Dear Evangelical Friends: Can A Mormon Be A Christian?

[coolrok7]

I don't deny that works are a product of having faith which produces the works that follow but what Paul taught is not what Joseph Smith taught by adding "after all we can do". Its not there in the text. By grace through faith, not of works is there in what Paul wrote as translated into English (KJV).

[boblloyd91]

Hi Halconero! Where could I read more about the ancient understanding of grace?

[halconero]

I don't deny that works are a product of having faith which produces the works that follow but what Paul taught is not what Joseph Smith taught by adding "after all we can do". Its not there in the text. By grace through faith, not of works is there in what Paul wrote as translated into English (KJV).

 

If you read the passages following the verse in 2 Nephi, the writer's meaning becomes clear. He goes on to say that works of the law are dead to the Nephites because of their faith in Christ, and that they only keep them because the law has not been fulfilled yet. In other words, the addition of "after all we can do" is not a reference to our need to expend all our mortal energies before we obtain grace, rather it's Nephi's way of saying that "all we can do" is insufficient, that the works of the law are dead, and that it is the grace of Christ which saves.

[halconero]

Hi Halconero! Where could I read more about the ancient understanding of grace?

 

I'm away from my computer at home for the moment, I'll be back around 8:00 PM Pacific, and will try to post some stuff then.

[coolrok7]

The whole BofM is a plagiarized work, New Testament stories in Old Testament times.

[halconero]

The whole BofM is a plagiarized work, New Testament stories in Old Testament times.

That is a phenomenal response. Your debating skills are without peer.

Edited July 27, 2014 by halconero

[Vance]

The whole BofM is a plagiarized work, New Testament stories in Old Testament times.

LOL!!!!

[Anakin7]

    I see that our Lutheran friend coolrok is back !.

 

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

[coolrok7]

You already announced that back in post #32 Anakin7. I didn't go anywhere. I see clear enough to know that I've removed the motes and beams that you falsely accuse me of continually. How about you're own. I'm responding to the question of the thread as well as the comments of others.

 

Remember, you were the one who originally invited me here from ZLMB.

Edited July 27, 2014 by coolrok7

[wenglund]

Yes, I was going to get back to the passage in Matthew 7 about getting the log out of our own eyes before we take the speck out of another's eye.  There is an implicit command there: we really ought to try and help our brother get stuff out of his eye!  And if I think my neighbor is lost I have to tell him so, regardless of whether they share my religion.

 

That is the spirit of the NT: the gospel judges the pluralistic society around it as lost and offers Jesus instead.

 

I don't think you got the gist of what I said. I wonder if this is because you are conflating actions/beliefs with labels (like "Christian")? Matt 7 applies to the former and not the later.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[boblloyd91]

@ coolrok7:thank you for responding to the op. I have a question for you. You just barely said that the Book of Mormon is a plagiarized work. You have also said several times that the first vision and Moroni were demonic manifestations. Could you explain to us how you feel the narrative of the founding of Mormonism occurred? In my view I don't understand exactly where you are coming from....it seems like you believe something supernatural happened (albeit sinister) yet you also feel the Book of Mormon is plagiarism. Do you mean man made plagiarism?

[Anakin7]

    Coolrok7 my Lutheran friend thank you for your reply. Yes I did make that observation back in post #32 which from my lights and others lights it is still is in effect. You misunderstood my "your back" statement I made, I know that you still visit here but you have not continiously been here during the whole duration of the thread 24/7 which is what I was referring to  when I said "your back". You state that you have removed the motes and beams to see clearly but your posts show/prove otherwise from what we LDS see and read here of your posts. Remember it was this same busybody/prattter shutting up the kingdom to LDS posts that has got you banned in the past from this board a # of times. This is a discussion board not a attack/criticize LDS board. Try gentleness/meekness which the Apostle Peter shared in scripture. Try love it goes a long way. You are still misreading/misinterpeting 2 Nephi 25:23. Try reading it through the anchient True Hebrew/Israelite/Saint/Christian client patron system not a employer/employee system that you constantly use against us on this topic. Yes I am still a work in progress and am trying to remove those things in my life that affect my behaviour by way of Christ Jesus, My LORD OF LIFE/LORD/MASTER/REDEEMER/SAVIOUR/GOD/KING. I suggest rereading halconero's post #228 and # 238 - right after this post. Yes I did invite you here in the past which on occassion I regret,

 

IN HIS DEBT/GRACE

        Anakin7

Edited July 28, 2014 by Anakin7

[halconero]

Hi Halconero! Where could I read more about the ancient understanding of grace?

