Martin Luther: The Idea That Changed The World

[Atheist Mormon]

On 9/14/2017 at 9:14 AM, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

He was indeed the Father of the [link removed] and Evangelical movement or church(s). Sadly he was also very anti-Semitic, when he was  rejected by them. His comments about Jews led to the, "Inquestion" (hope I spelled this correctly) and to the rise  and hatred,and anti-Semitism in Europe, also to the rise of Hitler, who quoted his horrible comments, and the death of 6,000,000 Jews. The same with a founder of Islam, who went to the Jews to preach concerning his vision, then when he too was rejected, he filled the Koran with anti-Jewish  [link removed] that fuel there hatred for Jews today. What was the name of the show on PBS, so I can see it. 

Papa...We might have some future disagreements but  I am proud of you for writing what is the reality about Martin Luther. Actually he was a little more horrible of a personality which I don't want to elaborate. There's nothing about this man makes me feel warm inside. 

We do not allow posters to modify a quote from another poster. Don't do that again or you will be removed from the thread or even the board. If you want to add something do it in your own post. The links you inserted in someone else's comment have been removed. 

[LittleNipper]

10 hours ago, Vance said:

You are free to believe what ever you want.  But you have no evidence to support your position.

 

  10 And now, my beloved brethren, and also Jew, and all ye ends of the earth, hearken unto these words and believe in Christ; and if ye believe not in these words believe in Christ. And if ye shall believe in Christ ye will believe in these words, for they are the words of Christ, and he hath given them unto me; and they teach all men that they should do good.

  11 And if they are not the words of Christ, judge ye—for Christ will show unto you, with power and great glory, that they are his words, at the last day; and you and I shall stand face to face before his bar; and ye shall know that I have been commanded of him to write these things, notwithstanding my weakness.

 

I have a whole lot more support for my biblical position than you have for your choice ---- at least 12 Apostles who knew nothing about Moroni, Nephi nor any of the books on the book of Mormon. Peter was saved without even mentioning Mormon and accepting only ONE HIGH PRIEST.  I pray that you can understand that reality.

Edited September 18, 2017 by LittleNipper

[LittleNipper]

11 hours ago, Okrahomer said:

1 Corinthians 12:3

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

I do hope that you realize the difference between demons and humans. Humans -- MAN. Demons = FALLEN ANGELS. So, I'm hoping that you were interjecting in agreement with the biblical view and not trying to support an error.

[Gray]

11 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

Demons believe in GOD and quake ---- are they good or evil?

The Book of Mormon isn't a demon, it's a book. Is it wrong?

[Guest]

14 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Papa...We might have some future disagreements but  I am proud of you for writing what is the reality about Martin Luther. Actually he was a little more horrible of a personality which I don't want to elaborate. There's nothing about this man makes me feel warm inside. 

Just telling the truth, but it seems you added links to my comments without my permission; why? 

[LittleNipper]

4 hours ago, Gray said:

The Book of Mormon isn't a demon, it's a book. Is it wrong?

In an attempt to corrupt and undermine the belief of biblical inerrancy, could the book of Mormon be a demonic fabrication through a man under demonic possession?

Edited September 18, 2017 by LittleNipper

[Gray]

10 minutes ago, LittleNipper said:

In an attempt to corrupt and undermine the belief of biblical inerrancy, could the book of Mormon be a demonic fabrication through a man under demonic possession?

Biblical inerrancy is a modern heresy. Heresy comes from the devil. Therefore the Book of Mormon, correcting a heresy, comes from God.

QED.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Gray

[LittleNipper]

4 hours ago, Gray said:

Biblical inerrancy is a modern heresy. Heresy comes from the devil. Therefore the Book of Mormon, correcting a heresy, comes from God.

QED.

I might suggest that Bible errancy is necessary for Mormonism to be at all valid.. 

There are many passages which state or imply that the authors of the Bible were inspired by God. Since errors, mistakes and duplicity are not generally regarded as qualities of God, inspiration by God would imply inerrancy of the text. Passages are found both in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) which support inerrancy, either directly or indirectly. 

