A Simple Question For Latter-Day Saint Friends

[thesometimesaint]

Where does the Bible say eternal life can change?

Choose whom you this day will serve.

By their works you will know them.

etc., etc., etc..

[pogi]

Where does the Bible say eternal life can change?

 

So, you don't deny that eternal death can change?  Then why not eternal life?

 

Based on your definition of eternal life, which basically equates to belief and grace, there are a plethora of Bible passages which speak of a fall from grace, a falling away, lost belief, lost faith, turning from God, etc. etc. etc. 

 

Here are a few examples I found from http://www.netbiblestudy.net/denominations/new_page_2.htm

 

James 5:19-20 “Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.”  The Bible here says that a believer can wander from the truth and be lost.  But also one who wanders from the truth can be won back.

 

1 Corinthians 9:27 “But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.”  Even the apostle Paul knew it was possible for him to become a castaway and be lost even after he had preached to others.

 

2 Peter 2:20-22 “For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the later end is worse for them than the beginning.  For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them.

 

Revelations 2:10 “Be faithful until death and I will give you the crown of life.”  Eternal life is conditional on one remaining faithful.  What will happen if one does not remain faithful until death?

 

Hebrews 3:12 “Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God.”  So the Bible says that a Christian can depart and leave God if he develops an evil heart of unbelief.

 

Luke 8:13 Jesus says “But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.” 

 

1 Timothy 5:12 “Having condemnation because they have cast off their first faith.”

[Akboy]

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?  

 

Of course it's beneficial. God isn't a kill joy who wants us to follow rules just for the sake of rules. Many of the teachings about behavior teach us how to not destroy ourselves or our relationships with others. As Peter says, people should follow those principles to avoid blindness. But Peter doesn't say loss of eternal life or salvation is one of the downsides.

 

Look at Christ's call for us to obey His commandments, "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."

 

 

Choose whom you this day will serve.

By their works you will know them.

etc., etc., etc..

Could you actually explain why you believe those passages imply eternal life can change?

 

 

 

So, you don't deny that eternal death can change?  Then why not eternal life?

 

Based on your definition of eternal life, which basically equates to belief and grace, there are a plethora of Bible passages which speak of a fall from grace, a falling away, lost belief, lost faith, turning from God, etc. etc. etc. 

 

Here are a few examples I found from http://www.netbiblestudy.net/denominations/new_page_2.htm

 

James 5:19-20 “Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.”  The Bible here says that a believer can wander from the truth and be lost.  But also one who wanders from the truth can be won back.

 

1 Corinthians 9:27 “But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.”  Even the apostle Paul knew it was possible for him to become a castaway and be lost even after he had preached to others.

 

2 Peter 2:20-22 “For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the later end is worse for them than the beginning.  For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them.

 

Revelations 2:10 “Be faithful until death and I will give you the crown of life.”  Eternal life is conditional on one remaining faithful.  What will happen if one does not remain faithful until death?

 

Hebrews 3:12 “Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God.”  So the Bible says that a Christian can depart and leave God if he develops an evil heart of unbelief.

 

Luke 8:13 Jesus says “But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.” 

 

1 Timothy 5:12 “Having condemnation because they have cast off their first faith.”

James: I don't have much time to get into it now, but this sermon seems to explain it pretty well, http://www.gty.org/resources/Sermons/59-34

 

2 Peter: It all hinges on the words 'knowledge' and 'known.' It sounds like it's describing someone who heard the Gospel, knows about faith, but walks away before that actually have saving faith.

 

Rev: What exactly is the 'crown of life'? The verse says nothing about salvation or eternal life in general. It just says some people will get crown. It doesn't say those who don't have the crown won't have eternal life. I see no reason to let this verse impact our understanding of eternal life when none of the verses that actually talk about eternal life make no mention of the crown.

 

Hebrews, Luke, 1 Tim.: None of them describe someone having a saving faith and then losing that faith or salvation.

[Brian 2.0]

Alboy and FormerLDS,

Do you believe it is possible for someone to accept Christ/have faith/gain Eternal life say in their teens... and then the next 20 or so years just really don't go there way, their disposition changes, and they end up becoming a serial racist and murderer at age 45 never changing back until they die 30 years later? Is that even possible? Can't someone who has legitimately been born again eventually become a person capable of that kind of evil? And if so... You still believe that person will have eternal life in heaven, correct?

