Dear Evangelical Friends: Can A Mormon Be A Christian?

[Vance]

The true Biblical God, in Genesis, is attributed with our being here "in the beginning God".

Another in the beginning is the opening of

John 1:1 where it identifies one of the Godhead in the person of Jesus.

There is a distinction to be made between those of the God head and other created beings that needs to be discerned which I believe Mormons confuse some of the time this topic being one of them concerning God and gods.

This post is just a bunch of gibberish.

[Vance]

Joseph's plurality of Gods teaching is not in line with the Biblical God. The capital G in our English translations is always capitalized and is not plural. The lower case g is where you will find gods. The term Elohim is translated God/gods depending on W/hom is being identified.

In the Godhead in the New Testament in Matthew 28 where the baptism command is given by Jesus, this is where Jesus affirms we are baptized in the name of God.

In Jesus' baptism, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all identified so the Chritian doctrine of God is to be understood as one God as in the Hebrew Schema, "Hear o Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one referred to by Jesus in the New Testament.

More gibberish with a gratuitous swipe at Joseph Smith thrown in for no valid reason.

Basically, you are saying that the English translation must take preeminence over the original Hebrew.

LOL!!!

[Vance]

The Bilal teaching on the nature of God is the view I hold to, one God three Identified in the Godhead, not a plurality of Gods. You will not find Gods plural but God singular even though Elohim had a plural ending in the Hebrew.

So, a plural is not a plural when you don't want it to be a plural, only because to admit that it is a plural would totally destroy the basis for your attack.

Got it.

LOL!!!!!

[Tacenda]

http://www.whatloveisthis.tv/

 

Listening to this podcast.  I know I'll get flak for listening to it.  But are there any apologists that can listen through it and point out where they're wrong?  It's pretty important to my continuing in belief of anything in Mormonism.  Or is this just laughable that I bring it forth?  Or are we really the Christian that is put forth in the bible?  Wait we're not, there is more and the bible didn't cover the "rest of the story".   

[coolrok7]

"Act as one" as where is that at as an address or reference?

[coolrok7]

Not a gratuitous swipe as it is a teaching of Joseph Smith. Once again to explain my point of view based on Biblical teaching.

I'm saying the English is based on what is in the Hebrew.

The plural allows for the three in the Godhead and yet still the one God of monotheism.

[danielwoods]

I asked you if these false gods are in heaven.

No.

[danielwoods]

I agree there is a double meaning, but not the one you see. The "dead" can refer to those that are spiritually dead - that is separated from God. But there is no getting around the part where it says "all those who are in their graves will hear his voice.

Now, if we look at verse 24, that lays the groundwork of who will not come into condemnation, and who will pass from death into life.

Now let me ask you, how can anyone who was already dead and buried have heard "His word and believe in him who sent me?"

I will tell you it is answered in verse 28 - All those in the grave, or in other words, the abode of the dead, will hear His voice. His word will be preached. That is when they will have the opportunity to accept or reject the gospel. Then when the resurrection comes all will have had the opportunity to Hear the Word of God and have no excuse.

You say: "Notice there is no mention of those hearing his voice and repenting,", but it is right there is the scriptures, plain as day.

Please quote for me where it states that the dead are able to hear and repent.

What it states is that they hear and rise. It doesn't say repent.

 

 

 

Um... no. The first part does not have anything to do with his soul, but only that he died - it is a euphemism for death. The second part simply states he was buried.

You are correct it's a description for death. Just like when Jacob died (Gen. 49:33) "he drew his feet up into the bed, breathed his last and was gathered to his people."

Then over two months later he was buried. The euphemism is a description of what happened to his soul not his body. David also went to his people.

 

 

 

Except that David was not always faithful. He sinned very grievous sins. As a result verses 8-11 describe not a reward, but punishments from God for his actions.

Now don't get me wrong, David was a very exceptional king, hand picked by God, his reign was a golden age of Israel and his accomplishments were great. But as a result of his sins, he suffered personally.

And yet despite this Israel was blessed because of David, and rewarded with a successor. If David wasn't faithful, no successor would have followed.

The curious thing is why "very grievous sins" aren't forgiven in LDS Doctrine?

 

 

 

In Psalm 86:13 David writes that his soul is delivered from the "lowest hell". If "hell" is sheol, then what would you think is the "lowest sheol".... paradise or prison?

