Mormons In The Middle - Conference

[Kerry A. Shirts]

Well, Lorenzo Snow, for one, agreed with this.

But remember, this is ONLY his own opinion........

[ksfisher]

That's perhaps your views on social welfare entitlement kicking in. I'm not talking about some freebie handout.

No, entitled as in:

entitled - qualified for by right according to law; "we are all entitled to equal protection under the law"

But everyone is still under the law. I'm entitled under the law. If I break or abandon that law then I'm no longer entitled to it.

So are you saying that all have a right to exaltation, or that salvation is available to all? Or is their a better way to explain it?

[canard78]

I doubt it. Rob Bowman has brought this up in the past, so I'm sure that it is him.

Was Rob there? What was his topic?

[canard78]

So are you saying that all have a right to exaltation, or that salvation is available to all? Or is their a better way to explain it?

Available to, right to... Doesn't mean all will get it.

[DBMormon]

I guess I am more interested in having you tell me if you believe there are alternative ways to exaltation. I''m uncertain because I couldn't quite make out your point. That's why I'm asking. If you'd rather me not ask you questions just say so, my friend.

Please ask, but then accept my answer as my stance and don't tell others what I think and say unless your prepared to prove you have it rght. You have misquoted me a lot. and you have been tossed from a thread, you have been warned in this one and you never admit to being unfair to me. So just get it right and all is well

I believe every single person who is exhalted will have to submit to Christ and receive the Saving ordinances which are administered by his Church( to the extent that the church at any given dispensation has them aka Jesus time didn't have temple ordinances like we do) in any dispensation it has existed. This dispensation contains all the saving ordinances

Though all will receive the ordinances and every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ.

I believe many paths lead back to the father but they all run through Christ and the ordinances administered by his church (not the LDS church specifically but The LDS Church and any other church in previous dispensations that are sanctioned by him ((The church the 12 apostles headed over, the one the nephites disciples headed over, ect..)) are all in eternity The Church of Christ.) If one will not in this life or the next submit to Christ and his ordinances and be willing to press forward with steadfastness towards perfection (screwing up along the way but working with Christ Grace which makes our weaknesses strengths, then They will likely not be exhalted, though it is for Christ to judge and not me for I see outwardly and he looketh on the heart.

Edited May 3, 2013 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

I only attended the Kirtland Temple session.

[Calm]

Was Rob there? What was his topic?

From his facebook site:

My topic is "Paul and Joseph: Comparing Joseph Smith's First Vision to the Apostle Paul's Encounter with the Risen Christ." I will be addressing a popular Mormon argument that defends the historicity of Joseph Smith's first vision (in which he says he saw the Father and the Son) by comparing it to Paul's vision of the risen Christ.

My presentation went well this morning. I expect that we will have some new resources on IRR's website in the next few weeks based on the recent work I've done on this project.

[canard78]

From his facebook site:

Thanks.

[Bob Crockett]

You have misquoted me a lot.

I disagree, but I certainly will strive to quote you accurately.

Again, my observation of your podcasts and such are that they express some inconsistency, but then again the definition of "salvation" is inconsistent. I just happened to be in a Deseret Bookstore today and picked up Wilcox's most recent book, and he uses "salvation" to mean that somebody has found the gospel and has been baptized. He argues that God's "grace" has enabled somebody to be found and baptized. But that isn't the meaning of "salvation" to most Protestants, who believe that salvation is equivalent to our use of the word "exaltation."

Most Protestants believe that "once saved," always saved, reasoning that works can do nothing to get one to God once God's grace has brought somebody to Jesus. Some of the things you've said get close to this but I'm glad that you say that you don't believe that.

and you have been tossed from a thread, you have been warned in this one and you never admit to being unfair to me.

I don't consider it a moral failure. I've not been unfair to you. I've been direct about some of my criticisms of your posts. You're earnest; that is all that counts now. Let's move on to the more interesting issues of salvific grace.