[teddyaware]

Of course it's beneficial. God isn't a kill joy who wants us to follow rules just for the sake of rules. Many of the teachings about behavior teach us how to not destroy ourselves or our relationships with others. As Peter says, people should follow those principles to avoid blindness. But Peter doesn't say loss of eternal life or salvation is one of the downsides.

You didn't answer my second question. That question was -- 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 to pursue a course of spiritual growth?

In other words, if there is a definite upside benefit for those who chose to obey God's counsel and by diligent effort succeed brilliantly in obtaining the spiritual growth promised by Peter, logic would dictate there must also be a definite downside disadvantage for those who choose to disregard the inspired counsel of Peter. So what do you believe that downside might be? And what would be the discernible differences between one who greatly increases his faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity by diligent effort, as opposed to a Christian who stubbornly refuses to pursue the course of spiritual growth as set forth by Peter?

Edited April 11, 2014 by teddyaware

[VideoGameJunkie]

I want eternal life. Where can one find some?

[Akboy]

Alboy and FormerLDS,

Do you believe it is possible for someone to accept Christ/have faith/gain Eternal life say in their teens... and then the next 20 or so years just really don't go there way, their disposition changes, and they end up becoming a serial racist and murderer at age 45 never changing back until they die 30 years later? Is that even possible? Can't someone who has legitimately been born again eventually become a person capable of that kind of evil? And if so... You still believe that person will have eternal life in heaven, correct?

 

No, it's not possible. That person may claim Christ/faith, but that doesn't mean their faith is genuine. Paul says those in Christ are new creations, but he never says anything about being able to turn back into the old creation. He also says we are sealed with the Spirit when we're saved. That seal can only be opened by God, not us or anyone else. True Christians always have the Spirit and the Spirit will produce fruit even if the Christian slides back into sin for a while.

 

You didn't answer my second question. That question was -- 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 to pursue a course of spiritual growth?

 

In other words, if there is a definite upside benefit for those who chose to obey God's counsel and by diligent effort succeed brilliantly in obtaining the spiritual growth promised by Peter, logic would dictate there must also be a definite downside disadvantage for those who choose to disregard the inspired counsel of Peter. So what do you believe that downside might be? And what would be the discernible differences between one who greatly increases his faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity by diligent effort, as opposed to a Christian who stubbornly refuses to pursue the course of spiritual growth as set forth by Peter?

I was writing before I had to leave for work, so I may not have explained it very well. Firstly, Peter does mention at least one downside in that passage, blindness. But he doesn't mention loss of eternal life as a downside.

Secondly, that part about love WAS responding to your question. Christ said love is the motivation for following His commandments, not getting eternal life. How do you define love? Can you think of any loving relationship where one person follows the wishes of the other partially out of fear of some downside? Is that a healthy type of love? Isn't it a greater act of love to love someone even when there's no significant reward or downside? Is that type of love possible in LDS theology?

 

Are you married? Do you have children? If so, I'm sure you want your spouse and children to love you. What kind of reward/punishment system do you set up to encourage them to love you? Do you spend more time with them if they follow your wishes? Do you remind them you might disown them and kick them out of the house if they disobey too much? If that's the kind of system they have from birth, how can you be sure any of their love is actually love?

 

The idea of a Christian who consistently refuses to pursue growth is an oxymoron. Like I said in my response above to Brian, a Christian is a new creation who is sealed with the Spirit.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Akboy

[teddyaware]

I was writing before I had to leave for work, so I may not have explained it very well. Firstly, Peter does mention at least one downside in that passage, blindness. But he doesn't mention loss of eternal life as a downside.

Secondly, that part about love WAS responding to your question. Christ said love is the motivation for following His commandments, not getting eternal life. How do you define love? Can you think of any loving relationship where one person follows the wishes of the other partially out of fear of some downside? Is that a healthy type of love? Isn't it a greater act of love to love someone even when there's no significant reward or downside? Is that type of love possible in LDS theology?

