Dear Evangelical Friends: Can A Mormon Be A Christian?

[Canadaigua]

I apply the same standard to the BoM as I do the Bible, it is what experience of the Spirit tells me as I study the scriptures that matters to me, not the text itself. 

 

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit changes the definitions of standard English words in the Bible when you are reading it?

[Vance]

We work with what we know to be true.

Ok, but HOW do you know what you "know to be true" is actually true?

 

When the LDS claim that Paul's usage of "third Heaven" isn't what Paul intended, then the claims of the LDS are known to be false.

Here is the thing, you don't KNOW that were are using "third heaven" differently from Paul's intent.  Because you don't KNOW what Paul's intent really was.  All you have is speculation.

 

IF the LDS simply want to say that they have a new revelation, and a new teaching, which has nothing what-so-ever to do with the teaching of Paul's "third Heaven" then that's fine, many religious groups do that.

The thing is we DO have new revelation but in this case we don't have new teaching.  The Bible is insufficient just plain and simple.

[Vance]

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit changes the definitions of standard English words in the Bible when you are reading it?

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit communicates with us in English?

[ERayR]

There are many hypothetical situations that could be created. Where does the evidence lead though? That is the question. Do you have evidence that supports this view?

 

 

It depends on who is interpreting it and whose interpretation you choose.

[ERayR]

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit changes the definitions of standard English words in the Bible when you are reading it?

 

Of course not.  Where did you get such a ridiculous idea?

[ERayR]

I quoted myself above, because this is my answer to your first question below. 

 

 

A) what someone is teaching has to line up with the principles and teachings already known to be true from known sources (such as the bible).

 

B) What a claimed "prophet" teaches has to line up as well. 

 

C) I don't see the principle of the Spirit witnessing that a prophet is true or a organization is true in the Bible. What I see, is that the Spirit will lead us into all truth. That might be from those specific sources, but it's the Spirit that leads. 

 

Circular reasoning.

[Teancum]

Let's be honest here. EVs want to own the term Christian. If the rabid evangelicals here would do some historical studies and IF they were honest they would admit that early Christianity was a hodge podge of ideologies and belief systems.   Eventually what became orthodoxy won out.  But is was not so for at least 300 years.  And the reformed Christianity  which EVs peddle (and there are even many brands of that) was certainly NOT what was there the first 300 years.

 

Mormons on the other hand claim a restoration. If they were honest they would argue that they are true Christianity and they rest are wannabe apostates.

 

Yet Mormonism tries to pigeon hole itself into ancient Christianity and guess what.  Much of is just ain't there.

 

In other words EVs, Mormons, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and so on....none of you have the pure Christianity.  Why?  Because what you strive for never ever existed,

 

Hate to burst your bubbles.

 

But I imagine this post will be ignored and you will all argue another hundred pages of nonsense. What a waste of time and life.

[ERayR]

Let's be honest here. EVs want to own the term Christian. If the rabid evangelicals here would do some historical studies and IF they were honest they would admit that early Christianity was a hodge podge of ideologies and belief systems.   Eventually what became orthodoxy won out.  But is was not so for at least 300 years.  And the reformed Christianity  which EVs peddle (and there are even many brands of that) was certainly NOT what was there the first 300 years.

 

Mormons on the other hand claim a restoration. If they were honest they would argue that they are true Christianity and they rest are wannabe apostates.

 

Yet Mormonism tries to pigeon hole itself into ancient Christianity and guess what.  Much of is just ain't there.

 

In other words EVs, Mormons, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and so on....none of you have the pure Christianity.  Why?  Because what you strive for never ever existed,

 

Hate to burst your bubbles.

 

But I imagine this post will be ignored and you will all argue another hundred pages of nonsense. What a waste of time and life.

 

Believe it or not I agree with much of what you have posted here.   Almost enough to give you a rep point but not quite.

[Teancum]

Believe it or not I agree with much of what you have posted here.   Almost enough to give you a rep point but not quite.

 

 

Wow ErayR pick me up off the floor!

Edited December 20, 2014 by Teancum

[ERayR]

Wow ErayR pick me up off the floor!

 

Don't let it go to your head.

[Vance]

But I imagine this post will be ignored and you will all argue another hundred pages of nonsense. What a waste of time and life.

And yet here you are, occasionally condescending from your own lofty sanctimonious perch to chide us without adding anything of substance.

[Vance]

The statement is not different from John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God....v.14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us..."

How can this be? How can someone be with God, and then at the same time be God? Clearly he's referring to Jesus who was made flesh. Same problem as the one true God sent Christ (who is also God).