You're not claiming that David was in that location while writing are you? So what is your point then?

[thesometimesaint]

There is only one unforgivable sin for LDS. That is not to repent.

[coolrok7]

Jesus in Mark 13:29: GOD is one quoting from the Hebrew Schema, monotheism. You can be a polytheist all you want as it applies. It doesn' apply to me. The three of the Godhead are the one God by nature as there are no others (who are God by nature) without violating the term. No one else will make it.

One can worship people/angels/things but that doesn't make them/it God by nature.

Edited October 10, 2014 by coolrok7

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

No.

So there there are no false gods in heaven. So that means they are real? Pauls says "Weather in heaven or earth".

Edited October 10, 2014 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Please quote for me where it states that the dead are able to hear and repent.

 

This

 

Now let me ask you, how can anyone who was already dead and buried have heard "His word and believe in him who sent me?"

[danielwoods]

So there there are no false gods in heaven. So that means they are real? Pauls says "Weather in heaven or earth".

 

There are not any other real Gods. There is but one true God.

Are there other so called gods? Of course. But, they aren't real.

This

Now let me ask you, how can anyone who was already dead and buried have heard "His word and believe in him who sent me?"

Why are you quoting someone who misquoted the text in the first place?

That's why I asked the question.

Here is what the passage states:

John 5:24 - 28

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.

25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Notice that he is talking to people who are listening to his word in present tense they aren't physically dead yet. They are living. Speaking to them that "hearth my word..." and believe, has everlasting life, but has passed from death to life, right now. Not later.

Then in verse 25, speaking about a future event, called the resurrection of the righteous, those dead shall hear and live, as the Prophet Daniel also spoke about. Others will hear and be judged. No mention of repentance after our physical death.

[Flyonthewall]

Please quote for me where it states that the dead are able to hear and repent.

What it states is that they hear and rise. It doesn't say repent.

It sounds like you object to the repentance part of the gospel. Do you believe repentance should not be offered to those that have had no opportunity?

If I understand what you are stating, they will hear the gospel but have no opportunity to do anything with it, and simply rise to condemnation...?

You are correct it's a description for death. Just like when Jacob died (Gen. 49:33) "he drew his feet up into the bed, breathed his last and was gathered to his people."

Then over two months later he was buried. The euphemism is a description of what happened to his soul not his body. David also went to his people.

where does that euphemism come from - where else is it used, and where does it indicate it is the status of their soul instead of the body?

 

And yet despite this Israel was blessed because of David, and rewarded with a successor. If David wasn't faithful, no successor would have followed.

The curious thing is why "very grievous sins" aren't forgiven in LDS Doctrine?

David's successor was rewarded for his faithfulness. There are plenty of instances where a wicked king had a a successor. If what you propose is factual, wicked kings would not have a successor.

Grievous sins are forgivable. David was forgiven, that is why his soul would not be left in the lowest hell.

You're not claiming that David was in that location while writing are you? So what is your point then?

No. He did receive an assurance that his soul would not be left there. He is still redeemed to a kingdom of glory.

[Flyonthewall]

There are not any other real Gods. There is but one true God.

Are there other so called gods? Of course. But, they aren't real.

Why are you quoting someone who misquoted the text in the first place?

That's why I asked the question.

Here is what the passage states:

John 5:24 - 28

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.

25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Notice that he is talking to people who are listening to his word in present tense they aren't physically dead yet. They are living. Speaking to them that "hearth my word..." and believe, has everlasting life, but has passed from death to life, right now. Not later.

Then in verse 25, speaking about a future event, called the resurrection of the righteous, those dead shall hear and live, as the Prophet Daniel also spoke about. Others will hear and be judged. No mention of repentance after our physical death.

Please address verse 28 where those in the graves will hear the gospel. If there is no opportunity to repent once they have heard the gospel, to what end is the gospel preached?

Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? (1 Corinthians 15:29).

[EllenMaksoud]

I am not asking if Mormons are Christians.  I know that's  been debated ad nauseam.  I am asking if it is possible for ANY mormon to be a Christian.

 

If I accept Christ as my savior, can I be a Christian?  If I accept the Christ of the Bible as my Savior.  If I have a personal relationship with him, know that I am a sinner, and know that it is by his grace that I am saved.