Edited May 3, 2013 by Bob Crockett

[DBMormon]

Well Bob, I think my view is doctrinal. I also think my view is more credible. While I am willing to hear evidence of why it doesn't fit, I have spent the last several years reading every scripture, talk, and article on it along several books. I also feel spirtually pulled towards it and not sure I can ever see the gospel differently.

I also understand you have your views and seem very set in them. That you find mine uncredible and disagree with it strongly.

I would love evidence of your view from LDS Church approved sources. I would love you to submit a talk from a general authority that states my view is incorrect. You seem to feel this will be difficult because my view is a moving goal post in your mind. I don't think so. My view is shared very destinctly and I will post this again.

For an indepth understanding of my view

please consider the following

http://mormondiscuss...-best-episodes/

DOCTRINE OF CHRIST

PT1 http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/08/09/doctrine-of-christ-part-1/

PT2 http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/08/24/doctrine-of-christ-part-2/

PT3 http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/09/19/doctrine-of-christ-part-3/

PT4 http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/09/25/doctrine-of-christ-final-part-4/

or a synopsis

SYNOPSIS on GRACE -

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/09/30/grace-being-perfected-in-christ/

It would seem easy to quote me where I am wrong, to date you have been unable to do that. I am open to adapting my view where corrections are needed. In fact I would likely make a few small changes to the above commentary if I were to do again, but I will stand by it none the less, until you can show where it is off track. It is audio, which you detest, so I also share the synopsis of it here in written form so it will be easier for you.

1.) As a background there are seven talks that are a must read/listen (Not that you must read them here but if you want to know where my view derives from, these are it)

Brad Wilcox - His Grace is Suffcient http://byutv.org/wat...9475abb-10d4-4f ... 00b9945468

Stephen Robinson - "Believing christ"

Robert Milllet - "Grace after all we can do"

Robert Millet - "Why not speak of the atonement" http://byutv.org/wat...c198ffd-2dc7-46 ... a1c700ca21

Brad and Wendee Wilcox - "faith, an anchor to my soul"

Bruce R McConkie "what think ye of salvation by grace" http://speeches.byu....der.php?id=6910

Gerald Lund "salvation: by Grace or works" http://www.lds.org/e...-works?lang=eng

2.) Scripture I use all the time to reference my views

2nd Nephi all of chapter 31 with special focus to verse 18-21 then going to Ch 32:6

Helaman 3:35

2nd Nephi 2:3

3rd Nephi 27:16-20

Alma 42:22-24

Alma 24:11

Mosiah 5:15

Jacob 4:7, 12

Ether 12:27

2nd Nephi 25: 23-26, 29-30

Alma 24:11 (goes with 2nd Nephi 25:23)

Moroni 10:32-33

D&C 19:11-18

followed up by D&C 88:21

Alma 5:12-15, 26, 28 through the end

D&C 20:30-34

D&C 137:9

Abraham 3:25

Galatians 3:24

Galatians 2:20-21

2nd Corinthians 12:7-10

Romans 14:1-8

Romans 11:27-32

Romans 10:9-13,

Romans 10:3

Romans 8:6-14

Romans 8:1-4

Romans 6:14-19

Romans 5:1-9 &17-19

Romans 4:3-5, 16, 24-25

Romans 3:7-12, 20 -end of chapter

Romans 2:11-15

3.) - Most Latter Day Saints use either 2nd Nephi 25:23 or the Bible Dictionary to share their understanding that grace comes in after and only after we do all we can do and expend our own best efforts. Nobody ever does their best for a whole day nevermind a lifetime. We fall short. Because many think they have to do their best they become depressed, discouraged, and give up. This understanding of 2nd Nephi 25:23 is incorrect. the after has many meanings. It can also be translated as notwithstanding or nevertheless. In other words "inspite of all I do, it is Grace by which I am saved". The bible Dictionary simply furthers the wrong interpretation. The LDS bible dictionary is not doctrine and is not binding as it says so itself in it's introduction.

4.) Ether 12:27 - God gave us our weakness or made us a natural Man that makes mistakes and is fallen and has flaws. Why did he do that? So we would be humble. Why? So we would turn to his Son. Why? Because his Son makes Weakness Strengths - 2nd Cor 12:9-10. Stop beating yourself up, Paul didn't.

