What Is The New Testament Definition Of "Christian"

[Zakuska]

Those are only the words of Jesus. They don't count. Only the words of Paul (that can be construed to agree with 21st Century American Protestant Evangelical Calvinists) count.

Just so you know.

And if Salvation is assured. at the moment one beleives... as DJHolmess thinks, then these words of warning by Peter make no sense what so ever.

2 Peter 1

5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;

7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.

8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.

10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

12 Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.

If they could never fall the moment they beleive as DJholmess thinks then why so much "diligent" working?

Edited August 16, 2012 by Zakuska

[altersteve]

Sorry, didn't see this post before.

Christ is purported to have said that the churches "were all wrong" and "that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight." If I am a part of the Christian tradition that wrote the creeds that are all an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and if I affirm the creeds that are all an abomination in the sight of the Lord, and I am a member of the wrong church in which these abominable creeds are believed in and acted upon how then, exactly, is my belief not also an abomination in the sight of the Lord?

Because, again, I don't believe Christ found these creeds abominable because of the beliefs they professed, but rather because of what they did. They did not allow any room for continuing revelation. They could not be added to or changed in any way. This is what Christ did not like.

I think there is plenty of room for continuing revelation. I am a witness to continuing revelation and would pray that my life is an example of continuing revelation. Specifically: how does each creed, since Christ specifically said that "all their creeds were an abomination", disallow continuing revelation?

Again, because they could not be changed or added to. As Joseph Smith said, "I cannot believe in any of the creeds of the different denominations, because they all have some things in them I cannot subscribe to, though all of them have some truth. I want to come up into the presence of God, and learn all things; but the creeds set up stakes, and say, 'Hitherto shalt thou come, and no further'; which I cannot subscribe to."

It appears that Christ did have a problem with personal revelation: "those professors were all corrupt, that: "they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far away from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of me, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof."" So, what exactly were these professors professing, teaching and denying?

This quote has nothing to do with personal revelation. I don't know who the "professors" Joseph referred to are, but they seem to be the people who "draw near unto [Christ] with their lips, but their hearts are far from [Him]." They claimed to teach the gospel of Christ based on their own understanding, and not by the spirit of prophecy and revelation ("they teach for doctrines the commandments of men").

[Vance]

And if Salvation is assured. at the moment one beleives... as DJHolmess thinks, then these words of warning by Peter make no sense what so ever.

2 Peter 1

5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;

7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.

8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.

10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

12 Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.

If they could never fall the moment they beleive as DJholmess thinks then why so much "diligent" working?

Those are only the words of Peter, the apostle that was with Jesus at the beginning. They don't count. Only the words of Paul (that can be construed to agree with 21st Century American Protestant Evangelical Calvinists) count.

Just so you know.

[Zakuska]

Those are only the words of Peter, the apostle that was with Jesus at the beginning. They don't count. Only the words of Paul (that can be construed to agree with 21st Century American Protestant Evangelical Calvinists) count.

Just so you know.

Paul must be confused... Why is he only "Hoping" for eternal Life if he already has it?

Titus 1:2

2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

Hebrews 10:36

36 For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.

And why is the "promise" of Eternal Life predicated on "DOING" the will of God the Father? And Patienly enduring?

[Vance]

Paul must be confused... Why is he only "Hoping" for eternal Life if he already has it?

Titus 1:2

2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

Hebrews 10:36

36 For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.

And why is the "promise" of Eternal Life predicated on "DOING" the will of God the Father? And Patienly enduring?

Those are only the words of Paul that can't be construed to agree with 21st Century American Protestant Evangelical Calvinists. They don't count. Only the words of Paul (that can be construed to agree with 21st Century American Protestant Evangelical Calvinists) count.

Just so you know.

[Rob Bowman]

Vance,

D. J. is correct about the tenses in 1 John 5:1a. What the text says is this: "Everyone believing {pisteuōn, present active participle} that Jesus is the Christ has been born {gegennētai, perfect passive indicative} of God." Note the following contemporary translations:

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born from God (CEB)

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God (ESV)

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Messiah has been born of God (HCSB)

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been fathered by God (NET)

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has become a child of God (NLT)

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God (NRSV)

The older rendering "is begotten," which has also influenced some modern versions, is not so much wrong but rather misses a nuance that translating the verb in the English perfect more adequately expresses.

What one makes of this fact theologically is perhaps another matter, but that the verb in question is in the perfect tense, not the present tense, is really a fact beyond reasonable debate.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Rob Bowman

[Zakuska]

Some more scriptures DJHolmess hides from:

He keeps telling us that it was "faith alone" which justifed Abraham. Ala...

