When should you resign your L D S membership?

[Avatar4321]

2 hours ago, FormerLDS said:

Didn't Jesus Christ say in John 6:47 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life"?

Those who hear His word and choose to believe are given eternal life immediately.

How is that anything even remotely close to LDS theology friends?

 

have you read the Book of Mormon? Are you going to seriously claim that it doesn't teach that we must have faith in Jesus Christ to obtain eternal life?

I also can't help but notice you needed to insert words into the verse that Jesus didn't say to reach your conclusion.

finally can you believe in Christ if you ignore everything He teaches?

[bluebell]

42 minutes ago, FormerLDS said:

 

One is alive and one is dead.  Which would you say is blessed?

And in mortality, how are the 'alive' and the 'dead' differentiated?  What is the difference between them while they are alive?

Edited December 7, 2015 by bluebell
Grammar and for clarity

[Avatar4321]

1 hour ago, FormerLDS said:

I'm just a regular Baptist, and, far as I know, everyone believes as I described.

Regarding "once saved always saved", do you believe that once you are born of your parents you can be un-born? 

It's so refreshing to me that I can never become unsaved no matter how far I stray or what I do or don't do.  I have eternal life and nothing can ever change that.

Contemplate that for a moment.  I mean, how can any reward-based system of do's-and-don'ts compete with that?

people are unborn all the time. It's called dying. It's one of the reasons Jesus Christ had to pay for our sins.

do you really not know this?

[bluebell]

43 minutes ago, FormerLDS said:

You're really asking "Is one sin more sinful than another sin?"

Doesn't James 2:10 say "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."

Therefore, to God, wouldn't telling a lie be the same a murder?

I think what he's asking is, can someone who is saved, murder someone?  As in, doesn't someone's choice to murder (or to commit any very serious sin) show that the person is not in a saved state?  

They don't have the countenance of Christ, for example, they have bad fruit, they don't love Christ, they are carnal, sensual, and devilish.  In short, their actions show that they are no longer a 'new creature in Christ'. 

Can someone like that still have eternal life?

[Avatar4321]

37 minutes ago, FormerLDS said:

If "faithfulness to covenants" is a requirement to "obtain eternal life", wouldn't that make eternal life a reward?

uh no. Because without the atonement of Jesus Christ obeying Him couldn't help you in the slightest.

again have you read the Book of Mormon?

are you seriously telling us that anyone who suggests we need to obey God to obtain eternal life is teaching a false gospel?

[Avatar4321]

15 minutes ago, FormerLDS said:

Correct, receiving eternal life is something Jesus Christ gives you within.  It's a free gift and all you have to do is choose to believe that His work alone is sufficient for that gift.  It can't be a gift if you are required to do something in order to get it.

You need to ask yourself "Why does Jesus Christ plainly offer me eternal life today, but LDS theology completely disagrees?" 

Whom will you choose to believe friends?

I believe Christ, not you. And He teaches me to keep His commandments. I'd be a liar if I claimed to believe Christ and ignored what He said.

[bluebell]

39 minutes ago, FormerLDS said:

If "faithfulness to covenants" is a requirement to "obtain eternal life", wouldn't that make eternal life a reward?

What you are really asking is if faithfulness to Christ is a requirement to obtain eternal life, wouldn't that make eternal life a reward? Because covenants are promises we make to God, keeping them is an act of faith in Christ.  

Do you believe that having faith in Christ is a requirement to obtain eternal life?

[FormerLDS]

49 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

have you read the Book of Mormon? Are you going to seriously claim that it doesn't teach that we must have faith in Jesus Christ to obtain eternal life?

I also can't help but notice you needed to insert words into the verse that Jesus didn't say to reach your conclusion.

finally can you believe in Christ if you ignore everything He teaches?

Where did I say the Book or Mormon didn't teach "that we must have faith in Jesus Christ to obtain eternal life"?

I could ask you the same questions...

[FormerLDS]

56 minutes ago, bluebell said:

And in mortality, how are the 'alive' and the 'dead' differentiated?  What is the difference between them while they are alive?

How do you differentiate these?

"He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life".

One has the Son and one doesn't.  Period.

[Zakuska]

7 hours ago, FormerLDS said:

I'm just a regular Baptist, and, far as I know, everyone believes as I described.

Regarding "once saved always saved", do you believe that once you are born of your parents you can be un-born? 

It's so refreshing to me that I can never become unsaved no matter how far I stray or what I do or don't do.  I have eternal life and nothing can ever change that.

Contemplate that for a moment.  I mean, how can any reward-based system of do's-and-don'ts compete with that?

If you can't lose your salvation then warnings like  these should be removed from your Bible ASAP.

Heb 6

 1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,1  2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this will we do, if God permit. 4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. 7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:2  8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.