5.) Many in the church want to have value placed on works. They will say things that tend to say "My good works have merit in my salvation"

but these scriptures and quotes say otherwise

Helaman 14:13, Alma 24:10, Moroni 6:4, D&C 3:20, 2nd Nephi 31:19 there are many more... a whole slew of them

Now this doesn't mean "one only need believe, and then thou art saved" like some evangelicals proclaim.

Rather we must get in our heads Keeping commandments, accepting ordinances, doing good works are all required and necessary. But they are in place to push us to grow, progress, and through Christ's grace receive the mighty change from Alma 5

6.) We place value on outside behavior but god looketh on the heart as the bible says and also Helaman 3:35 says it is our yielding our heart to God that brings sanctification... aka: the mighty change.

7.) To live with God again we must be justified. To do so can be done three ways.

A.) To keep the law perfectly - Only Jesus did, so sorry your out of luck here

B.) To live the gospel always pressing forward with steadfastness and repenting when you don't: repentance means change

C.) D&C 19:15-18 to suffer for your own sins

8.)This will justify you (make you clean from your sins) but in order to live with God you must be sanctified as well (spiritually changed to be Christlike)<--- this doesn't happen instantaneouly for most, it is a journey... one day at a time.

D&C 88:21 only the sanctified will be Celestial. Sanctification comes from yoking with Christ and using his Grace or enabling power to change (Ether 12:27). This change will happen in the eternities for many who would have done so here if the opportunity presented itself. Perfection is an eternal Goal, will not be achieved in this life.

9.)So how do we access this. Grace comes in as soon as we exercise faith and grace added to Grace as we live more and more of the gospel in our heart. Moroni 10:32 - 33 - you must see this scripture as a process and you must not think that you have to reach a certain level of righteousness at any one point in this life. Notice how we become perfected in Christ then later we become perfect in Christ.

10.) To be perfected in Christ is to yoke with him in the baptismal covenant and live that covenant. When we do so we have a relationship with Christ. We borrow his perfection as we keep this covenant. His grace is at work in our life perfecting us.

11.) What is the covenant - Mosiah 18 - be "willing" to mourn with those that mourn, comfort those in need of comfort, stand as a witness of him, remember him always (sacrament), and repent when you mess up. Look at the bread prayer and Water Prayer of the sacrament - Only the bread asks us to keep the commandments but it also says "willing". The Water prayer says neither. If you had to "keep the commandments" to have his spirit - you would break the covenant within minutes of making it and he would be bound to remove the spirit from you all the time. But if your promise is to be willing to keep the commandments then you can do it. It measures your desires, and attitude, and motives. You still must repent when behavior is sin but that too demonstrates your heart and willingness to be humble and to follow him.

There is so much more to this but this is a good outline of my feelings on the subject.

I will conclude with this. The church on LDS.ORG has this definiton of Grace which is newer and I feel 100% on

http://www.lds.org/l...g/v/index.jsp?l ... 82620aRCRD

Grace

Grace is the help or strength given through the Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ. Through the grace of God, everyone who has lived will be resurrected—our spirits will be reunited with our bodies, never again to be separated. Through His grace, the Lord also enables those who live His gospel to repent and be forgiven.

Grace is a gift from Heavenly Father given through His Son, Jesus Christ. The word grace, as used in the scriptures, refers primarily to enabling power and spiritual healing offered through the mercy and love of Jesus Christ.

Everyone on earth experiences physical death. Through the grace of Jesus Christ, all will be resurrected and will live forever (see 1 Corinthians 15:20–22; 2 Nephi 9:6–13).

Because of personal choices, everyone also experiences the effects of sin (see 1 John 1:8–10; Mosiah 16:4). These effects are called spiritual death. No one can return to the presence of God without divine grace. Through the Atonement, we all can be forgiven of our sins; we can become clean before God. To receive this enabling power, we must obey the gospel of Jesus Christ, which includes having faith in Him, repenting of our sins, being baptized, receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, and trying to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ for the rest of our lives (see Ephesians 2:8–9; James 2:17–22; 2 Nephi 25:23; 31:20).