Romans 4:3

3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

What DJHolmess misses again is what the "faith" of Abraham consisted of:

Being "ungodly" God called Abraham out of his country and Abraham responded in "obedience".

Heb 11

8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

Only AFTER Abraham obeys God's command to leave his country is he declared righteous. (Gen 15 vs Gen 12)

Edited August 16, 2012 by Zakuska

[danielwoods]

I wrote:

Right. So unless I'm reading it wrong. It states plainly that LDS believe they are saved through their aided efforts. Aided by Christ. Works plus the grace of Christ. Is this correct?

As it states, "We must work to our limit and then rely on Christ."

You replied:

We believe we are saved by the grace of Christ, after all we can do. We believe that Christ's grace is conditional upon how we choose to serve Him and whether or not we try to keep His commandments in faith and sincerity. This does NOT mean, however, that works by themselves save us. They don't. Christ's grace saves us, period. But His grace has no effect on us if we don't choose to be His disciple, and that involves action.

So then it appears your answer is yes, that you agree with the statement, "We must work to our limit and then rely on Christ."

[danielwoods]

You stated:

No, the Thief went to "paradise" and three days latter, Jesus went to "heaven" without him. So, the Thief isn't with Jesus.

Do you really want to do this?

43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Yes, it means EXACTLY what is says.

1) Notice the timing as being that very day,

2) Notice the location is "paradise", not heaven.

Three days later Jesus said this,

John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

1) Notice that Jesus had "not yet ascended to (His) Father.

2) Notice that it is Jesus ONLY that is going to ascend, no thief involved.

And where is His Father? Do I really need to post some of the NUMEROUS verses that show that the Father is in heaven?

And, as far as your CFR is concerned,

Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;

11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

No thief there.

So, No, the thief did NOT get to heaven. Sorry, but your whole theological premise is based upon a falsehood.

Nothing you have stated supports the notion that the thief is left out of Heaven. An argument from absence isn't a supported argument. I asked for a specific reference supporting your statement claiming that Jesus went to Heaven without the thief on the cross. You've quoted many things about things Jesus did and said. However, none of your quotes show that the Thief didn't go to Heaven, that is what I'm specifically asking for, because that is what you are specifically claiming.

[danielwoods]

Daniel, I think that Vance's response above in #881 was rather complete. Two things:

1) Can you understand by scripture why LDS would believe what has been stated by Vance?

2) How do you interpret these scriptures to mean something else?

You may want to let go of the snarky comments from this point forward. What is evident, as in crystal clear, is that your interpretation of scripture is no better than anyone else's interpretation. It may be time for just a little bit of respect for LDS as a people and as Christians.

I am sorry if I've come across as snarky and disrespectful, that certainly isn't my intention.

As for your questions.

1) Of course I understand why the LDS view the scriptures the way they do.

2) The scriptures that Vance lists do not in anyway say that the Thief was restricted to one location. Rather Jesus had fellowship with him, just as all believers do.

[danielwoods]

See vance's post. It deals with it accurately.

Oh youmean that we have to do things per Matthew 25.

Why were the goats damned and the sheep saved? Please quote the relevant portions. It is very specific.

Actually no, Vance didn't deal with the question at all.

As for Matthew 25, and the differing views of salvation between the LDS and evangelicals.

What exactly is your point? Is it your point that the "goats" didn't do the things that the "sheep" did and on that basis alone, they are damned?

If that's your point, then of course I disagree. The sheep didn't do these things to gain or attain reward or righteousness. They were surprised saying, "When did we see you hungry...?" The sheep had the heart and passion of the Lord and were blessed, but the goats obviously did not, and their actions demonstrated what was in their hearts. As Jesus said, ^{18 "}But the things that come out of a person’s mouth come from the heart,^(N) and these defile them. ¹⁹ For out of the heart come evil thoughts—murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.^(O)20 These are what defile a person;^(P) but eating with unwashed hands does not defile them.” (Matt. 15:18-20)

[danielwoods]

The list i was speaking of was the list concerning the need for baptism.

And the list I was referring to was the LDS one. Sorry for the confusion.

Well, it doesn't say the thief was saved at that very moment, so if it says what it means, then it doesn't mean that.

Of course it does. Jesus said the thief would be with Him, so understanding where He was absolutely impacts the interpretation of that verse.

I agree, it also matter who he was with. Jesus. It's clear from the passage that he feared God, and Jesus invited him to "be" with him, as in fellowship. As for the location, just as Lazarus was there, it was the place where the righteous went before Christ died.