 

Are you married? Do you have children? If so, I'm sure you want your spouse and children to love you. What kind of reward/punishment system do you set up to encourage them to love you? Do you spend more time with them if they follow your wishes? Do you remind them you might disown them and kick them out of the house if they disobey too much? If that's the kind of system they have from birth, how can you be sure any of their love is actually love?

 

The idea of a Christian who consistently refuses to pursue growth is an oxymoron. Like I said in my response above to Brian, a Christian is a new creation who is sealed with the Spirit.

I have to leave for work, so I won't be able to reply at length now. But I must say you are being very presumptuous to assume we Latter-day Saints don't obey Heavenly Father's commandments out of our love for Him, because we do. Another reason why we are motivated to obey Him is because we love Him so much that we don't want to disappoint by our ingratitude after He and His Son have made such great sacrifices that we might be forgiven and enjoy the companionship of His Spirit. Going back to Peter, other reasons why we are motivated to obey God is because we don't want to, in the words of Peter, " be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ." We also obey Him because, as Peter warned, we don't want to be spiritually "blind" and unable to "see afar off," thereby demonstrating by our attitude of ingratitude that we the kind of Christians who have "forgotten that he was purged from his old sins," treating the atonement of Christ as though it were a thing of naught.

 

And isn't Peter's promise of increased spirituality by diligently pursuing a course of action to gain greater virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity also a powerful motivator for one to want to do God's will? Or is the need for increased spirituality an insignificant factor in the life of a Christian?

This notion you apparently entertain that the Latter-day Saints are something akin to a bunch of trained monkeys who only perform for reward is way off base. By the way, you still haven't given me a well thought out answer as to what you think the downside is for Christians who refuse to follow Peter's admonition to increase their spirituality by diligently striving to obtain increased virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity. Again what, if any, downside is there for a Christian who refuses to diligently follow the path to greatly increased spiritual growth?

Edited April 11, 2014 by teddyaware

[Akboy]

Again what, if any, downside is there for a Christian who refuses to diligently follow the path to greatly increased spiritual growth?

Why does there have to be? Of course there's natural downsides, like broken relationships if you ignore patience, temperance and kindness. Isn't that enough? What if that's all there is? What do you think Christianity would look like if it was clear there was no eternal downside for not living up to some unspecified standard of 'do the best you can'?

 

Again, the idea of a Christian who consistently refuses to pursue growth is an oxymoron. It's not possible. That person may claim Christ/faith, but that doesn't mean their faith is genuine. Paul says those in Christ are new creations, but he never says anything about being able to turn back into the old creation. He also says we are sealed with the Spirit when we're saved. That seal can only be opened by God, not us or anyone else. True Christians always have the Spirit and the Spirit will produce fruit even if the Christian slides back into sin for a while.

[pogi]

Hebrews, Luke, 1 Tim.: None of them describe someone having a saving faith and then losing that faith or salvation.

 

Ummm, yes, they all speak of losing faith/belief in Christ which according to you = eternal life which can never change.  How can you possibly suggest that someone cannot stop believing or lose true faith?  That's what Satan is for.  He doesn't only work on the unbelievers you know.  Why would he waste his time on the believers if he knows that they already have eternal life.  Pointless!

 

I thought this was good:

"The proof texts, used to defend "present possession" of eternal life, themselves state conditions to be met.

John 5:24 - He who hears and believes. But we have shown that one can cease doing these.

John 6:47; 3:16,36 - He that believes. But one can cease believing.

1 John 5:13 - V11,12 speak of those who believe on the Son, and life is IN the Son. But we can cease believing and fail to abide in Him (John 15:1- .

John 10:27,28 - Hear Jesus' voice and follow Him.

John 17:3 - Know God. But one can forget God, turn from Him, and cease to know Him (I John 2:3-6; Jer. 3:21,22; Psa. 9:17; 106;12,21,24).

Note also that saving faith requires obedience, and to cease to obey is to cease to have a saving faith - James 2:14-26; Heb. 10:39; chap. 11; Gal. 5:6; etc.

The fact life is "eternal" does not prove we cannot lose it. "Eternal" describes the nature of the life. It has nothing to do with whether it can or cannot be lost.

