A Simple Question For Latter-Day Saint Friends

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Yes, "with me" suggests we are sitting at the table by his side (feast imagery is common in the scriptures), not "on me" which might imply eating Christ's flesh and blood.

Spot on. I am glad there are people on this board that have more expertise with words. I really kinda suck at it sometimes.

[Calm]

Spot on. I am glad there are people on this board that have more expertise with words. I really kinda suck at it sometimes.

Everyone has different gifts.

[Bikeemikey]

Seriously, who doesnt...

[Calm]

Have eternal life?

[Akboy]

According to Christ, these people were "workers of iniquity"  Perhaps they did all of this for their own glory instead of God's, making all of their "good deeds" condemnable.

 

I thought that belief alone is what grants eternal life?  Are you suggesting there is something more?  If so, then we are agreed.

Please share your thoughts on this passage.  What did they not do right?

Notice that in Matthew 7 those that were turned away, were only turned away after a final judgment.  This life is still probationary.  If there is an eternal life Now, then reason would suggest that there must be a eternal death or condemnation NOW as well.  Why then a final judgment?

Yes, it's biblical belief, complete trust in Christ's righteousness, that grants eternal life. It's not the modern idea of 'belief' which is a mere acknowledgement of something. That living faith will produce works, but that doesn't mean we need to prove our faith. God knows the validity of our faith and just like with Abraham, our faith is counted as righteousness.

 

No, there isn't anything required beyond living, biblical belief. If you add requirements like enduring to the end or living worthy lives, then that's not biblical belief because it's not completely trusting in Christ. How can you have complete trust in Christ if part of your belief is in your own ability to endure to the end?

 

You're right that their mistake was probably focusing on their own glory rather than God's. So when Mormons talk about the need to endure to the end and live righteous, worthy lives, who's glory are they focusing on? Who's righteousness are they relying on?

Edited April 10, 2014 by Akboy

[Calm]

 

You're right that their mistake was probably focusing on their own glory rather than God's. So when Mormons talk about the need to endure to the end and live righteous, worthy lives, who's glory are they focusing on? Who's righteousness are they relying on?

God's of course since it is only through him we can achieve righteousness and endure.

[teddyaware]

Yes, it's biblical belief, complete trust in Christ's righteousness, that grants eternal life. It's not the modern idea of 'belief' which is a mere acknowledgement of something. That living faith will produce works, but that doesn't mean we need to prove our faith. God knows the validity of our faith and just like with Abraham, our faith is counted as righteousness.

 

No, there isn't anything required beyond living, biblical belief. If you add requirements like enduring to the end or living worthy lives, then that's not biblical belief because it's not completely trusting in Christ. How can you have complete trust in Christ if part of your belief is in your own ability to endure to the end?

 

You're right that their mistake was probably focusing on their own glory rather than God's. So when Mormons talk about the need to endure to the end and live righteous, worthy lives, who's glory are they focusing on? Who's righteousness are they relying on?

Greetings Akboy! If you are willing, I'd like to engage with you in dialogue.

I find the Evangelical explanation of what God requires of a Christian, in order for Him to be saved, very problematic in light of many Biblical passages. If I'm understanding you correctly, you believe it's unnecessary for a Christian to have to endure to the end in consciously striving to keep the commandments of God -- yet over and over again the Bible clearly says otherwise.

In fact, throughout the New Testament there are so many solemn admonitions that a Christian must endure to the end in an ongoing process of growing in the attributes of righteousness that, in all honesty, I can't imagine how anyone could possibly believe otherwise. The only way I can imagine how one might think it's unnecessary to endure to the end would be for that man to deliberately choose to focus entirely on the scriptural references that seem to back up the "no need to endure to the end" position, while studiously ignoring, or at very least minimizing, the scriptural references that unambiguously say otherwise. So for a start let's focus on the following verses from Peter's first general epistle.

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: (1 Peter 1)

 

These verses fly directly in the face of a "no need to endure to the end" approach to the Gospel of Christ. I don't even need to explain what these verses mean because the meaning is so crystal clear and self-evident. So let's focus on these verses for now, with you explaining to me how Peter's admonition does not speak to a need for a Christians to endure to the end in a process of in pressing on toward successfully gaining greater and greater endowments of righteousness.  