I used the Book of Mormon to show that we believe the same thing about salvation being free and it only coming through Jesus Christ. Can you point out anything in the verses i quoted that you disagree with?

Nope. Not sure it's relevant.

Um, that's two things. 1-Belief. 2-Yielding our lives to His.

You got me there!

As for belief being able to save us-

"Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"

If the NT has set only one requirement to access His saving grace, 'belief' is definitely not it.

Especially if you're LDS. However, Jesus said, "My burden is light, and my Yoke is easy."

[Zakuska]

Actually no, Vance didn't deal with the question at all.

As for Matthew 25, and the differing views of salvation between the LDS and evangelicals.

What exactly is your point? Is it your point that the "goats" didn't do the things that the "sheep" did and on that basis alone, they are damned?

If that's your point, then of course I disagree. The sheep didn't do these things to gain or attain reward or righteousness. They were surprised saying, "When did we see you hungry...?" The sheep had the heart and passion of the Lord and were blessed, but the goats obviously did not, and their actions demonstrated what was in their hearts. As Jesus said, ^{18 "}But the things that come out of a person’s mouth come from the heart,^(N) and these defile them. ¹⁹ For out of the heart come evil thoughts—murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.^{(O) 20} These are what defile a person;^(P) but eating with unwashed hands does not defile them.” (Matt. 15:18-20)

Not to Answer for Vance or Mola, but you just explained the LDS position to a T. (Marked in Bold above)

However, I've marked in red the portion of your quote that undercuts your whole argument. All of these things are "Actions" (things people DO) that is what defiles.

As it is written...

Deuteronomy 25:16

16 For all that do such things, and all that do unrighteously, are an abomination unto the Lord thy God.

And Super-Paul agrees...

Galatians 5:21

21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

The only difference was in what they DID.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Zakuska

[altersteve]

Especially if you're LDS. However, Jesus said, "My burden is light, and my Yoke is easy."

And Latter-day Saints believe that statement wholeheartedly and embrace it enthusiastically.

[altersteve]

I wrote:

You replied:

So then it appears your answer is yes, that you agree with the statement, "We must work to our limit and then rely on Christ."

No. We rely on Christ all the time, not just after we work to our limit.

[danielwoods]

Not to Answer for Vance or Mola, but you just explained the LDS position to a T. (Marked in Bold above)

However, I've marked in red the portion of your quote that undercuts your whole argument. All of these things are "Actions" (things people DO) that is what defiles.

As it is written...

Deuteronomy 25:16

16 For all that do such things, and all that do unrighteously, are an abomination unto the Lord thy God.

And Super-Paul agrees...

Galatians 5:21

21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

The only difference was in what they DID.

Is that all it was about, what they did?

1 Jn. 5:¹¹ And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

¹² He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

Seems to me that all that matters is whether we have the Son or not.

[danielwoods]

No. We rely on Christ all the time, not just after we work to our limit.

Now I'm really confused. I took the quote direct from your link, and now you don't agree with it?

How does one rely on Christ all the time, and after one works to their limit? This is confusing to me.

[Flyonthewall]

I think this is the third time I have said this so let me try and be very very clear. Being born again is not a result of faith (as you seem to think I am saying). Being born again precedes faith. This is what 1 John 5:1 is saying. Let me translate it in a way that makes the tenses of the two words clear. Everyone who currently believes that Jesus is the Christ has in the past been born of God. As I said ‘believes’ is in the present tense, ‘born’ is in the perfect tense. If you don’t understand the difference it is easy to google.

Being born again precedes faith. That is what you are saying? really?

Jesus's words are that to be born again, you must be born of water and spirit.

Born of water is baptism. Born of spirit is receiving the Holy Ghost.

John baptized unto repentance...he preached that one must bring forth fruits meet for repentance. In order to bring forth fruits meet for repentance, you must first have faith that the message is correct. Once you have faith in the message, then you must DO something...repent and be baptized.

You can split hairs with an english translation all you want but the overall message of the Bible does not support it.

I have asked you a couple of times now what you actually think being born again is – what happens to the person.

I will be specific in my answer: Being born again is to receive baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost. Just as Jesus stated.

Jesus said to Nicodemus:

As a teacher of Israel Jesus expected Nicodemus to understand what he was talking about – why do you think this is? Maybe because what Jesus was talking about was promised?

Ezekiel 36

Notice how water and Spirit bookend the description of the radical change God promised he would do in the future? Also notice the nature of the change; new heart, old heart removed, new spirit, Spirit of God put within the person, radical isn’t it, almost sounds like being born again right? If there is another place where water and Spirit are so clearly linked in the OT in the context of such a change I certainly don’t know of it.