2 Peter 2

19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. 20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. 21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. 22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

1 Cor 15

30 And why stand we in jeopardy every hour? 31 I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.4  32 If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die.5  33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. 34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame. 

Unfrutiful plants get cast into the fire so you can't say work's (do's-and--don'ts) have nothing to do with salvation. God has no use for plants that bring forth briers and wild fruit. So it makes a huge difference what you do and don't do.

Mark 4

13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?
and the meaning thereof  14 The sower soweth the word. 15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts. 16 And these are they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness; 17 And have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended.1  18 And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word, 19 And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.2  20 And these are they which are sown on good ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some an hundred.

If "once Saved Always Saved" is true then the above parable of the Lord cant be because there would be no way for the devil to snatch the word from their heart nor would there be a way for them to be unfruitful, once they are given the Holy Ghost.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Zakuska

[FormerLDS]

57 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I think what he's asking is, can someone who is saved, murder someone?  As in, doesn't someone's choice to murder (or to commit any very serious sin) show that the person is not in a saved state?  

They don't have the countenance of Christ, for example, they have bad fruit, they don't love Christ, they are carnal, sensual, and devilish.  In short, their actions show that they are no longer a 'new creature in Christ'. 

Can someone like that still have eternal life?

Those who have eternal life can still sin.  It doesn't mean you no longer have that life or never had life in the first place.

By "very serious sin", do you believe there is a "not very serious sin"?  Makes no sense.  All sin is very serious sin and equally sinful. 

[FormerLDS]

58 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

uh no. Because without the atonement of Jesus Christ obeying Him couldn't help you in the slightest.

again have you read the Book of Mormon?

are you seriously telling us that anyone who suggests we need to obey God to obtain eternal life is teaching a false gospel?

You're confused on multiple levels.

We're talking about "ETERNAL LIFE" not general salvation.

Yes I've read the BoM

When you say "obey God to obtain eternal life", do you mean believe or do you mean obey the commandments?

[FormerLDS]

56 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

I believe Christ, not you. And He teaches me to keep His commandments. I'd be a liar if I claimed to believe Christ and ignored what He said.

So you keep his commandments.

Have you ever noticed how those who claim works are required for eternal life are never actually doing what they claim is required for eternal life? 

 

[Thinking]

Like me, my younger brother no longer believes the truth claims of the LDS Church. My wife is active LDS so I won't be resigning out of respect for her. My younger brother is not married so I asked him if he had resigned. He told me that he had no intention of resigning because our Dad had baptized him and resigning would cancel out something that meant a lot to our parents.

[Teancum]

Looks like this thread is devolving into a save by faith and grace approach to a saved by faith and works approach.

 

How fun!  

 

 

[FormerLDS]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

What you are really asking is if faithfulness to Christ is a requirement to obtain eternal life, wouldn't that make eternal life a reward? Because covenants are promises we make to God, keeping them is an act of faith in Christ.  

Do you believe that having faith in Christ is a requirement to obtain eternal life?

My whole point is that faithfulness [i.e. obedience to commandments] is not a requirement for the gift of eternal life.   

[halconero]

5 hours ago, FormerLDS said:

Didn't Jesus Christ say in John 6:47 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life"?

Those who hear His word and choose to believe are given eternal life immediately.

How is that anything even remotely close to LDS theology friends?

 

Let me ask you this: did the notion of belief as intellectual assent arise from the Greek understand of the concept, or does it arise from Enlightenment-era notions of rationality?

Hint...if you adhere to the notion of salvatory immediacy or simple agreement with Jesus' teachings it's the latter and not reflective of the above scripture.

[halconero]

5 hours ago, FormerLDS said:

My whole point is that faithfulness [i.e. obedience to commandments] is not a requirement for the gift of eternal life.   

Except that's a post-reformation era doctrine coming from Protestant reactions against Catholicism, mixed with Enlightenment-era Cartesian thought processes on thought processes and rationality, combined with the fact that our translations of the Bible are somewhat antiqued.

The Greco-Roman conceptualization of Pistis, the root word for both belief and faith in the New Testament, absolutely implies and demand faithfulness, love, obedience, submission, and the development of a patron relationship based on covenants. Such was doubt by Paul, the writer of James, and the authors of the Gospel. It does not diminish the grace of Christ, nor does it signify human ability to overcome sin through action, but it does not erase obedience or faithfulness from the salvatory equation either.

Edited December 8, 2015 by halconero

[bluebell]

52 minutes ago, FormerLDS said:

My whole point is that faithfulness [i.e. obedience to commandments] is not a requirement for the gift of eternal life.   

Is faith in Christ required for the gift of eternal life?

[FormerLDS]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Is faith in Christ required for the gift of eternal life?