 

I'm going to bed now, but if you respond I'll reengage with you tomorrow...

 

All the best, Ted  

 

[Bernard Gui]

Your question is ambiguous, and I could answer it both Yes and No.

 

1. Yes, because I have eternal, that is, never-ending existence, as a creature of Heavenly Father.

 

2. No, because I have not yet been granted Eternal life, that is, the life that God leads.

 

I voted Yes, though, because of sense 1, and my hope of sense 2.

This is exactly why I voted yes too.

[Stargazer]

1. You have defined the LDS concept of "Immortality" not "Eternal Life".  Look it up some time.

2. Agreed [according to LDS theology]

 

1. Of course!  There is a world of difference between immortality/eternal life and Eternal Life.  Carefully note the capitalization.  Your question was imprecise, and I was simply pointing that out.

 

I knew exactly what I was talking about. Sorry you missed it.

[Akboy]

God's of course since it is only through him we can achieve righteousness and endure.

But who has to endure, you or God? Who has to follow the law of faith? When you read "for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do," doesn't the "we" include you? How is that not bringing glory to yourselves?

 

I'm not saying you're trying to hog the glory or deny God glory. I'm saying putting any reliance on your own abilities puts some of the glory on you. It may be 99% glory and reliance to God and only 1% reliance on your ability, but 99% is not complete reliance on Christ's righteousness.

 

Greetings Akboy! If you are willing, I'd like to engage with you in dialogue.

I find the Evangelical explanation of what God requires of a Christian, in order for Him to be saved, very problematic in light of many Biblical passages. If I'm understanding you correctly, you believe it's unnecessary for a Christian to have to endure to the end in consciously striving to keep the commandments of God -- yet over and over again the Bible clearly says otherwise.

In fact, throughout the New Testament there are so many solemn admonitions that a Christian must endure to the end in an ongoing process of growing in the attributes of righteousness that, in all honesty, I can't imagine how anyone could possibly believe otherwise. The only way I can imagine how one might think it's unnecessary to endure to the end would be for that man to deliberately choose to focus entirely on the scriptural references that seem to back up the "no need to endure to the end" position, while studiously ignoring, or at very least minimizing, the scriptural references that unambiguously say otherwise. So for a start let's focus on the following verses from Peter's first general epistle.

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: (1 Peter 1)

 

These verses fly directly in the face of a "no need to endure to the end" approach to the Gospel of Christ. I don't even need to explain what these verses mean because the meaning is so crystal clear and self-evident. So let's focus on these verses for now, with you explaining to me how Peter's admonition does not speak to a need for a Christians to endure to the end in a process of in pressing on toward successfully gaining greater and greater endowments of righteousness.  

 

I'm going to bed now, but if you respond I'll reengage with you tomorrow...

 

All the best, Ted 

First of all, that passage is in 2 Peter, not 1 Peter, unless the LDS use a version of the KJV I'm not aware of.

 

Anyway, there's a lot going on in the context and the passage, so I'll refer to someone who studied it a lot more than me.

https://bible.org/seriespage/secured-faith-keeps-saints-stumbling-2-peter-18-11

 

Here's a few useful observations.

 

(3) In these verses, Peter does not teach that a person must work to earn or obtain their salvation. Verses 1-4 emphasize that we have been saved solely on the basis of the righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ. We in no way contribute to our salvation through our own efforts or works. Verses 5-7 call upon every Christian to diligently strive to supply the virtues which the grace of God makes possible for the saint. We do not work to be saved; we work because we have been saved. A living faith works (see James 2). But that faith has been received (2 Peter 1:1).

(4) The list of dangers Peter enumerates does not include “losing one’s salvation.” Just as Peter, nor any other biblical author, does not teach that one is saved by works, neither does he teach that one stays saved by works. All things are of Him, through Him, and to Him (Romans 11:36). We possess nothing spiritually which we have not received from God (1 Corinthians 4:7). Our salvation is certain because He is faithful and does not change, and no one shall pluck us from His hand (see James 1:17; Philippians 1:6; John 10:27-30).