Please read Ezekiel again and this time pay attention to what this actually is. It is a prophecy about the House of Israel. In the future, when they accept Christ, that is when they will be born again. But what happens first before they receive a new spirit? Baptism for the remission of sin.

This is what Jesus was talking about and it is necessary for someone to be born again. Paul makes it clear why in 1 Corinthians 2:12

The natural person is not able to understand the spiritual truths taught by Paul. In order to understand and respond to the gospel in faith the natural person must first be born again; given a new heart and new spirit so that they can then understand and believe.

True, the natural man cannot/will not understand the things of the spirit, but it is after Baptism that the spirit is received, and baptism is after repentance, and repentance is after faith.

Where exactly justification through baptism in the NT?

Are you saying from your second sentence that someone can lose their justification if they fail to keep the commandments?

Paul would seem to disagree in Romans 8;

All who are called are justified – no drops outs. All those who are justified are also glorified – no drop outs. With your LDS understanding of justification I don’t know how you can deal with such verses.

What is the very definition of justification? It is being pardoned from punishment for sin and declared guiltless. This happens when we receive baptism for the remission of sin, which of course follows faith.

I can deal with that verse very simply. Who is Romans 8 talking about? Verse 28 says it is to them that love God. Jesus said: If ye love me, keep my commandments.

He also said: "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him."

I hope you understand that I am saying the opposite of your first sentence above.

Regarding ‘dead faith’ you are mixing contexts between Paul in Romans and James in his letter as if they are the same author addressing the same subject. But even allowing you this just suppose for a second that the evangelical understanding that being justified is a onetime event that lasts forever.

What is wrong with God justifying someone immediately upon the moment they put their real living faith in Jesus? This living faith is a faith that is going to go on and do good works but has not had the chance to yet. Doesn’t God know if someone’s faith is genuine? Can’t he justify someone based on his knowledge that their faith is a faith that will produce good works? Your argument seems to be based on the assumption that he can’t when you have given no reason why he can’t.

Ofcourse this isn’t the only difference. As I have explained Christ’s perfect righteousness is counted to the believer the moment they put their faith in Jesus. The justification of the ungodly is not with respect to any good work the ungodly have done it is on the basis of Christ’s righteousness imputed to the true believer. The faith of this true believer then goes on to produce good works BUT these good works are not done in order to be justified – that has already happened.

I am not mixing contexts between Paul and James I have it straight. Paul is talking about the Law of Moses not being salvic, it is faith in the atonement of Christ. James described what faith is.

The evangelical view of Justification before anything is done is putting the cart before the horse. There is no need of repentance, no need of baptism, no need of anything Jesus preached if that is how God worked. He would simply justify those He likes and the rest of us are out of luck.

God has always commanded us to DO something, and then promises us that we will be rewarded for what we do.

Now if you look at the things said about Abraham being justified by his faith, and Abraham being justified by his works, the LDS point of view makes perfect sense...faith includes works. The evengelical point of view has to reject one.

Yes of course they can. Don’t you believe adultery can be forgiven in Christ? Maybe you meant ‘can a justified person still commit adultery’

Once again I would say yes ofcourse they can. As John said ‘if anyone say he is without sin the truth is not in him’. However if someone was to commit adultery and be unrepentant then that would be a sign that his faith was never real living faith in the first place as living faith produces good works such as repentance.

Notice also what Nathan says to David when David acknowledges his sin (he hasn’t repented yet)

David did have to live with the earthly consequences of his sin but God had already put away his sin.

Can you see the sharp distinction between us?

You are saying faithful works are part of the reason why someone is justified.

I am saying faithful works evidence the fact someone has already been justified because the righteousness of Christ was imputed to them.

Your ‘justification’ is based partly on your own works

The Biblical presentation of justification is based solely on someone else’s righteousness being imputed to the believer.

I believe that adultery can be forgiven, but only if one repents. If, as you say, one is justified and can never drop out of being justified, then there is no more need of repentance. One can commit the most grevious of sin and still be justified - never needing to repent.

This is in direct contadiction of the scriptures. The scriptures are full of calls to repentance.

David did not die because of his sin but he did not escape punishment for it. He was sent to hell. It is only because he called upon the Lord. See Psalms 16 & 86.

My view of justification is reflected in the Bible and is very specifically described by James.

[altersteve]

Now I'm really confused. I took the quote direct from your link, and now you don't agree with it?

How does one rely on Christ all the time, and after one works to their limit? This is confusing to me.

