protect us from ourselves for as long as He possibly can.

So yes, the Holy Ghost's role is to teach us all things, but it is our responsiblity to be ready to receive them. God does not force feed us things we really don't want to know. He can reach us in our weakness, but He does not reach us in our pride.

It really would bother you that God told you the LDS church is true and told me it's not true?

If i knew that that had happened, then i would have to re-evaluate some things. But since i don't have any idea if that happened, and since i can't ever know if that happened, why would i spend any time worrying about it?

thought the whole purpose of coming to earth is to be tested and prove ourselves worthy. If that's true, then why wouldn't God tell me? Why would God deny me the chance to prove myself by not giving me a witness of the full gospel? What makes you so special that you get the full gospel and I don't?

Despite what your religion teaches about people who don't believe like you do, mine doesn't believe that God loves me any more than He loves you. I believe you are just as much a child of God as i am.

We each have responsibilities to seek His will. He will judge how open we are to it and how we'll we acted upon it and no one else. Those who find His gospel are no more special than those who don't-but they may be more prepared for the knowledge and more open to receiving it. Asking, knocking, and seeking is more than words deep. Again though, no one can judge what someone claims transpired between themselves and God in a prayer, so no one should try.

There's a difference. I've never heard a sermon about how the Trinity helps us in our daily life. It's not a doctrine that directly impacts how we follow Christ.

Can you deny the doctrine of the Trinity and be a Christian?

I can't speak for the protestants you've talked to, but I would be honored if you prayerfully considered what we're talking about.

I have, and will continue to do so.

I know, from prayer, that authority to act in the name of God is an essential and necessary part of His church and so i can have no part of any religious denomination that denies it's importance.

I know, from the witness of the Holy Ghost, that the Book of Mormon is God's word. I can't have any part of a religion that denies that.

I have prayed every morning and every night-and often before i sit down at this keyboard-that i will be guided in what i type (and also behave in a Christ-like manner). That doesn't make my words revelation by any means and i don't say that to imply that because of such prayers, i'm obviously right. I'm sure you are praying too. I just say it so you understand that i am taking our conversation seriously and that includes the things you have shared about your own beliefs.

I think a good example of this is James 2. I've heard quite a few LDS say that chapter says we need faith plus works, but I think that misses what the chapter says about faith. Faith without works is dead. If you're having to add works to your faith, then your problem is with your faith, not your lack of works. If your faith is dead, it doesn't matter what you add to it, the faith will still be dead. But if your faith is living, then the works will take care of themselves. This is what the Pharisees didn't understand. They focused so much on getting their works perfect that they neglected their faith. They looked faithful, but they were white washed tombs. Their faith was dead at the core.

LDS understand that, and agree with it.

I've never yet met an Evangelical that really understood LDS doctrine concerning faith and works. There are probably some out there, i've just never met one.

We believe faith in Him and repentance of sin IS foundational theology. What definition of 'theology' are you using?

I'm using 'theology' as a general term for all beliefs, doctrines and/or philosophies related to God.

Let me ask again, can someone deny the trinity as YOU espouse it, and still be saved? Your answer to that question will help me answer your's better.

[altersteve]

So you can't point out a biblical verse that sets out what a spiritual witness is? How then can you ascert it is Christ's defination, what kind of argument is that anyway? If you can use that line of reasoning then why can't I.

I can assert it is Christ's definition because of what I have learned in not only the Bible, but also the Book of Mormon, the D&C, and other modern teachings. You asked, "How do you know Christ is talking about a spiritual witness in the LDS context?" The answer is simple: because we have more than just the Bible to learn from. You have only the Bible, so your knowledge of Christ is limited only to what you learn from it.

You need to remember that Latter-day Saints interpret the Bible in light of modern knowledge and revelation. Asking us to point out a biblical verse to show how our beliefs are true is unnecessary and unreasonable, because we believe we have no need to do so.

me: I believe your concept of God being an exalted man is wrong and the trinity is right.

You: why?

Me: because I believe Christ's defination of who God is is the trinity.

Before I address this further, let me ask: How do you know that I believe God is an "exalted man"?

So it is your belief that Peter knew what he was going to say to Jesus was from the devil and yet he chose say it anyway?

No. My belief is that Peter believed his testimony of Christ was from the Father. Christ, in my opinion, was merely confirming this to him. But I do not believe Peter believed his next statement, while he said it, was false.

Edited August 6, 2012 by altersteve

[djholmess]

I can assert it is Christ's definition because of what I have learned in not only the Bible, but also the Book of Mormon, the D&C, and other modern teachings. You asked, "How do you know Christ is talking about a spiritual witness in the LDS context?" The answer is simple: because we have more than just the Bible to learn from. You have only the Bible, so your knowledge of Christ is limited only to what you learn from it.