(5) The list of dangers Peter enumerates in this text does not include “doubting one’s faith.” In the current faith/works debate, both sides seem to agree that 2 Peter 1:8-11 is about assurance. Those who emphasize faith insist that the believer’s assurance is to be found in God, in His sovereignty, and in the sufficiency of His provisions. Those who stress the necessity for works (as an evidence of faith) insist that there is some measure of assurance to be gained by obedience and fruitfulness. As we see God at work in our lives, we are more confident that our faith is alive and well, they say. I see a measure of truth in both positions, but I do not see Peter emphasizing assurance in this text. It is not assurance that is so prominent, but what we attain (an abundant entrance into the kingdom of God, verse 11) and what we avoid (uselessness, unfruitfulness, blindness, short-sightedness, forgetfulness, stumbling).

 

 

11 For in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you (2 Peter 1:11).

 

The Bible teaches that some Christians will enter into God’s kingdom by the proverbial “skin of their teeth:”

 

12 Now if any man builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13 each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it, because it is [to be] revealed with fire; and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work. 14 If any man’s work which he has built upon it remains, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work is burned up, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire (1 Corinthians 3:12-15).

 

5 [i have decided] to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Corinthians 5:5).

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep (1 Corinthians 11:28-30).

 

It is certainly possible for a Christian to live in such a way that God removes him from this life (1 Corinthians 5:5; 11:28-30). I do not think one would expect a “Well done, good and faithful servant!” upon his arrival in the presence of God. He will be saved, yet as by fire (1 Corinthians 3:15). For the Christian who pursues holiness, there is a far better entrance into the kingdom of God. It is an entrance we eagerly anticipate (see Philippians 1:19-23; 3:14; 2 Corinthians 5:6-10). It is an entrance abundantly supplied to us. This is the reward of diligently seeking to confirm our calling and election.

 

Yes, I believe there are benefits and blessings when we are following these and other biblical principles and there are consequences for sinful, worldly lifestyles. But this passage, and the rest of the Bible, doesn't say losing our salvation or going to a lower level of heaven is one of those consequences. For that matter, the Bible doesn't mention different levels of heaven at all and it doesn't make a distinction between salvation and eternal life. And no, it doesn't make a distinction between immortality/eternal life and Eternal Life.

Edited April 10, 2014 by Akboy

[Calm]

So when Christ said "follow my commandments" he didn't really mean that?

It would appear that you think that if I even simply get out of bed with the intent to do good today to honour my God, I am taking glory to myself. Trying to do good means a less than 100% reliance on Christ and if it isn't 100%, I am taking glory to myself even if I don't intend to....

What then must I do? Intend to sin and harm people so if anything good does happen it must obviously be a result of God's work?

Edited April 10, 2014 by calmoriah

[Akboy]

So when Christ said "follow my commandments" he didn't really mean that?

It would appear that you think that if I even simply get out of bed with the intent to do good today to honour my God, I am taking glory to myself. Trying to do good means a less than 100% reliance on Christ and if it isn't 100%, I am taking glory to myself even if I don't intend to....

What then must I do? Intend to sin and harm people so if anything good does happen it must obviously be a result of God's work?

Look at the whole quote, "If you love me, keep my commandments." So what does it mean to love? I think a good definition would be 'Selflessly serving someone or giving them something without expecting anything in return.' Would you agree? What happens to the motivation when you add something you get in return?

 

Imagine you find out your parents promised someone a large inheritance if they married you and "loved" you for 20 years. That person may do tons of nice things for you, treat you like the most important person in the world and say they love you more times than you can count, but how can you be sure it's really love? Obviously, the Bible says a lot about how we're supposed to treat God and others, but what does it give as the motivation for doing that? What does it say about what we get for loving Christ? Doing something nice for God isn't taking glory for yourself, but if you do that nice thing because it gets you closer to eternal life, then it's taking the focus off Christ's righteousness and putting it on yours.

 

Christ said "If you love me, keep my commandments," not "If you want eternal life, keep my commandments."

Edited April 10, 2014 by Akboy

[Calm]

Then it is not an issue, because I want eternal life because God said it was his work and glory, not as a reward for myself.

[FormerLDS]

According to Christ, these people were "workers of iniquity"  Perhaps they did all of this for their own glory instead of God's, making all of their "good deeds" condemnable.

 

I thought that belief alone is what grants eternal life?  Are you suggesting there is something more?  If so, then we are agreed.

Please share your thoughts on this passage.  What did they not do right?