Example: Suppose someone offers me a watch guaranteed to work for 50 years, but I must do some task in order to receive it. It is still a "50-year watch" regardless of whether or not I do the job and receive it.

These passages discuss the reward believers will receive as a result of their current state. But they are not discussing what would happen if they change their state.

The passages are not intended to discuss everything about what can happen to a child of God. They are written to help us appreciate the blessings we have, or to encourage people to become children of God. But God does not put all His will in a single verse or passage. We are expected to study other Scripture. When we do, we learn that we ultimately receive the reward only if faithful. It is misusing these verses to teach from them something they do not necessarily mean and which contradicts other passages.

Consider the consequences if we used this reasoning on passages that describe the lost. John 3:36 says unbelievers shall not see life. Shall we conclude this too cannot change (like people argue on the first part of the verse)? If a person is lost, does this prove he can never change and be saved? "Once lost, always lost"? [Cf. John 5:24; Heb. 6:4-8; 10:26ff]

If we can see how unsaved people can change their state and become saved, despite such verses as this, then in the same way we can understand how saved people can change their state and become lost.

This same approach works with most other arguments for "once saved always saved." Consistently applied to passages about lost people, the same arguments would prove "once lost, always lost."

 

Please take a look at the rest of this link where I copied and pasted the above.  There is a ton more good stuff on this subject.  Please take it all into account:

 

http://www.gospelway.com/salvation/eternal_security.php

Edited April 11, 2014 by pogi

[MiserereNobis]

Mormons and Catholics often join forces in charitable work.  Perhaps we should also join forces in fighting sola fide, sola scriptura, solus Christus, and other fundamental errors of protestantism

 

(It is interesting to see where Mormons fall in the Catholic vs. protestant debates)

[Brian 2.0]

Again, the idea of a Christian who consistently refuses to pursue growth is an oxymoron. It's not possible. That person may claim Christ/faith, but that doesn't mean their faith is genuine. Paul says those in Christ are new creations, but he never says anything about being able to turn back into the old creation. He also says we are sealed with the Spirit when we're saved. That seal can only be opened by God, not us or anyone else. True Christians always have the Spirit and the Spirit will produce fruit even if the Christian slides back into sin for a while.

So how do you, or any Christian, KNOW that they have eternal life and have been changed into a new creature?

No doubt there have been people who have thought and felt that they had been saved only to then much later in life do "old creature" things, thus proving they were NOT in fact saved and transformed into a new creature previously.

[teddyaware]

Why does there have to be? Of course there's natural downsides, like broken relationships if you ignore patience, temperance and kindness. Isn't that enough? What if that's all there is? What do you think Christianity would look like if it was clear there was no eternal downside for not living up to some unspecified standard of 'do the best you can'?

 

Again, the idea of a Christian who consistently refuses to pursue growth is an oxymoron. It's not possible. That person may claim Christ/faith, but that doesn't mean their faith is genuine. Paul says those in Christ are new creations, but he never says anything about being able to turn back into the old creation. He also says we are sealed with the Spirit when we're saved. That seal can only be opened by God, not us or anyone else. True Christians always have the Spirit and the Spirit will produce fruit even if the Christian slides back into sin for a while.

So a if a Christian who refuses to pursue spiritual growth is an oxymoron, why in the world does Peter even bother to admonish the saints at all? And why does he give such a powerful and solemn warning about the need to remain diligent in pursuit of spiritual growth if that pursuit is going to unavoidably happen anyway?

 

By the way, according to your understanding of Peter's words, you seem to be indicating that a Christian convert no longer has free will -- that he is saved whether he wants to remains so or not. Free will is sacrosanct in the LDS religion, purchased at great cost by the suffering and shed blood of Christ, so you won't be winning many friends for your ideas around here. And since I find your answer to my question so woefully inadequate and lacking in insight, I'll answer my own question myself:

So what is the downside of if one chooses to ignore and disobey Peter's counsel to continually and diligently strive to grow spiritually?

That man who puts aside and disregards Peter's counsel to strive for spiritual growth will be less virtuous, less knowledgeable, less temperate, less patient, less godly, less kind and less charitable than the man who does diligently pursue a course of spiritual growth.

