Dear Evangelical Friends: Can A Mormon Be A Christian?

[KevinG]

You got me!! Bandwagon's are terribly irresistible.

 

Your point has some validity.  We should be careful that our propaganda generates the results we intend.  

[danielwoods]

Perhaps I did misunderstand what you were referring to as temporary.

For all those that have had the gospel preached to them, death is the end of their chance.

In LDS theology this mortal life is the time to repent see Alma 34:33

"33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed."

But this is directed at those that have been taught the gospel.

Those that have had no chance to hear the gospel do not even know there is a need for repentance.

This is repeated by you and LDS teachings, however it is not a teaching derived from the bible.

 

 

"Them" in verse 19 refers back to "they who hold the truth in unrighteousness" in verse 18. The "truth" in verse 18 refers to the "righteousness of God" in verse 17, which is the Gospel of Jesus Christ announced in verse 16.

As you can plainly see it is not referring to "anyone" in general, but anyone who has heard the gospel of Jesus Christ.

What you are stating is not found in the text. The text states, that God has shown himself to them by his creation. It does not say that they have heard the gospel preached as you claim.

 

 

I believe I understand what you are trying to say, but according to Romans 10, what other way does faith come? How can one have faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ, if they have never heard of it? The atonement is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Is this what is revealed to a Buddhist? or a Shintoist? or a Pagan? or an Animist? or Hindu? or an Atheist? People who have never heard of Jesus Christ? A general belief in God is not enough. Someone who believes Vishnu is God, or Buddha or a tree, or some other name cannot be saved in the name of Jesus Christ because they do not know it. How can one have faith in Jesus if they do not know the name? Can faith in some other name save?

Jesus was all about preaching and missionary work to the entire world...If preaching is so irrelevant, why would Jesus command the preaching of His Gospel, when "general revelation" is good enough? Such a waste of time and effort to do missionary work when God will do it Himself(and since the bulk of all who have lived on earth have never heard of Jesus Christ, God is the one that had to have done it).

There are too many things about the scriptures that have to be ignored or outright opposed in your version.

Your argument is both false and hypocritical, especially considering the origins of the LDS church. You don't believe that Jesus visited the Nephites or Joseph Smith?

This can't happen? http://www.charismanews.com/world/33713-dreams-visions-moving-muslims-to-christ

IS that what you are saying?

And exactly where does the bolded (above) teaching come from? I haven't ever seen a source for it.

Edited October 21, 2014 by danielwoods

[dberrie2000]

    Db I agree, remember historicaly James wrote that scripture to those that only had an head knowledge of Faith - pistis [ antinomianism] with no Grace activated empowered works !.

In His Debt/Grace

       Anakin7

 

 

I believe that. One of the problems with deciphering theology in the Biblical NT text is the use of terms. "Works", to Paul--represented certain rituals under the Mosaic Law--"works" to James represented obedience to Christ.

 

That is where the New Perspective of the scholars comes in--rightly dividing the meaning of the term "works".

 

One just cannot collate Paul's use of the term "works" as meaning obedience to Christ--and connect that to Paul's other writings, IE---

 

Romans 2:5-11---King James Version (KJV)

⁵ But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

⁶ 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:

¹¹ For there is no respect of persons with God.

 

There has to be an answer for the obvious contradiction. Either Paul was a deceiver, and a confused theologian--or Paul meant something outside of obedience to Jesus Christ, when he used the term "works", for the main.

[Vance]

This is repeated by you and LDS teachings, however it is not a teaching derived from the bible.

It is like you have never studied the Bible. And like you ignore the posts here that show you to be wrong.

From post #1302

 

1.Matt. 4:17 ¶ From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

2.Matt. 12:41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

3.Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

4.Mark 6:12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent.

5.Luke 3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;

6.Luke 11:32 The men of Nineve shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

7.Luke 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

8.Acts 13:24 When John had first preached before his coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.

If people, who have never heard the gospel, already know that repentance is part of that unknown gospel, THEN why is repentance commanded to be preached?

Just more silliness from you.

 

What you are stating is not found in the text. The text states, that God has shown himself to them by his creation. It does not say that they have heard the gospel preached as you claim.

Your logic is flawed.

The epistle was written to members of the church who had been taught the truth. The verse is referring to those that know the truth, yet disregard it. The only way to know the truth is to be taught it.

You are being ridiculous, just to maintain your untenable position.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Vance

[Anakin7]

     About/On Grace -   http://www.2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/graceof.htm     http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/doctrines/grace_eom.htm        

 

        http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1990.htm/...

 

In His Debt/Grace

       Anakin7

Edited October 21, 2014 by Anakin7

[danielwoods]

Of course it is in the past tense because this is referring to what Jesus did before his resurrection.

1 peter 4 doesn't say it was Jesus who preached. Of course you disagree with how the NIV translates the passage, which was the point of mentioning the greek tense. Why you disagree I have no idea.

 

What are angels but messengers sent from God? The angel that gave to John the revelations in the Book of Revelation was a human. Why would angels be anything else? Spirits in prison are nothing more that spirits of the dead.

 

Refer to all the translations in my previous post - most of them translate to "preach" and those that use "proclaim" state the gospel or good news is proclaimed, which is different than proclaiming victory. So are you saying that Repentance is not a part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

BTW - I love how you state that Peter wrote the scripture incorrectly. Perhaps it is just your interpretation that is incorrect?

The word "gospel" is not in 3:19, like it is in 4:6. There is no evidence that the spirits in prison, who ever they are, were able to repent. The gospel isn't mentioned, so how could I be saying that repentance isn't apart of the gospel? In 4:6 the gospel was preached to them while they were alive. That's what it says.