 

I am very familiar with the standard arguments against this concept.  That I worship a different Jesus.  That to be Mormon I must believe in being saved by works and therefore can't receive God's grace.  What I am getting at is, is it possible for any one Mormon to be a Christian in your eyes (and presumably in the eyes of God) while still remaining a Mormon.  What would have to happen in order for this to be the case?

 

(btw - I am not baiting anyone here.  I am attending a Christian university and have been absolutely blown away by how well my Christian friends treat their Mormon classmates.  This really got me thinking about this.)

Well, I am not just sure if I am Mormon or Muslim since our two faiths connect at so many points. Were I still Evangelical, they would be frothing at the mouth over that. In the Mormon faith, there are not statements like "All Muslims will go to Hell", (John Hagee). There is reasonable freedom to pray, study and ponder. I can still remember in my old EV church when I said I had issue with the Trinity. That Revelation 22:19 does not preclude further revelation, simply because, the bible in its entirety did not exist at the time. The statement was applicable to Revelations only.

 

There are other areas where the Mormons will allow a discussion, but in my old denomination, you would be seen as a heretic.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

 

There are not any other real Gods. There is but one true God.

Are there other so called gods? Of course. But, they aren't real.

 

So what you are saying is that false or fake gods exist in heaven. How does that work exactly? What are they doing in heaven if they are fake? If Paul said "earth" only then you would have a point. But since he mentions heaven you don't. Only real things exist in heaven.

 

 

Just saying "There is but one true God" does not attempt to understand the faulty of your logic.

Edited October 10, 2014 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Why are you quoting someone who misquoted the text in the first place?

That's why I asked the question.

Here is what the passage states:

John 5:24 - 28

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.

25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Notice that he is talking to people who are listening to his word in present tense they aren't physically dead yet. They are living. Speaking to them that "hearth my word..." and believe, has everlasting life, but has passed from death to life, right now. Not later.

Then in verse 25, speaking about a future event, called the resurrection of the righteous, those dead shall hear and live, as the Prophet Daniel also spoke about. Others will hear and be judged. No mention of repentance after our physical death.

This is getting old.

 

"25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."

 

What is the point of "the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God (Jesus) if, as you say, the judgment happens at death, if they clearly are able to hear after being dead and they hear and shall live? All future tense stuff. "Shall live" indicates that at their current status they are dead. All shall be resurrected who lived so it cant be talking about that kind of "live". It must be talking about "live" being salvation. So, they hear the Son of God while being dead (in the grave) and then act on what they hear and accept Jesus, then they are saved and are living.

 

It at the very least puts to rest your silly notion that the judgement happens at death. That is false. So if that is false what else can we learn about the fate of man between death and judgement. What else is going on?

[EllenMaksoud]

Sorry, but you are reading into it something that is NOT there.

It does not express or imply that the sin was forgiven.

 

You are missing something that is there.

5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

So, you are claiming that these other gods that are in heaven are not real? So Paul lied to us?

Then why are they in heaven? How could they be in heaven?

Is this another incidence where you don't believe what it says so you are going to tell us it doesn't mean what it says?

 

You do know that the "tri" in trinity means three, right? That alone makes you as much a polytheist as any Mormon.

I like your take on this and wish that we could sit and study. That however is not possible.

 

The Trinity idea was first espoused around 325 AD. It seems that by that time Constantine was busy taking the church on an Apostate course. The thing that interferes with the Trinity for me is the first Commandment back in Exodus 20:3, and my partial adherence to Islam.

 

In my opinion, the truth is skillfully concealed in a nightmare of truth and deceit from centuries of historians pitching the story to suit the needs of their group or the one who paid them. In my opinion, the Mormons are about as close as anyone to correcting this.

[danielwoods]

It sounds like you object to the repentance part of the gospel. Do you believe repentance should not be offered to those that have had no opportunity?

If I understand what you are stating, they will hear the gospel but have no opportunity to do anything with it, and simply rise to condemnation...?

First I notice that you cannot answer my question with a direct quote as I asked for, "Please quote for me where it states that the dead are able to hear and repent."

What I object to is using the Bible to say things it doesn't say. That is why I asked where does it say this or that. It's a very simple concept. The LDS do not get this teaching from the Bible, that is my point.

I think it would be great if everyone could repent after we die. That would be cool, sure, let's go with that. Now where's the evidence that this is true? It's simply not there. Rather, what the Infinite and all knowing God says is that all are without excuse, and that the glory of God and his invisible attributes are known to all because of creation.

where does that euphemism come from - where else is it used, and where does it indicate it is the status of their soul instead of the body?