But that's not all. By applying simple logic to Peter's words, we also come to understand that the faithless, slothful Christian will be considered as one who is barren and unfruitful in his Christian profession. In other words, he is a Christian in name but not in thought, emotion and action. We also learn that such a person is spiritually blind, unable to grasp and understand sacred things, and lacking in appreciation for the infinite and eternal sacrifice for sin the Lord Jesus Christ made on his behalf.

 

We also learn that his spiritual laziness, unless repented of, will prevent him from making his calling and election sure and opening up the possibility he may eventually fall from grace. And at best, unless he repents of his spiritual indifference, ingratitude and lack of faithful motivation, he will eventual gain entry into the kingdom of God, but only under conditions that will be less glorious and less abundant in blessings than it will be for those who did diligently purse a steady course of spiritual growth. 

 

The proof text for my comments is supplied below:

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)

.

 

Edited April 11, 2014 by teddyaware

[VideoGameJunkie]

I still want to know where I can get eternal life if anyone else here already has it. I want it.

[teddyaware]

I still want to know where I can get eternal life if anyone else here already has it. I want it.

I'm hoping you're older than twelve, but with that screen name I doubt it.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

 

No, it's not possible. That person may claim Christ/faith, but that doesn't mean their faith is genuine.

The idea that it was never genuine is not taught in scriptures. Sorry. I know you need to explain it  away but you can fall from grace.

[boblloyd91]

Mormons and Catholics often join forces in charitable work.  Perhaps we should also join forces in fighting sola fide, sola scriptura, solus Christus, and other fundamental errors of protestantism

 

(It is interesting to see where Mormons fall in the Catholic vs. protestant debates)

 

I totally agree. In fact because the same people who bash us also bash Catholics I have become more interested in Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. It is kind of like the old saying "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". As far as joining Theological forces, that one is definitely a stretch in some ways, but we both agree in regards to a need for authority. Even though I think we Mormons still have a small amount of anti Catholicism in our cultural heritage (coming from a frontier Protestant Milieu) I find myself having much more sympathy with Catholic Theology then say Reformed Theology. Also, in reading works of Catholic writers as well as the early Church Fathers, I have a greater desire to know God then say when I read Jonathan Edwards or Charles Spurgeon. Finally, as you and Rory (aka 3dop) show, you can disagree while being agreeable, which I have observed in many Catholics I have met with. 

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

So a if a Christian who refuses to pursue spiritual growth is an oxymoron, why in the world does Peter even bother to admonish the saints at all?

 

Yeah. This sorta of reminds me of the crowd that says "All you need to do is confess with your mouth" And I would always say, what is the point have having the bible as big as it is when all you really need is a few verses that tell you how to be saved. Why does Peter and others go through all the trouble to tell us that we can fall and that it would be worse to have not known Christ if we really can't fall and if we do it really was not genuine.  Why not just say" You are saved and can never fall and if you do fall you were really not saved"? I mean that concept is completely missing from scripture. It can only be read into the text.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Mormons and Catholics often join forces in charitable work.  Perhaps we should also join forces in fighting sola fide, sola scriptura, solus Christus, and other fundamental errors of protestantism

 

(It is interesting to see where Mormons fall in the Catholic vs. protestant debates)

I would say that were are probably more close in a lot of ways in more areas than we are apart.

 

I do know there are some major differences but I am all for finding the common ground and standing with each other.

[boblloyd91]

I think what it boils down to is we need to believe and trust in Christ and avoid sin to maintain that closeness to him. Just my two cents...

[Akboy]

Pogi, can we agree we can't earn eternal life? So it would be unbiblical for someone to say "I'm trying to be good enough to earn eternal life." Is that person following the gospel? So what is the difference between that and saying "I'm trying to be good enough to not lose eternal life." The wording is a bit different, but either way you're relying on your own ability and your own righteousness rather than Christ's righteousness.

 

I'm not denying eternal life is conditional upon belief, but once we have true, genuine belief, Paul says we are transformed into new creations and sealed with the Spirit, a seal that can only be opened by God. Paul doesn't mention anything about changing back into the old creation if you don't live up to some standard.