 

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ashland_theological_journal/31-1_032.pdf

 

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you. This article is an excellent summary of grace, patronage, and reciprocity as contained in the New Testament. The gist of it is that we have modernized the concept of grace beyond its original meaning. Here are some key quotes:

 

- "For the actual writers and readers of the New Testament, however, "grace" was not primarily a religious, as opposed to secular, word: rather it was used to speak of reciprocity among human beings and between mortals and God (or, in pagan literature, the gods). This single word encapsulated the entire ethos of the relationships we have been describing."

 

- "The fact that one and the same word can be used to speak of a beneficent act and the response to a beneficent act suggests implicitly what many moralists from the Greek and Roman cultures stated explicitly: "grace" must be met with "grace," favor must always give birth to favor, gift must always be met with gratitude."

 

- "An act of favor and its manifestation (the gift) initiate a circle dance in which the recipients of favor and gifts must "return the favor," that is, give again to the giver (both in terms of a generous disposition and in terms of some gift, whether material or otherwise). Only a gift requited is a gift well and nobly received. To fail to return favor for favor is, in effect, to break off the dance and destroy the beauty of the gracious act." 

 

- "It is worth noting at this point that "faith" (Latin,fides; Greek, pistis) is a term also very much at home in patron-client and friendship relations, and had, like "grace," a variety of meanings as the context shifted from the patron's " faith" to the client's "faith." In one sense, "faith" meant "dependability." The patron needed to prove himself or herself reliable in providing the assistance he or she promised to grant; the client needed to "keep faith" as well, in the sense of showing loyalty and commitment to the patron and to his or her obligations of gratitude. A second meaning is the more familiar sense of "trust": the client had to "trust" the good will and ability of the patron to whom he entrusted his need, that the latter would indeed perform what he promised, while the benefactor would also have to trust the recipients to act nobly and make a grateful response. In Seneca's words, once a gift was given there was "no law [that can] restore you to your original estate -look only to the good faith (fidem) of the recipient" (Ben. 3.14.2)."

 

- "For such converts, God's "grace" (charis) would not be of a different kind than the "grace" with which they were already familiar: it would be understood as different only in quality and degree. Moreover, they would know that the reception of gifts "given freely" laid the recipients under obligation to respond with grace to match (insofar as possible), with the result that much exhortation in the New Testament falls within the scope of directing believers to a proper, "grateful response" to God's favor."

 

- "We come at last to what is surprising about God's grace. It is not that God gives "freely and uncoerced": every benefactor, in theory at least, did this. God goes far beyond the high-water mark of generosity set by Seneca, which was for virtuous people to consider even giving to the ungrateful (if they had resources to spare after benefitting the virtuous). To provide some modest assistance to those who had failed to be grateful in the past would be accounted a proof of great generosity, but God shows the supreme, fullest generosity (not just what God has to spare!) toward those who are God's enemies (not just ingrates, but those who have been actively hostile to God and God's desires). This is an outgrowth of God's determination to be "kind"n even "toward the ungrateful [acharistous] and the wicked" (Lk 6:35). God's selection of his enemies as beneficiaries of his most costly gift is one area in which God's favor truly stands out."

 

- (this is probably one of the most important) "One of the more important contributions an awareness of the ethos of "grace" in the first-century world can make is implanting is our minds the necessary connection between receiving and responding, between "favor" and "gratitude" in its fullest sense. Because we think about the "grace" of God through the lens of sixteenth-century Protestant polemics against "earning salvation by means of pious works," we have a difficult time hearing the New Testament's own affinnation of the simple, yet noble and beautiful, circle of grace. God has acted generously, and Jesus has granted great and wonderful gifts. These were not earned, but "grace" is never earned in the ancient world (this, again, is not something that sets New Testament "grace" apart from everyday "grace"). Once favor has been shown and gifts conferred, however, the result must invariably be that the recipient will show gratitude, will answer "grace" with "grace." The indicative and the imperative of the New Testament are held together by this circle of grace: we must respond generously and fully, for God has given generously and fully."