 

English requires the use of articles to clarify specificity.  the definite article (the) and indefinite article (a) are common.

 

Greek, on the other had does not use articles as consistently.  If you want to be specific you need to use a definite article but if you don't want to be specific, then no article is needed.

 

Also, the Greek doesn't use uppercase and lowercase letters the way English does.  All of the letter in this verse are uppercase Greek.

 

If you look at the Greek of that verse with a direct interlinear English translation you get this,

 

 

IN BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS TOWARD THE GOD AND GOD WAS THE WORD

 

Notice that it doesn't NOT specify that "THE WORD WAS THE GOD"  but rather the none specific "GOD" was the specific "THE WORD"

 

Your interpretation is not required by the Greek text, but rather is somewhat contradicted by the Greek text.

 

To me, a more accurate translation would be,

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was next to God, and the Word was a god/divine."

Edited December 21, 2014 by Vance

[Flyonthewall]

Even if an angel appeared to me and stated things that contradicted what I knew to be true, I wouldn't believe the angel. A prophet's message is under his control and power. When his message contradicts known teachings then yes, I wouldn't believe it to be true.

This is exactly what the Jews did at the time of Christ and they had Jesus crucified.

Jesus was in their midst, but He did not measure up to their pre-conceived notion of what the Messiah would be...and taught things that were different than the "already known to be true" teachings.

It is a good thing that Jesus will come in power next time around so history will not repeat itself.

[Teancum]

Don't let it go to your head.

Oh I won't.

[Teancum]

And yet here you are, occasionally condescending from your own lofty sanctimonious perch to chide us without adding anything of substance.

Then I fit in well don't I? It is just i find this thread so amusing,

[Canadaigua]

Of course not.  Where did you get such a ridiculous idea?

Perhaps you didn't read the post by Calmoriah that I responded to.  Here it is what he said.

 

Calmoriah

"I apply the same standard to the BoM as I do the Bible, it is what experience of the Spirit tells me as I study the scriptures that matters to me, not the text itself. 

[coolrok7]

The answer to the question of how we know is found in John 20:30-31 (an editorial comment of the apostle John), just after Thomas declares Jesus of being his Lord and God in vs 28. Jesus comments in vs. 29.

Edited December 21, 2014 by coolrok7

[intra]

But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken?  when a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
(Deuteronomy 18:20-22) 

no warm fuzzy feeling in the gut mentioned here. 

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith,

giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
(1 Timothy 4:1-3) 

false prophets and false spirits spoken of as "seducing" - i.e. appealing to the flesh - here. 

are your feelings weightier than the scriptures? 
will you trust God or trust men? 

 

[pogi]

are your feelings weightier than the scriptures? 

will you trust God or trust men?

 

I will trust neither man nor man's interpretation of scripture, but the Spirit of the Lord.

[intra]

I will trust neither man nor man's interpretation of scripture, but the Spirit of the Lord.

how good of the Lord to have given us in Deuteronomy such plain speech by which a true prophet can be tested, so that we should not be led astray! 

He cares for us each, and desires that we should know the Truth, does He not!? 

 

[intra]

even the rocks will cry out if we keep silent -- 

just as Joseph Smith's "seer stone" told him: 

Some revelations are of God; some revelations are of man; and some revelations are of the devil.
 

[pogi]

how good of the Lord to have given us in Deuteronomy such plain speech by which a true prophet can be tested, so that we should not be led astray! 

He cares for us each, and desires that we should know the Truth, does He not!?

 

How do we "know" such truth if not through the Spirit?  Why would I trust you above the Spirit of the Lord?  Are you not a fallible man, subject to false interpretations and understanding?

[pogi]

just as Joseph Smith's "seer stone" told him: 

Some revelations are of God; some revelations are of man; and some revelations are of the devil.

 

Sounds like a true revelation to me.  Must be a prophet!

[intra]

Sounds like a true revelation to me.  Must be a prophet!

it might sound that way when you don't have the context of why he said that -- because he had claimed to have a revelation from God and found out that it didn't come to pass. 

so good of God to give us such a clear test for a prophet! 

 

[intra]

How do we "know" such truth if not through the Spirit?  Why would I trust you above the Spirit of the Lord?  Are you not a fallible man, subject to false interpretations and understanding?

do you doubt that God desires that we know the Truth because i have said it? 

are you confused by Deuteronomy because i have quoted it? 

take the Lord at His word -- 

Divers weights are an abomination unto the LORD;

and a false balance is not good.

(Proverbs 20:23)