 

Yes, Satan is still working on believers. There are various ways for him to try to make us ineffective in our interactions with other Christians and non-Christians.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Akboy

[pogi]

Pogi, can we agree we can't earn eternal life? So it would be unbiblical for someone to say "I'm trying to be good enough to earn eternal life." Is that person following the gospel? So what is the difference between that and saying "I'm trying to be good enough to not lose eternal life."

 

We don't earn the grace of God or eternal life any more than a petitioning beggar earns his wage.  Yet, if we stop the petition due to a fall from faith or belief...  Eternal life is only as eternal as the wanting of it and living in it through belief and faith.

 

I'm not denying eternal life is conditional upon belief, but once we have true, genuine belief, Paul says we are transformed into new creations and sealed with the Spirit, a seal that can only be opened by God. Paul doesn't mention anything about changing back into the old creation if you don't live up to some standard.

 

Paul does, along with many others, speak of a fall from the standard (which even you subscribe to) of belief and faith.

 

Yes, Satan is still working on believers. There are various ways for him to try to make us ineffective in our interactions with other Christians and non-Christians.

 

So, we are responsible if other people choose not to believe in Christ due to our poor interactions and example.  Is that what you are suggesting?  I agree.  However, I think that we really will be held responsible in the end and not get a free pass into heaven because we believed at one time, only later to be deceived, screwing up someone elses chance at salvation.  I refuse to believe that we will kick it with Peter while they burn in hell because we screwed up?

[JDave]

Still the crux of all this is that Mormons simply CAN'T have eternal life if they subscribe to Mormon doctrine, right?

If someone believes in Christ, that just isn't enough.  They have to have the correct belief, right?

 

Someone can have faith in Christ and believe that Christ requires that faith be shown by some inner change of "true, genuine belief".

Someone else can have faith in Christ and believe that Christ requires that faith be shown by making and keeping covenants.

Others can believe both, or some other variation.

 

It all just seems kind of a silly argument when it all points to the exact same result -- following Christ.  I'm pretty sure that ALL devout followers of Christ have the appropriate attitude and feelings toward Christ, even Mormons.

[Brian 2.0]

Akboy,

What do you make of King David? The scriptures say he was forgiven. Then later he commits adultery and murder. Did he or does he have Eternal life? Or are the rules different for him because he lived before Christ was on the Earth.

[Akboy]

So how do you, or any Christian, KNOW that they have eternal life and have been changed into a new creature?

No doubt there have been people who have thought and felt that they had been saved only to then much later in life do "old creature" things, thus proving they were NOT in fact saved and transformed into a new creature previously.

You know if you're completely trusting in Christ's righteousness for eternal life and display the fruit of the spirit. Being a new creation doesn't mean you're perfect. Falling back into sin for a while does not prove they weren't changed into new creations. Is that idea in the Bible? Can you show a verse that says we're supposed to doubt our salvation or try to get re-saved every time we sin?

 

So a if a Christian who refuses to pursue spiritual growth is an oxymoron, why in the world does Peter even bother to admonish the saints at all? And why does he give such a powerful and solemn warning about the need to remain diligent in pursuit of spiritual growth if that pursuit is going to unavoidably happen anyway?

 

By the way, according to your understanding of Peter's words, you seem to be indicating that a Christian convert no longer has free will -- that he is saved whether he wants to remains so or not. Free will is sacrosanct in the LDS religion, purchased at great cost by the suffering and shed blood of Christ, so you won't be winning many friends for your ideas around here. And since I find your answer to my question so woefully inadequate and lacking in insight, I'll answer my own question myself:

So what is the downside of if one chooses to ignore and disobey Peter's counsel to continually and diligently strive to grow spiritually?

That man who puts aside and disregards Peter's counsel to strive for spiritual growth will be less virtuous, less knowledgeable, less temperate, less patient, less godly, less kind and less charitable than the man who does diligently pursue a course of spiritual growth.

But that's not all. By applying simple logic to Peter's words, we also come to understand that the faithless, slothful Christian will be considered as one who is barren and unfruitful in his Christian profession. In other words, he is a Christian in name but not in thought, emotion and action. We also learn that such a person is spiritually blind, unable to grasp and understand sacred things, and lacking in appreciation for the infinite and eternal sacrifice for sin the Lord Jesus Christ made on his behalf.