[Vance]

That gives clarification to the verse,

John 1:16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.

As well as these,

Hel 12:24 And may God grant, in his great fulness, that men might be brought unto repentance and good works, that they might be restored unto grace for grace, according to their works.

D&C 93:12 And I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace;

• • •

20 For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace.

Edited July 28, 2014 by Vance

[halconero]

That gives clarification to the verse,

John 1:16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.

As well as these,

Hel 12:24 And may God grant, in his great fulness, that men might be brought unto repentance and good works, that they might be restored unto grace for grace, according to their works.

D&C 93:12 And I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace;

• • •

20 For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace.

 

Exactly. To further the point, the beneficiaries of grace, whether or not the benefactors were mortal or deities, were restricted in how to respond with grace. Many times they could not reciprocate with material wealth, and so their response was to show pistis (loyalty, trust, devotion, adherence, faithfulness), give praise, and follow the counsel of the benefactor. A mortal-to-mortal example would be the patronage between Tullius Cicero and his clients. He provided them with legal aid, and would give them money in times of need. In return they would follow him through the street, shouting his praises, studying his books and adhering to his philosophies, and surrounded his house when threatened by the second triumvirate.

 

A deity-to-mortal example would be the city of Athens. The goddess, Athena would provide the city with wisdom, divine protection, and favour, and in return the city offered her praise, sacrifice, and temples. Their response could obviously not match the divine aid of the deity, but they could match her grace with their material grace.

 

If we believe that grace and patronage was any different in the writings of the early apostles, we are wrong. The grace (favour) of God enables men to be saved. Men however, must meet this grace with adherence to God's teachings, sing him praises, give thanksgiving, and spread his message. It is not that these acts earn us grace, but rather, they are the response to grace. Without the response the "dance of grace", as the author puts it, is broken. The two commonly wrong views are that 1) grace saves, and our works have no part in our salvation, because that would be "earning grace" and 2) that obedience to the commandments earns us a place in Heaven. The proper understanding of grace and works as discussed by Paul and other apostles is that God and Jesus shower divine, saving favour on the believers, which grace enables the believer to "do all things through Christ who strengthens [them]." All these good things, including service, praise, and missionary work, are the gracious response to God. Grace and grace are reciprocated unto a receiving of a fullness.

[Anakin7]

      Or in other words as Craig Blomberg said in "How Wide The Divide" - "Salvation is absolutly Free but it costs us our very lives". Or in other words it is our surrender of our complete life to God/Jesus/Holy Ghost - The " all we can do " that accepts/access/activates the gift of the awesome atoning blood sacrifice of the saviour. We must follow him to show honor/respectto him/them  in our lives .

 

In His Debt/Grace

       Anakin7

Edited July 28, 2014 by Anakin7

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

If we believe that grace and patronage was any different in the writings of the early apostles, we are wrong. The grace (favour) of God enables men to be saved. Men however, must meet this grace with adherence to God's teachings, sing him praises, give thanksgiving, and spread his message. It is not that these acts earn us grace, but rather, they are the response to grace. Without the response the "dance of grace", as the author puts it, is broken. The two commonly wrong views are that 1) grace saves, and our works have no part in our salvation, because that would be "earning grace" and 2) that obedience to the commandments earns us a place in Heaven. The proper understanding of grace and works as discussed by Paul and other apostles is that God and Jesus shower divine, saving favour on the believers, which grace enables the believer to "do all things through Christ who strengthens [them]." All these good things, including service, praise, and missionary work, are the gracious response to God. Grace and grace are reciprocated unto a receiving of a fullness.

 

Just have to be careful here because EVies just say that "Works will follow but are not necessary" or specifically that works follow grace. I have stated that works and faith allow grace to save us. Or something like that. Ha.

Edited July 28, 2014 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[coolrok7]

boblloyd91, I have jury duty today and only have my cell phone with me.

Will answer later when I have my laptop. There are multiple possibilities to explain Joseph Smith and his claims. Probably a combination of several things. Certainly a spiritual influence but not necessarily of God.

[coolrok7]

Sorry, double post.

Edited July 28, 2014 by coolrok7

[halconero]

Just have to be careful here because EVies just say that "Works will follow but are not necessary" or specifically that works follow grace. I have stated that works and faith allow grace to save us. Or something like that. Ha.