The grace of God helps us every day. It strengthens us to do good works we could not do on our own. The Lord promised that if we humble ourselves before Him and have faith in Him, His grace will help us overcome all our personal weaknesses (see Ether 12:27).

I also Add my view is based on the following LDS Church approved materials

http://www.lds.org/n...icient?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/e...-works?lang=eng

http://www.byutv.org...ert-millet-1998 - on the BYU channel which I admit does not have the church's stamp certainly is not disavowed by them.

http://www.byutv.org...ley-wilcox-2007 - same as above

Would you please provide for me some evidence of Why the church view

#1.) united with yours?

#2.) certainly not united with mine?

Could you provide some articles or talks from Church sources that state your view?

Also if you could specifically state where you feel I over state the doctrine, I will try and provide where I get that view from an LDS source.

Also if unable to do that, then I will just agree to disagree and we can move on and recognize that there must be room for both views as I have referenced mine already.

Thanks

Bill

Edited May 4, 2013 by DBMormon

[Tacenda]

DBMormon, how did the conference go? I have been out of town so I haven't kept up with the thread. Did it go well? I really regret not attending. I hope it went well, also was it possible to get any audio from it. I think I'll check Sunstone right now and your website. Thank you, and btw I love your stance on Grace, it never seems to veer from our LDS doctrine but sure does emphasis it and that has made me feel a kinship with you.

[DBMormon]

DBMormon, how did the conference go? I have been out of town so I haven't kept up with the thread. Did it go well? I really regret not attending. I hope it went well, also was it possible to get any audio from it. I think I'll check Sunstone right now and your website. Thank you, and btw I love your stance on Grace, it never seems to veer from our LDS doctrine but sure does emphasis it and that has made me feel a kinship with you.

My talk is on my podcast

http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2013/04/29/sunstone-talk-at-kirtland/

I thought the Temple session was good. I did not attend the rest.

Thank you for your compliments. Your are my sister in Christ

[DBMormon]

Bob ?

[Tacenda]

DB, it must have felt surreal to speak inside the Kirtland temple like that. Also, did you have a good turn out? Was Rob Bowman one of the speakers? How was the weather?

[Calm]

Not sure if this has been posted before, but it comes from the Sunstone website:

SYMPOSIUM PURPOSE. The Sunstone Symposium is dedicated to the idea that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ are better understood and, as a consequence, better lived when they are freely and frankly explored within the society of the Saints. Sunstone seeks to celebrate and explore Mormon experience, issues, and art from diverse perspectives.

We recognize that the search for greater understanding is a sifting process in which much chaff will be inspected and threshed before wheat can be harvested.

We welcome the ponderings of Latter-day Saints and their friends and expect that everyone will approach all issues, no matter how difficult, with respect, intelligence, and good will. From scholarly papers to artistic expressions, we strive for excellence in thought, quality in presentation, and respect in the exchange of ideas.

[DBMormon]

DB, it must have felt surreal to speak inside the Kirtland temple like that. Also, did you have a good turn out? Was Rob Bowman one of the speakers? How was the weather?

I can only speak for the Kirtland Temple Session which was Bro. Kloosterman, myself, and KArl Ricks Anderson - It was a nice conference, But I am biased. Someone else who was there will need to share their 2 cents

Tacenda - there may have been 30 - 40 people in the temple session

Edited May 5, 2013 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

Bob ??? Wonder if he went on vacation?

[DBMormon]

Bob, you back from your long trip?

[Tacenda]

Bob, you back from your long trip?

I love it, Bob's still not responding huh? While you're waiting, I have a great "Bob" story, great if you were there anyway. My husband did this to our friends dad, who he didn't know at all and who is kind of a tough guy. My husband would call him and ask for Bob. He did this for about three or four times, with our friend's dad getting pretty ticked because there was no Bob that lived there. Then the last call my hubby made was to say "Hi, this is Bob, did anyone leave any messages for me?".

Or there's the "What About Bob? movie!