Notice that in Matthew 7 those that were turned away, were only turned away after a final judgment.  This life is still probationary.  If there is an eternal life Now, then reason would suggest that there must be a eternal death or condemnation NOW as well.  Why then a final judgment?

 

Think you're arriving at the same conclusion as myself.  If there is an eternal life available right now, then those who do not have that "eternal life" would actually have eternal death - regardless of what their self-perception.   

 

Consider those who have eternal life in John 5:24 "Verily, verily, I say unto you , He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."

 

Hence, the rejected of the savior in Matthew 7 are those who did not receive eternal life during mortality (i.e. they never "passed from death unto life" while they were on earth.)

[Brian 2.0]

Think you're arriving at the same conclusion as myself.  If there is an eternal life available right now, then those who do not have that "eternal life" would actually have eternal death - regardless of what their self-perception.   

 

Consider those who have eternal life in John 5:24 "Verily, verily, I say unto you , He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."

 

Hence, the rejected of the savior in Matthew 7 are those who did not receive eternal life during mortality (i.e. they never "passed from death unto life" while they were on earth.)

 

Just to understand what you believe...

 

You believe that ALL people mortal people are currently in one of two camps.  "Eternal Life" or "Eternal Death".  People in in the Eternal Death camp CAN move up into the Eternal Life camp at some point during their life.  Those in the Eternal Life camp can NOT move back down to the Eternal Death camp.  It's a one-way street.  

 

Correct?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

So you remember this as a common theme of Former in the past as well perhaps?

Yes...we used to debate via e-mail. And yes, this is always the common theme.

[Akboy]

Then it is not an issue, because I want eternal life because God said it was his work and glory, not as a reward for myself.

Why do you believe you'll have eternal life? What does it take to get eternal life? I've read multiple LDS sources that say some Mormons will end up in the Terrestrial kingdom. So why will some Mormons go to different levels of glory than other Mormons?

[T-Shirt]

Remind me please. Are you the one who equates the Bible itself with Christ (since both have been called the Word of God iirc)?

And does one literally take in the body of Christ and if so, how?

If you are Catholic, literal makes sense. Not sure it does if you are not.

If I recall correctly, he is a King James Version Only, independent Baptist.  And, I do remember that he seems to eguate the Bible as the "Word of God" with Jesus as the "Word of God" (John 1).

[pogi]

Just to understand what you believe...

 

You believe that ALL people mortal people are currently in one of two camps.  "Eternal Life" or "Eternal Death".  People in in the Eternal Death camp CAN move up into the Eternal Life camp at some point during their life.  Those in the Eternal Life camp can NOT move back down to the Eternal Death camp.  It's a one-way street.  

 

Correct?

 

This is the same question and problem that I have with eternal life now, or eternal death now.  If it can change, how is it eternal?  Does not the very fact that it can change hint at our need to endure?  Did Judas not need to endure to the end because he had true belief at one time and thus eternal life?  Or was his "eternal" life now not so eternal after all?  All that I can say for certainty is that I BELIEVE NOW, that belief must endure however for it to mature into "eternal life". 

 

Final judgment has been brought up several times but the eternal life now camp has given no explanation for the need.

[Akboy]

This is the same question and problem that I have with eternal life now, or eternal death now.  If it can change, how is it eternal?  Does not the very fact that it can change hint at our need to endure?  Did Judas not need to endure to the end because he had true belief at one time and thus eternal life?  Or was his "eternal" life now not so eternal after all?  All that I can say for certainty is that I BELIEVE NOW, that belief must endure however for it to mature into "eternal life". 

 

Final judgment has been brought up several times but the eternal life now camp has given no explanation for the need.

Where does the Bible say eternal life can change?

Edited April 10, 2014 by Akboy

[Calm]

If I recall correctly, he is a King James Version Only, independent Baptist.  And, I do remember that he seems to eguate the Bible as the "Word of God" with Jesus as the "Word of God" (John 1).

There was a poster who claimed that the Bible is literally Jesus Christ. My memory says it was Former, but I may be wrong.

Though if he believes we literally take in the body of Christ at the moment of salvation, it sounds much like the same reasoning. We shall see (if we haven't already and I haven't read it yet).