Hebrew scriptures: Passages concerning the words of God being without error include:   Psalms 12:6: "the words of the LORD are flawless"   Psalms 119:89: "Your word, O LORD, is eternal, it stands firm"    Proverbs 30:5-6: "Every word of God is flawless"

Christian scriptures: Matthew 5:18: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (KJV) A jot is the Greek letter "i" - the smallest letter in the alphabet; a tittle is a small mark used to aid in reading ancient Hebrew. This statement would seem to imply that the Mosaic law, given in the Hebrew Scriptures, was correct and valid in the 1st century CE during Jesus' ministry on earth. That is, the Law was inerrant; there was no justification for any deletions to the law. However, Jesus' statement would seem to permit additions to the law, as in Matthew 5:28 where Jesus equates looking at a woman with lust with committing adultery.   Gospels, Acts, Epistles: There are passages which stated that the apostles would convey the words of the Holy Spirit when they were addressing a crowd or an accuser. One might infer from these passages that the Holy Spirit would also guide their written statements. Some examples from the Christian Scriptures are:    Matthew 10:19-20: "But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you."   Mark 13:11: "But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost."   Luke 12:11-12: "And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say: For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say."   Luke 21:14-15: "Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer: For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist."   John 16:13: "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."   Acts 1:8: "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."   1 Corinthians 2:12-13: "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."

[Atheist Mormon]

6 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

Just telling the truth, but it seems you added links to my comments without my permission; why? 

No links was added from my end.

[Vance]

11 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

I have a whole lot more support for my biblical position than you have for your choice ----

No, you don't.  They that be with us are greater than they that be with you.

11 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

at least 12 Apostles who knew nothing about Moroni, Nephi nor any of the books on the book of Mormon.

There lack of knowledge was and is irrelevant.

11 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

Peter was saved without even mentioning Mormon and accepting only ONE HIGH PRIEST.

Since Mormon lived more than 300 years AFTER Peter one should not expect Peter to mention him.  And again you misquote and misrepresent scripture.

NOWHERE in the New Testament can you find the phrase "one High Priest" let alone "only one High Priest".

OOPS, if it is not in the Bible YOU can't believe it. 

 

11 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

 I pray that you can understand that reality.

I pray that you can understand that a lot of what you believe is NOT in the Bible.  So much for Martin Luther's false doctrine of "sola scriptura".

[Vance]

6 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

In an attempt to corrupt and undermine the belief of biblical inerrancy,

The Bible you have today is not inerrant.  Just read the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy real close and you will see THAT.

http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html

"down to the very words of the original"

and " WE AFFIRM  that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture"

Whereas not a single word "of the original" exists today, the Bible you have is not inerrant.  Not a single autograph exists.

Here is a funny contradiction, it says, 

"The mode of divine inspiration remains largely a mystery to us."

If they don't know HOW it was given, how could they know it was inerrant?

Here is another conundrum.  If the statement on inerrancy is not inerrant, they we can't trust it to be true.

 

6 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

could the book of Mormon be a demonic fabrication through a man under demonic possession?

Nah,  it teach us to believe in and obey Christ.

Matt 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

(I highlighted the part that applies to the authors of the Book of Mormon for you.)

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

No links was added from my end.

OK, they looked like links usually appear. 

[LittleNipper]

1 hour ago, Vance said:

No, you don't.  They that be with us are greater than they that be with you.

There lack of knowledge was and is irrelevant.

Since Mormon lived more than 300 years AFTER Peter one should not expect Peter to mention him.  And again you misquote and misrepresent scripture.

NOWHERE in the New Testament can you find the phrase "one High Priest" let alone "only one High Priest".

OOPS, if it is not in the Bible YOU can't believe it. 

 

I pray that you can understand that a lot of what you believe is NOT in the Bible.  So much for Martin Luther's false doctrine of "sola scriptura".

Nephi lived before Peter. There was ever only one Chief/Head Priest to serve in the Temple at Jerusalem at any one time. Christ is now the eternal Chief/High Priest. None of the Apostles or disciples of Christ were Mormon.

[pogi]

11 minutes ago, LittleNipper said:

None of the Apostles or disciples of Christ were Mormon.

Mormon was not even a Mormon...what's your point?

[LittleNipper]

1 hour ago, Vance said:

The Bible you have today is not inerrant.  Just read the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy real close and you will see THAT.

http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html

"down to the very words of the original"

and " WE AFFIRM  that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture"

Whereas not a single word "of the original" exists today, the Bible you have is not inerrant.  Not a single autograph exists.