I do agree with it. Nothing in the link I provided contradicts with the notion that I rely on Christ every minute of every hour of every day. He is my Savior, forever and always. But a straight-up answer to your original question would be "Yes." I believe I have been asked to do all I can do and then humbly present what I have done (or tried to do) to Christ and have faith that His Atonement -- what He did for me in the garden, on the cross, and in the tomb -- will make up for all my shortcomings and bridge the massive gap between me and my Father in Heaven.

When I walk toward the tree of life, He's walking right beside me. When I let go of the iron rod and fall, He offers His hand to lift me back up again. Why is this so confusing?

[Zakuska]

Is that all it was about, what they did?

1 Jn. 5:¹¹ And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

¹² He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

Seems to me that all that matters is whether we have the Son or not.

And how do we know that we "have the son" and we in him and he in us?

1 John 1

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

1 John 2

3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

<snip>

17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Check this one out...

29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.

Hmmm... Reborn of God are those who DO righteousness.

1 John 3

7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

<snip>

10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.

12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.

13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you.

14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.

15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

17 But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?

18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.

19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.

20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.

21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.

22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.

23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

Thats an aweful lot of Commandment keeping and DOING stuff to have Christ and his word IN ya... So you can have eternal life!

But here is the final nail in the coffin...

24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

More commandment keeping.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Zakuska

[danielwoods]

I do agree with it. Nothing in the link I provided contradicts with the notion that I rely on Christ every minute of every hour of every day. He is my Savior, forever and always. But a straight-up answer to your original question would be "Yes." I believe I have been asked to do all I can do and then humbly present what I have done (or tried to do) to Christ and have faith that His Atonement -- what He did for me in the garden, on the cross, and in the tomb -- will make up for all my shortcomings and bridge the massive gap between me and my Father in Heaven.

When I walk toward the tree of life, He's walking right beside me. When I let go of the iron rod and fall, He offers His hand to lift me back up again. Why is this so confusing?

The confusing part is saying that you agree with the statement, and yet disagree with it at the same time.

The quote from your link again:

"We must work to our limit and then rely upon the merits, mercy and grace of the Holy One of Israel to see us through the struggles of life and into life eternal (2 Nephi 31:19; Moroni 6:4)."

You stated that you didn't agree with this originally, and now you say you do, but are also now qualifying your statement that you rely on Christ through it all. Which isn't what the statement says above.

I guess it might be easier to ask, what is the percentage that you rely on yourself, for your own salvation, and what percentage do you rely on Christ?

[danielwoods]

And how do we know that we "have the son" and we in him and he in us?

1 John 1

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

1 John 2

3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

<snip>

17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Thats an aweful lot of Commandment keeping and DOING stuff to have Christ and his word IN ya... So you can have eternal life!

Check this one out...

29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.

Hmmm... Reborn of God are those who DO righteousness.

Right. He that has the son has life, and the evidence of that life is a renewed heart and mind which produce the fruit of righteous actions.

However, you aren't saying that righteous actions are what give us eternal life are you? Because the passage clearly states that having the Son is what gives life.

[Zakuska]

bluebell,

As to the topic of the thread, I think John gives us the answer.

1 John 4

15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

LDS infatically confess that "Jesus is the Son of God".

Therefore, by the NT Standard, LDS ARE Christians and are IN God.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Zakuska

[altersteve]

The confusing part is saying that you agree with the statement, and yet disagree with it at the same time.

The quote from your link again:

"We must work to our limit and then rely upon the merits, mercy and grace of the Holy One of Israel to see us through the struggles of life and into life eternal (2 Nephi 31:19; Moroni 6:4)."

You stated that you didn't agree with this originally, and now you say you do, but are also now qualifying your statement that you rely on Christ through it all. Which isn't what the statement says above.

I guess it might be easier to ask, what is the percentage that you rely on yourself, for your own salvation, and what percentage do you rely on Christ?

I never said I "didn't agree with" anything. Don't put words in my mouth please.

I don't rely on myself for my salvation at all. I rely on Christ 100%. Without Him, there would be no salvation, period.

[danielwoods]

I never said I "didn't agree with" anything. Don't put words in my mouth please.

I don't rely on myself for my salvation at all. I rely on Christ 100%. Without Him, there would be no salvation, period.

Then if that is true then why say that, "we must work to our limit and then rely on Christ..."?

If you seriously (and I don't doubt you do, I'm only honestly asking because I don't get it) rely on Christ 100%, then why even mention that "we must work to our limit..."? Why not just say, "We rely on Christ alone for our salvation." and leave it at that? What is wrong with that statement?