The common word for “grave” in the Old Testament is queber. Of the sixty-four times it is used, it is translated “grave” thirty-four times, “sepulcher” twenty-six times, and “burying place” four times. Queber is used five additional times as part of a place name, Kibroth-hattaavah, which means “graves of lust.” As we said earlier, Sheol is found sixty-four times, being rendered “grave” thirty-one times, “hell” thirty-one times, and “pit” three times.

A comparison of how Sheol and queber are used reveals eight points of contrast that tell us that they are not the same thing.

1. Sheol is never used in plural form. Queber is used in the plural 29 times.

2. It is never said that the body goes to Sheol. Queber speaks of the body going there 37 times.

3. Sheol is never said to be located on the face of the earth. Queber is mentioned 32 times as being located on the earth.

4. An individual’s Sheol is never mentioned. An individual’s queber is mentioned 5 times.

5. Man is never said to put anyone into Sheol. Individuals are put into a queber by man (33 times).

6. Man is never said to have dug or fashioned a Sheol. Man is said to have dug, or fashioned, a queber (6 times).

7. Man is never said to have touched Sheol. Man touches, or can touch, a queber (5 times).

8. It is never said that man is able to possess a Sheol. Man is spoken of as being able to possess a queber (7 times). (These eight points of comparison are adapted from “Life and Death” by Caleb J. Baker, Bible Institute Colportage ***’n, 1941).

 

David's successor was rewarded for his faithfulness. There are plenty of instances where a wicked king had a a successor. If what you propose is factual, wicked kings would not have a successor.'

Rather, what I quoted is factual. It was Israel who was rewarded for David's faithfulness. Later Israel was punished, and the kingdoms were split and captive to their enemies.

Grievous sins are forgivable. David was forgiven, that is why his soul would not be left in the lowest hell.

If it was forgiven, then why was he punished after he died?

No. He did receive an assurance that his soul would not be left there. He is still redeemed to a kingdom of glory.

It actually doesn't say any of that. It's a psalm about how he feels. Please point to where you are getting these ideas?

[danielwoods]

Please address verse 28 where those in the graves will hear the gospel. If there is no opportunity to repent once they have heard the gospel, to what end is the gospel preached?

28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned."

Where does it say in verse 28 that they are hearing the gospel? Rather, it says they will hear his voice and then come out.

Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? (1 Corinthians 15:29).

1 Cor. 15:29 - "29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them? 30 And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour?"

If you think that Paul is promoting baptism for the dead, he is not. Notice the start of verse 30 where he juxtaposes that with, "And as for us...." Indicating that Christians don't baptize for the dead at all. Rather, he's arguing for the validity of an afterlife and brings "those people" into his argument, as a way of cultural context to support his argument, because everyone knew "those people" that do those things. But, as for us, we don't do that. By way of contrast, we endanger ourselves every hour..."

[danielwoods]

So what you are saying is that false or fake gods exist in heaven. How does that work exactly? What are they doing in heaven if they are fake? If Paul said "earth" only then you would have a point. But since he mentions heaven you don't. Only real things exist in heaven.

 

 

Just saying "There is but one true God" does not attempt to understand the faulty of your logic.

I never said that false or fake gods exist in heaven.

Let's look at what Paul said.

1 Cor. 8:4 "We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”),..."

Notice that Paul is not claiming what you think he's claiming. He is not saying that there are other gods in heaven. Rather, he's saying even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as claimed by those who think there are other gods) we serve the one true God. His following statement, "there are many "gods" and many "lords" is a reference to people who pretend to be gods and lords (ever hear of Caesar, who claimed to be "god"?).

[Flyonthewall]

First I notice that you cannot answer my question with a direct quote as I asked for, "Please quote for me where it states that the dead are able to hear and repent."

What I object to is using the Bible to say things it doesn't say. That is why I asked where does it say this or that. It's a very simple concept. The LDS do not get this teaching from the Bible, that is my point.

The ironic thing about this is that you have never been able to give a direct quote for anything that supports your interpretation. The context of John 5 states unequivocally that the gospel will be preached. Verse 24 states vey plainly He that heareth my word... - His word is the Gospel. The next few verses are in the context of verse 24 and hearing His word. He goes on the say both the living and the dead will hear his voice. And what will His voice be? His voice is his message, and that is the Gospel.