No reason to be careful at all, I'm not trying to posit a theological point, but a historical one. The problem with theology is that it often presumes a point-of-view and then imposes it on evidence. Which is what many Evangelical churches have done.

I would add something to your statement. Works and Faith allow grace to save us, and grace allows works and faith to save us. Salvation is based on reciprocity in New Testament writings. Not that we save God, but that saving grace enables saving works and faith, which enables further saving grace, which enables further saving works and faith.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

No reason to be careful at all, I'm not trying to posit a theological point, but a historical one. The problem with theology is that it often presumes a point-of-view and then imposes it on evidence. Which is what many Evangelical churches have done.

I would add something to your statement. Works and Faith allow grace to save us, and grace allows works and faith to save us. Salvation is based on reciprocity in New Testament writings. Not that we save God, but that saving grace enables saving works and faith, which enables further saving grace, which enables further saving works and faith.

Yeah I agree, you need all 3 to be saved. Good points.

[coolrok7]

Anakin7, salvation, escape from an eternal punishment, is by grace through faith, not of works (meriting eternal life is not in Paul's teaching).

[Zakuska]

Coolrok7, halconero, mola rom suda rom,

See my sigline below.

Edited July 31, 2014 by Zakuska

[Vance]

Anakin7, salvation, escape from an eternal punishment, is by grace through faith, not of works . . .

If you really understood what Paul was talking about, you would know that what he really meant was, "We are saved by grace (ie, obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ), not by works (of the law of Moses)".

 

(meriting eternal life is not in Paul's teaching).

Oh, but it is.

Rom 2:6 (God) Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, ETERNAL LIFE:

8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

More importantly, it is also in Jesus' teachings.

Matt 19:16 . . . Good Master, what good thing shall I DO, that I may have eternal life?

17 . . . but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Matt 25:31 ¶ When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Luke 10:25 ¶ And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I DO to inherit eternal life?

26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?

27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this DO, and thou shalt live.

Edited July 31, 2014 by Vance

[coolrok7]

Post #236- boblloyd91:

 

You asked me where I'm coming from. Per the Old/New Testament, as descendants of Adam and Eve, we are (indirectly) created physical beings with a spiritual component (only Adam was formed out of the dust of the earth with Eve then being made from a part of Adam as an helpmeet for him).

 

The rest of us are a product of a sexual union initially between them and eventually from others, born as their descendants.

 

The joining of the sperm and egg is the beginning process of our physical/spiritual beings (not preexisting as spirits). The norm being the sexual union of a man and a woman but in today's technology can be done in various ways without the sexual union being involved (initially between Adam and Eve and eventually from others, born as their descendants).

 

We've inherited the punishment of death, the root cause being their initial disobedience in which we are held culpable for our own sin, not theirs (the wages of sin is death).

 

It is at death that these two components of our being separate (the body without the spirit is dead per James).

 

The message of the Biblical Gospel is that one can be saved from an eternal punishment in hell by believing that Jesus died to pay for our sin (a product of our sinful nature which is what separates us from a relationship God. This can only be had through faith which is not a birthright of being human. This is why Jesus said we must be born again (a spiritual rebirth so to speak) when He was talking with Nicodemus.

 

At Judgment Day, there will be a resurrection of the dead followed by separation of the sheep and the goats as stated by Jesus (Matthew 25).

 

There are two destinations, the sheep are going to be with God (typically being referred to as "going to heaven"), having eternal life (being the gift not resurrection as taught in Mormonism) in "paradise". For the goats, in eternal punishment (typically referred to as "going to hell"), existing eternally like the sheep as well but not the promised "eternal life".

 

Mormonism (Mormons not necessarily being Christians although individuals can be depending on what they ultimately believe that is Christian; the danger being mixing up Mormon Doctrine with Christian Doctrine, neutralizing it's eternal benefits) are coming from an entirely different perspective (with different end results), being developed from Joseph Smith's claims. Using a yes plagiarized, also modified somewhat Biblical history and in addition, three other works of so-called "Scripture".

 

Of course Joseph Smith (others as well) could have been called by God but I think the evidence points to the source of Joseph's teaching being identified as the, "god of this world", warned about by Jesus and others who also wrote what is identified as Scripture (the sixty-six books of the Bible) , not the actual God of our salvation revealed in Biblical Revelation.