Yes, faith that is in Christ is given as a free gift and is the only faith that saves.  Think about James 2:1 " My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons."

And in Galatians 2 " Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."

Our faith - sinful man's faith - is our selfish, worthless works and cannot save.

This is obvious in James 2:21 where Abraham was justified before man by his works (offering Isaac), but he was not justified before God by his works.  Romans 4:2 " For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God." 

LDS theology teaches that man's faith can save him by his own worthy behavior, but LDS theology can and HAS NEVER given one single person eternal life.

[filovirus]

2 hours ago, FormerLDS said:

My whole point is that faithfulness [i.e. obedience to commandments] is not a requirement for the gift of eternal life.   

Obedience is not the same as faithfulness.

Example: Husband and wife both have taken a covenant to pay tithing. Wife loves to pay tithing as she knows all things come from God. She is willing and does so each month. She does it because she knows it builds the Kingdom of God.

Husband on the other hand hates to pay his tithing. He argues against it each month. He feels he earned the money and that God will understand because money is tight. In fact, the only reason he pays it is because his wife does it for him.

So both husband and wife are perfectly obedient to the covenant they made to pay tithing. But are they both faithful for doing so? Do you see that there actually is a difference?

[FormerLDS]

2 hours ago, halconero said:

Except that's a post-reformation era doctrine coming from Protestant reactions against Catholicism, mixed with Enlightenment-era Cartesian thought processes on thought processes and rationality, combined with the fact that our translations of the Bible are somewhat antiqued.

The Greco-Roman conceptualization of Pistis, the root word for both belief and faith in the New Testament, absolutely implies and demand faithfulness, love, obedience, submission, and the development of a patron relationship based on covenants. Such was doubt by Paul, the writer of James, and the authors of the Gospel. It does not diminish the grace of Christ, nor does it signify human ability to overcome sin through action, but it does not erase obedience or faithfulness from the salvatory equation either.

You do not have a copy of the original scriptures.  All you have is google.

I believe in the plain reading of the King James Bible.  "True meaning of the word" arguments are as worthless as contextual debates.

Keep googling...

[halconero]

6 minutes ago, FormerLDS said:

You do not have a copy of the original scriptures.  All you have is google.

I believe in the plain reading of the King James Bible.  "True meaning of the word" arguments are as worthless as contextual debates.

Keep googling...

I most certainly have access to a copy of the ancient manuscripts, can read Koine Greek, and recently finished a degree in Early Christian Writings from the Religion Department at the University of Toronto.

True meaning of the word and contextual debates are extremely vital in establishing doctrine. Even in your plain reading of the King James Version of the Bible is informed by 20th/21st century English rather than the 17th century English in which it was written, the meaning of words like faith and belief radically changed even in that era in the next 200 years afterwards.

Edited December 8, 2015 by halconero

[halconero]

Why is context and linguistics important? Because if they're not considered then you're imposing your notions on scripture rather than letting the authorial intent speak for itself.

Pistis, Charis, and Agape. Commonly translated as faith/belief, grace, and love. These are all words with tremendous cultural and religious significance in the time of the apostles and the writers of the New Testament. They carried with them specific connotations, descriptions of relationships to deity, and were used to describe salvation. If not read in their cultural, religious, or linguistic context then we lose the meaning the authors chose to convey.

Likewise, with the King James Version, we have to understand that while similar to currently spoken English, the translators of the KJV were not translating it into terms we understand, but that they understood. Notions of faith and belief were much more tied to concepts of piety, devotion, and righteous living than they were to ideas of intellectual assent or agreement with doctrine. Beginning in the era of the Enlightenment, when modern deism, agnosticism, and atheism along with a premium on Cartesian thought and rationality began to form the notion of faith underwent a major shift. The existence of God was no longer assumed as it was in the days of the translation of KJV, and so faith and belief had to begin to account for this. Whereas before the intellectual assent to God's existence was largely assumed, with faith and belief being descriptors of Christian living, that intellectual assent had to be factored into the Christian discourse. This, combined with Protestant doctrine placing a premium on faith, combined to create the rather prevalent, yet unbiblical and modern notion that acknowledgement that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God is sufficient for salvation.

[bluebell]

46 minutes ago, FormerLDS said:

Yes, faith that is in Christ is given as a free gift and is the only faith that saves.  Think about James 2:1 " My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons."

And in Galatians 2 " Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."

Our faith - sinful man's faith - is our selfish, worthless works and cannot save.

This is obvious in James 2:21 where Abraham was justified before man by his works (offering Isaac), but he was not justified before God by his works.  Romans 4:2 " For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God." 

LDS theology teaches that man's faith can save him by his own worthy behavior, but LDS theology can and HAS NEVER given one single person eternal life.

Sorry, I didn't realize you were a Calvinist.