I think it would be great if everyone could repent after we die. That would be cool, sure, let's go with that. Now where's the evidence that this is true? It's simply not there. Rather, what the Infinite and all knowing God says is that all are without excuse, and that the glory of God and his invisible attributes are known to all because of creation.

I never said everyone will have the opportunity to repent after we die... only those that never had the opporunity in this life.

The common word for “grave” in the Old Testament is queber. Of the sixty-four times it is used, it is translated “grave” thirty-four times, “sepulcher” twenty-six times, and “burying place” four times. Queber is used five additional times as part of a place name, Kibroth-hattaavah, which means “graves of lust.” As we said earlier, Sheol is found sixty-four times, being rendered “grave” thirty-one times, “hell” thirty-one times, and “pit” three times.

A comparison of how Sheol and queber are used reveals eight points of contrast that tell us that they are not the same thing.

1. Sheol is never used in plural form. Queber is used in the plural 29 times.

2. It is never said that the body goes to Sheol. Queber speaks of the body going there 37 times.

3. Sheol is never said to be located on the face of the earth. Queber is mentioned 32 times as being located on the earth.

4. An individual’s Sheol is never mentioned. An individual’s queber is mentioned 5 times.

5. Man is never said to put anyone into Sheol. Individuals are put into a queber by man (33 times).

6. Man is never said to have dug or fashioned a Sheol. Man is said to have dug, or fashioned, a queber (6 times).

7. Man is never said to have touched Sheol. Man touches, or can touch, a queber (5 times).

8. It is never said that man is able to possess a Sheol. Man is spoken of as being able to possess a queber (7 times). (These eight points of comparison are adapted from “Life and Death” by Caleb J. Baker, Bible Institute Colportage ***’n, 1941).

This is all very interesting but does not say anything to what I requested - that is where is the passage you cited used as a euphemism for the state of the soul and not death.

 

Rather, what I quoted is factual. It was Israel who was rewarded for David's faithfulness. Later Israel was punished, and the kingdoms were split and captive to their enemies.

Factual hmm... so no wicked king had a successor. Only faithful kings had successors? Israel was rewarded while David was faithful, but how does Israel rewarded when their king is suffering from feuds and open rebellion within his own family? Remember the sword would never depart from his house, and God would raise up evil from within his own house.

If it was forgiven, then why was he punished after he died?

Why was he continued to be punished after he was forgiven? For the rest of his life...?

It actually doesn't say any of that. It's a psalm about how he feels. Please point to where you are getting these ideas?

From the words of David that are scripture. And it does say exactly that. I quoted it.

[Anakin7]

    Okay one more time, coolrok which form/model of the Trinity is the absolute correct Biblicaly - Athanasious

,Augustine,Bultman, Western,Eastern,Economic,Essential,Social  ?. The one you see in O.T/N.T scripture which one fits perfectly. Others make the same statement as you regarding there form/model of The Trinity and is to be found Biblicaly. And there attitude about this is the same as yours.

 

in His Debt/Grace

       Anakin7

Edited October 11, 2014 by Anakin7

[Flyonthewall]

28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned."

Where does it say in verse 28 that they are hearing the gospel? Rather, it says they will hear his voice and then come out.

Just what will His voice convey? What message will His voice bring? Verse 24 - His word.

1 Cor. 15:29 - "29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them? 30 And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour?"

If you think that Paul is promoting baptism for the dead, he is not. Notice the start of verse 30 where he juxtaposes that with, "And as for us...." Indicating that Christians don't baptize for the dead at all. Rather, he's arguing for the validity of an afterlife and brings "those people" into his argument, as a way of cultural context to support his argument, because everyone knew "those people" that do those things. But, as for us, we don't do that. By way of contrast, we endanger ourselves every hour..."

This is a case where the exact quote from the scriptures is used and you still say it doesn't mean what it says.

Notice he is using and existing practice of the church to validate an afterlife. Why in the world would he use a practice by "non-christians" to validate a Christian concept? Really?

Notice that even when it is spelled out explicitly in the scriptures there are denials of what the scriptures say. That is called twisting and perverting the scriptures to fit your own agenda.

The "And for us..." that you cite does not indicate anything of the sort. The "And for us" relates to what comes next....why were they in jeopardy every hour..., not previous. The whole of verse 30 relates to what is said next. Read the next few verses... specifically 32.