[danielwoods]

It''s amazing to see the mental gymnastics our friend has to go through in order to refute the obvious -- amazing and painful.

Simply looking for what the Bible teaches and what it does not teach.

[KevinG]

Why is everyone playing on a limited field.  If the LDS believe in Latter-day revelation and open canon why do we have to prove it with the constraints of Biblidolatry?

 

If it is a peculiar intellectual challenge then go for it, but wow, talk about rigging the game.  It would be like asking a Protestant to explain the Gospels using only the old testament.

[KevinG]

Simply looking for what the Bible teaches and what it does not teach.

 

How are you intending to take the limits of mortality out of that process? 

[danielwoods]

How are you intending to take the limits of mortality out of that process?

Not sure what you mean? Our limits are always present and accounted for. Which is why we have such a process. If I'm understanding you correctly. Even these limits affect supposed prophets of the LDS church.

[KevinG]

Not sure what you mean? Our limits are always present and accounted for. Which is why we have such a process. If I'm understanding you correctly. Even these limits affect supposed prophets of the LDS church.

 

I mean why do you figure your understanding of the scriptures is more accurate than anyone else?  And wouldn't additional revelation help that understanding rather than harm it?

 

Of course if you want to argue that the Book of Mormon, and Latter-day Revelation from the LDS prophets is hellborn, then were a little far apart for meaningful dialogue.

[Vance]

There is no evidence that the spirits in prison, who ever they are, were able to repent.

There is no evidence that the spirits in prison, who ever they are, were unable to repent.

[dberrie2000]

Then maybe you should talk to your friends here. They disagree. They are arguing that the doctrines of the LDS are derived from the NT. 

 

What is found in the Bible--is also found in the LDS church.

 

I don't believe the faith alone could truthfully make that statement, IMO.

[Tacenda]

...and I apologize for piling on.  I just had three smart alek responses and couldn't decide which one to use.

Haha, believe it or not I missed your smart alek responses from days gone past!!  Wondered where you were, glad you're doing ok.  Now get to writing a Savior song called "Follow the Savior" stat!!   

[dberrie2000]

 There is no evidence that the spirits in prison, who ever they are, were able to repent.

 

What is there about death that you believe shortens the arm of God in mercy and Grace?

 

Are we to believe that it took 4,000 years for His Atonement to remove the condemnation of all men due to the Fall ---and mankind can't have the forgiveness of sins after death? You do realize it was the Atonement that allowed for the remission of sins?

 

Hebrews 10:4----King James Version (KJV)

⁴ For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Edited October 21, 2014 by dberrie2000

[KevinG]

Haha, believe it or not I missed your smart alek responses from days gone past!!  Wondered where you were, glad you're doing ok.  Now get to writing a Savior song called "Follow the Savior" stat!!  

 

Follow the Savior He knows the way,

Follow the Savior He knows the way.

You can learn to follow Him if you often pray,

and for extra safety listen to His prophets and obey!

 

(Thanks for the kind words.  New job, surgery, two daughters in college, a son in combat, and new callings didn't leave me much time for goofing around here.  But I made an exception today!)

[Tacenda]

Your point has some validity.  We should be careful that our propaganda generates the results we intend.  

It sure generated some lovely posts of Jesus songs by you, I especially remember these sung in Primary and at Baptisms! 

[coolrok7]

There are things referred to as using the terms: god/gods but are not the true God, they are usually created beings.

The "God of this world" is Satan whose desire was to be above God (Isaiah 14). P

[KevinG]

It sure generated some lovely posts of Jesus songs by you, I especially remember these sung in Primary and at Baptisms! 

 

One of my boys used to sing at the top of his lungs when he was in the little boys room in the ward building, taking a tinkle...  "DO AS I"M DOING!  FOLLOW, FOLLOW ME!"

 

It was a good predictor of his personality.  He is 16 now, heaven help us all.

[Anakin7]

    Thanks for the drive by post by again coolrok7.

 

In His Debt/Grace

       Anakin7

[danielwoods]

I mean why do you figure your understanding of the scriptures is more accurate than anyone else?  And wouldn't additional revelation help that understanding rather than harm it?

 

Of course if you want to argue that the Book of Mormon, and Latter-day Revelation from the LDS prophets is hellborn, then were a little far apart for meaningful dialogue.

How are we able to interpret anything, anyone has written? If that is in question, then we have nothing we can establish as true. I think a base assumption that we all live by is that communication whether it is written or spoken, has certain rules by which we are able to interpret that message correctly.

Is the LDS church's interpretation of these passages correct or not? That's one question. The source of various LDS teachings don't seem to be found in the Bible, though some claim that (not all). 

We disagree on whether or not revelation helps at this point, because I believe that revelation is just as susceptible to the same short falls as interpreting the bible. In essence, how do I know that a certain revelation is true or not? Especially if it contradicts known teaching from the NT. Such as baptism of the dead or repenting after death.

[coolrok7]

It wasn't a drive by Anakin7, I was answering db.

[dberrie2000]

There are things referred to as using the terms: god/gods but are not the true God, they are usually created beings.

The "God of this world" is Satan  .....

 

That is correct--and if that is true--then Paul could not in any way be of the faith alone theology--and Trinitarianism is false, IMO--if it precludes the existenance of any other god.

[coolrok7]

It wasn't a drive by Anakin7, I was answering db.

[coolrok7]

board post delay

Edited October 21, 2014 by coolrok7