[ERayR]

Yes, it's biblical belief, complete trust in Christ's righteousness, that grants eternal life. It's not the modern idea of 'belief' which is a mere acknowledgement of something. That living faith will produce works, but that doesn't mean we need to prove our faith. God knows the validity of our faith and just like with Abraham, our faith is counted as righteousness.

 

No, there isn't anything required beyond living, biblical belief. If you add requirements like enduring to the end or living worthy lives, then that's not biblical belief because it's not completely trusting in Christ. How can you have complete trust in Christ if part of your belief is in your own ability to endure to the end?

 

You're right that their mistake was probably focusing on their own glory rather than God's. So when Mormons talk about the need to endure to the end and live righteous, worthy lives, who's glory are they focusing on? Who's righteousness are they relying on?

 

No, there isn't anything required beyond living, biblical belief. If you add requirements like enduring to the end or living worthy lives, then that's not biblical belief because it's not completely trusting in Christ. How can you have complete trust in Christ if part of your belief is in your own ability to endure to the end?

 

You're right that their mistake was probably focusing on their own glory rather than God's. So when Mormons talk about the need to endure to the end and live righteous, worthy lives, who's glory are they focusing on? Who's righteousness are they relying on?

 

Its short, you may have missed it:

 

Matthew 24:13:  But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

[Calm]

 

Final judgment has been brought up several times but the eternal life now camp has given no explanation for the need.

Quite a number of explanations are lacking.

[Akboy]

Its short, you may have missed it:

 

Matthew 24:13:  But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

Yes, I'm familiar with that verse, but context makes a big difference.

 

³ As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” ⁴ And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray. ⁵ For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. ⁶ And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet. ⁷ For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. ⁸ All these are but the beginning of the birth pains.

⁹ “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake. ¹⁰ And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. ¹¹ And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. ¹² And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. ¹³ But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

 

So the 'endures to the end' phrase applies during the "end of the age." I agree that's it's reasonable to believe we're near the end of the age, if not already in that time period. But was the early church also during the end of the age? Did the early church believe this passage applied to them and the gospel during their time? Some people may believe the gospel might have been adjusted for the end times, but I don't think Paul would like that idea.

 

Gal. 1

⁸ But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. ⁹ As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

 

Paul didn't leave room open for anyone, even himself, to change the gospel. The word 'saved' in Matthew can mean salvation from the punishment of sins or it can mean simply being saved from physical harm. Given the context of the passage and the rest of the Bible's teaching on eternal life and salvation, the latter interpretation fits better.

[teddyaware]

But who has to endure, you or God? Who has to follow the law of faith? When you read "for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do," doesn't the "we" include you? How is that not bringing glory to yourselves?

 

I'm not saying you're trying to hog the glory or deny God glory. I'm saying putting any reliance on your own abilities puts some of the glory on you. It may be 99% glory and reliance to God and only 1% reliance on your ability, but 99% is not complete reliance on Christ's righteousness.

 

First of all, that passage is in 2 Peter, not 1 Peter, unless the LDS use a version of the KJV I'm not aware of.

 

Anyway, there's a lot going on in the context and the passage, so I'll refer to someone who studied it a lot more than me.

https://bible.org/seriespage/secured-faith-keeps-saints-stumbling-2-peter-18-11

 

Here's a few useful observations.

 

 

 

 

Yes, I believe there are benefits and blessings when we are following these and other biblical principles and there are consequences for sinful, worldly lifestyles. But this passage, and the rest of the Bible, doesn't say losing our salvation or going to a lower level of heaven is one of those consequences. For that matter, the Bible doesn't mention different levels of heaven at all and it doesn't make a distinction between salvation and eternal life. And no, it doesn't make a distinction between immortality/eternal life and Eternal Life.

Hello again Akboy. For the sake of clarity, let's make things very simple by focusing in on Peter's admonition one small step at a time. I'll first requote the Apostle, highlighting the portion on which I'd first like to focus.

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. (2 Peter 1)

 

Do you agree it's beneficial for Christians to follow through on Peter's call to grow spiritually by diligently striving to increase the measure of their faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity? If you do agree it's beneficial for Christians to grow spiritually in the manner outlined by Peter, what downside, if any, is there for those born again Christians who deliberately choose to utterly ignore the Apostle's counsel?   

 

Edited April 10, 2014 by teddyaware