[Calm]

I love it, Bob's still not responding huh?

Bob may be banned from the thread or hesitant to post because of past bannings....

[DBMormon]

Bob may be banned from the thread or hesitant to post because of past bannings....

Cal

So Bob can state my view incorrectly, state that I said things I didn't, and then when asked to show evidence for his libel (he is a lawyer, he'll get it) he can just dissappear till the next time he wants to come after me? I thought there was a rule on this board that when one CFR's the other must show evidence for what they are saying in instances like this.

Tacenda - Maybe Bob is sailing

"IIIIIIIIIIIII'MMMMMMMMMMMMM SAILLLLLLLLLLLLINGGGGGGGGGG"

Bob in case your lurking -

Would you please provide for me some evidence of Why the church view

#1.) united with yours?

#2.) certainly not united with mine?

Could you provide some articles or talks from Church sources that state your view?

Also if you could specifically state where you feel I over state the doctrine, I will try and provide where I get that view from an LDS source.

Also if unable to do that, then I will just agree to disagree and we can move on and recognize that there must be room for both views as I have referenced mine already.

Thanks

Bill

[DBMormon]

he is not on vacation - sorry it would let me capture the B in Bob. Bob do you know if you spell your name backwards it still spells Bob well except it's boB but who cares about details right?

but it seems he was on at 9:27 this morning - OFFLINE Today, 09:27 AM. Take your time Bob, A good lawyer builds his case and is methodical.

Edited May 10, 2013 by DBMormon

[Calm]

he is not on vacation - ....

but it seems he was on at 9:27 this morning - OFFLINE Today, 09:27 AM.

You need to look at the people watching in the thread itself to see if he's paying attention here. You can find it at the bottom of the page if you are not already aware of it. For example at the moment it appears there is just me here:

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 1 anonymous users

If he's been banned, he may not know of your CFR because he can't read the thread. I don't know if he's done anything that might be a reason to be banned...don't remember enough of what he's stated, but if someone isn't responding I always make the assumption that it may be possible that s/he cannot....and act accordingly.

And the mods do at times ban people even when they have been CFRed for what others view as personal attacks...which makes sense if it is a real personal attack. It can be frustrating to those who want to confront perceived accusers but it seems to me that in most cases it is the wiser choice.

In the past I don't recall him being prone not to answer CFRs, but being quite willing to support his opinions (didn't always agree he was interpreting his support the right way, but do remember him providing such)...just mentioning this as a personal observation, no need to reply.

[DBMormon]

You need to look at the people watching in the thread itself to see if he's paying attention here. You can find it at the bottom of the page if you are not already aware of it. For example at the moment it appears there is just me here:

If he's been banned, he may not know of your CFR because he can't read the thread. I don't know if he's done anything that might be a reason to be banned...don't remember enough of what he's stated, but if someone isn't responding I always make the assumption that it may be possible that s/he cannot....and act accordingly.

And the mods do at times ban people even when they have been CFRed for what others view as personal attacks...which makes sense if it is a real personal attack. It can be frustrating to those who want to confront perceived accusers but it seems to me that in most cases it is the wiser choice.

In the past I don't recall him being prone not to answer CFRs, but being quite willing to support his opinions (didn't always agree he was interpreting his support the right way, but do remember him providing such)...just mentioning this as a personal observation, no need to reply.

Well, I guess we will give good ole boB the benefit of the doubt. In the meantime, we should tell bad lawyer jokes to take up the time.

[rongo]

Well, I guess we will give good ole boB the benefit of the doubt. In the meantime, we should tell bad lawyer jokes to take up the time.

Why are you continually mocking Bob Crockett, Bill? Enough, already. You're not helping yourself with people who are skeptical about your podcast, Powerpoint, blog, and program by seeming to gleefully twist the knife when you think Bob "is down." I can guarantee, based on my observations of his posts in the past, that he doesn't have his tail between his legs, like you seem to be relishing.

In the meantime, I am still here, and you have never answered my question about whether you claim to be, or are, or were a bishop. Why didn't *you* ever answer that simple question, Bill?