You need to remember that Latter-day Saints interpret the Bible in light of modern knowledge and revelation. Asking us to point out a biblical verse to show how our beliefs are true is unnecessary and unreasonable, because we believe we have no need to do.

Maybe I wasn't as clear as I could have been. In your previous post you had implied that Peter has received a witness of the spirit about who Jesus was. My question was from the context of that passage where does Jesus present anything similar to whatever your concept of a witness of the spirit is? I know the the BoM and what you claim to be revelation does.

[altersteve]

Maybe I wasn't as clear as I could have been. In your previous post you had implied that Peter has received a witness of the spirit about who Jesus was. My question was from the context of that passage where does Jesus present anything similar to whatever your concept of a witness of the spirit is? I know the the BoM and what you claim to be revelation does.

If by "Jesus" you actually mean "the Bible," then once again, I don't feel obligated to prove anything with the Bible, because I believe in more than just the Bible as scripture. I believe Jesus presents examples of what a witness of the Holy Spirit is in the Bible, as well as in the Book of Mormon, in the D&C, and through the teachings of modern prophets. But it's obvious what you're doing here: you want me to scramble to "prove" what I believe with the Bible and then take my "proof" and then try to tear it down with your own Protestant interpretation, which has nothing to do with what I believe in the first place, so it's both irrelevant and unreasonable. That's all you've done in this thread and it's getting tiring.

[bluebell]

Ok, so as requested a continuation of the reasons why I don’t believe I can label LDS believers Christians.

One of my reasons for believing LDS are not Christians is that they believe Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God.

In Mark 13: Jesus warns us that false prophets will arise:

²² For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.

²³ But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.

So how can I distinguish between potentially real and false prophets?

Well firstly as I am not a Mormon I reject the idea that I can pray and ask for a witness of the Holy Spirit that JS is a prophet. This is something revealed through JS (via BoM) so I’m not going to trust it unless I already know he is a prophet and thus trust worthy.

It's something James taught as well.

James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

Secondly I do not see the distinction current LDS make between a prophet standing up and speaking his opinion at times and then actually speaking for God at more ‘official’ times.

It's like the difference between when Moses taught the 10 commandments to Israelites and when he taught that bats were birds and that some fowls crept on all fours.

No mortal is infallible and since prophets are mortal, they cannot be infallible either.

Thankfully though the Bible has set out ways in which claims to being a prophet can be examined.

One such test is found in Deuteronomy 13:1-4

¹If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,

² And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;

³ Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

⁴ Ye shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.

Joseph Smith never said anyone should go after 'other gods'.

Notice that God recognises that a false prophet may even be able to give a sign or wonder that actually comes to pass. However, this does not make them a prophet of God, the test they must pass is a test of their teaching. If they lead people after other gods, which are not known to the people of God then that prophet must not be listened to. He is clearly a false prophet.

Thankfully, Jesus is a God known to the people of God, so JS passes that test.

So in light of Deuteronomy I can put JS to the test.

Possibly the clearest example of how JS fails the test is the King Follet Funeral Discourse. I’m taking my quotes from it from this link:

http://www.lds.org/e...-follett-sermon

The King Follett sermons are not doctrinal.

Some things you MUST acknowledge about the sermon before trying to use it 'against' LDS-

• it is not canonical and has never been voted on by the body of the Church as an official source of doctrine;
  
• it was recorded by someone other than Joseph Smith (Willard Richards, Wilford Woodruff, Thomas Bullock and William Clayton), and first published in the Times and Seasons of August 15, 1844, after Joseph's death, so he could not review and approve it;
  
• there are some obvious errors in the written report, as evidenced by footnotes to the record in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, so there is the potential for other less obvious scribal errors to exist (have you ever tried to write down a lengthy sermon? did you get everything quoted properly?);
  
• therefore, we are not accountable for all that is taught there, especially if it conflicts in any way with the established canon, although some elements of it have been given credence and support by subsequent Church leaders. "
  

(This list comes from Jefflindsay.com)

The only conclusion that I can come to is that Joseph Smith is a false prophet and by extension all the prophets of the LDS church that derive their authority from JS are false prophets. I see no reason therefore to think that someone who is following a false prophet can also be a follower of Jesus Christ.

If the King Follett sermon is the only reason you have for automatically dismissing JS as a prophet, then your arguments are not very convincing.

Edited August 6, 2012 by bluebell

[Vance]

The Bible is pretty clear that some people will follow false prophets and some face eternal punishment.

Good thing Latter-Day Saints don't follow false prophets.