 

We also learn that his spiritual laziness, unless repented of, will prevent him from making his calling and election sure and opening up the possibility he may eventually fall from grace. And at best, unless he repents of his spiritual indifference, ingratitude and lack of faithful motivation, he will eventual gain entry into the kingdom of God, but only under conditions that will be less glorious and less abundant in blessings than it will be for those who did diligently purse a steady course of spiritual growth.

Where does the passage say we can fall from grace? Don't read that into the passage when it doesn't mention grace.

 

I never said the spiritual growth is automatic. We still have to take the time to learn and deal with whatever unique struggles each of us have. Plus, just because someone doesn't look like they're growing doesn't mean they're not a new creation. One of the pastors at my church told us about his unusual past. He grew up with very strict, fundamentalist beliefs and went through college and seminary planning on being a pastor. But right after he finished seminary, he became disillusioned with faith and stopped going to church entirely. 20 years later, an event involving a friend almost dying helped open his eyes and bring him back to God. It may have seemed like those 20 years were wasted time when he could have been pursuing spiritual growth, but maybe that time was part of God's plan. As a pastor, he's reaching out to others who may not have been to church for 10-20 years, so his background might give him some helpful insights into what they're going through.

 

Why does there have to be an eternal downside? What do you think Christianity would look like if it was clear there was no eternal downside for not living up to some unspecified standard of 'do the best you can'? Have you answered that yet?

 

Seriously, who would use free will to intentionally reject eternal life and choose eternal punishment?

 

The idea that it was never genuine is not taught in scriptures. Sorry. I know you need to explain it  away but you can fall from grace.

It certainly sounds like Christ taught something at least similar to that. Matt. 7

²¹ “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. ²² On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ ²³ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

 

Maybe 'genuine' isn't the right word. Saving faith required genuine sincerity, but the people Christ was talking about certainly sound sincere, so it has to be more than that. Some people sincerely believe they can be saved by doing enough good things, but they would be sincerely wrong.

 

If you can fall from grace because you're not following laws, then do you stay in grace by following laws? Is you're confidence in grace based on you're ability to not fall away from grace?

 

We don't earn the grace of God or eternal life any more than a petitioning beggar earns his wage.  Yet, if we stop the petition due to a fall from faith or belief...  Eternal life is only as eternal as the wanting of it and living in it through belief and faith.

 

 

Paul does, along with many others, speak of a fall from the standard (which even you subscribe to) of belief and faith.

 

 

So, we are responsible if other people choose not to believe in Christ due to our poor interactions and example.  Is that what you are suggesting?  I agree.  However, I think that we really will be held responsible in the end and not get a free pass into heaven because we believed at one time, only later to be deceived, screwing up someone elses chance at salvation.  I refuse to believe that we will kick it with Peter while they burn in hell because we screwed up?

Okay, so you wouldn't say "I'm trying to be good enough to earn eternal life." We agree that's not the gospel. But you might say something like "I'm trying to petition enough to get eternal life" or "I'm trying to want and live in eternal life enough to get eternal life." You can change the terms all you want, but the same problem exists. If your eternal life hinges on "I'm trying to  . . .," then it's the same as saying Christ's righteousness isn't enough to get eternal life.

 

I agree it's wrong if we ignore chances to share our faith or don't take those chances seriously. But, no, I'm not saying we can 'screw up' another person's chance at salvation, and neither can Satan. If God is pursuing someone, there's no way I can screw up bad enough that would doom them to hell. My mistakes may slow down the process a bit, like how Jonah slowed things down when he ran away, but they won't screw God up.

 

Akboy,

What do you make of King David? The scriptures say he was forgiven. Then later he commits adultery and murder. Did he or does he have Eternal life? Or are the rules different for him because he lived before Christ was on the Earth.

I don't see any reason to doubt him having eternal life. He certainly made mistakes, and we all make mistakes, but the Psalms make it pretty clear he yearned for and trusted in God. In fact, Psalm 119 is one of my favorite studies I've done. It has powerful images of pursuing God without relying on our own ability. Contrast the 'Taw' section (v.169) with the 'He' section (v.33).

Edited April 12, 2014 by Akboy