Here is a funny contradiction, it says, 

"The mode of divine inspiration remains largely a mystery to us."

If they don't know HOW it was given, how could they know it was inerrant?

Here is another conundrum.  If the statement on inerrancy is not inerrant, they we can't trust it to be true.

 

Nah,  it teach us to believe in and obey Christ.

Matt 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

(I highlighted the part that applies to the authors of the Book of Mormon for you.)

One can understand that GOD created the entire Universe, but I bet you don't know exactly how HE accomplished that feat. Yes, I believe GOD spoke and everything came into being, but I don't know what exactly that entails. The very same is true regarding the Bible. We know that the Holy Spirit moved selected men to write exactly what GOD wanted in the way He wanted it, but we cannot know what that entailed because we were not there. 

[LittleNipper]

11 minutes ago, pogi said:

Mormon was not even a Mormon...what's your point?

No one ever heard of Mormon before Joseph Smith's writing of the book of Mormon. Joseph Smith developed that religion.

Edited September 19, 2017 by LittleNipper

[Okrahomer]

14 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

I do hope that you realize the difference between demons and humans. Humans -- MAN. Demons = FALLEN ANGELS. So, I'm hoping that you were interjecting in agreement with the biblical view and not trying to support an error.

James 2:29 bears no resemblance or relationship to 1 Corinthians 12:3.  One describes how a devil reacts to the one true God; and the other tells us that a MAN cannot declare that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Ghost. 

Joseph Smith, the MAN, said this:

“Salvation could not come to the world without the mediation of Jesus Christ.”

“The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it."

“When we reflect upon the holiness and perfections of our great Master, who has opened a way whereby we may come unto him, even by the sacrifice of himself, our hearts melt within us for his condescension. And when we reflect also, that he has called us to be perfect in all things, that we may be prepared to meet him in peace when he comes in his glory with all the holy angels, we feel to exhort our brethren with boldness, to be humble and prayerful, to walk indeed as children of the light and of the day, that they may have grace to withstand every temptation, and to overcome every evil in the worthy name of our Lord Jesus Christ. For be assured, brethren, that the day is truly near when the Master of the house will rise up and shut the door, and none but such as have on a wedding garment will be permitted to enjoy a seat at the marriage supper!"

 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2017 by Okrahomer

[Gray]

12 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

I might suggest that Bible errancy is necessary for Mormonism to be at all valid.. 

There are many passages which state or imply that the authors of the Bible were inspired by God. Since errors, mistakes and duplicity are not generally regarded as qualities of God, inspiration by God would imply inerrancy of the text. Passages are found both in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) which support inerrancy, either directly or indirectly. 

Hebrew scriptures: Passages concerning the words of God being without error include:   Psalms 12:6: "the words of the LORD are flawless"   Psalms 119:89: "Your word, O LORD, is eternal, it stands firm"    Proverbs 30:5-6: "Every word of God is flawless"

Christian scriptures: Matthew 5:18: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (KJV) A jot is the Greek letter "i" - the smallest letter in the alphabet; a tittle is a small mark used to aid in reading ancient Hebrew. This statement would seem to imply that the Mosaic law, given in the Hebrew Scriptures, was correct and valid in the 1st century CE during Jesus' ministry on earth. That is, the Law was inerrant; there was no justification for any deletions to the law. However, Jesus' statement would seem to permit additions to the law, as in Matthew 5:28 where Jesus equates looking at a woman with lust with committing adultery.   Gospels, Acts, Epistles: There are passages which stated that the apostles would convey the words of the Holy Spirit when they were addressing a crowd or an accuser. One might infer from these passages that the Holy Spirit would also guide their written statements. Some examples from the Christian Scriptures are:    Matthew 10:19-20: "But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you."   Mark 13:11: "But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost."   Luke 12:11-12: "And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say: For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say."   Luke 21:14-15: "Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer: For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist."   John 16:13: "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."   Acts 1:8: "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."   1 Corinthians 2:12-13: "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."

 

You're conflating "the words of the Lord" with the Bible. Not the same thing at all. Regarding Matthew 5:18, it has nothing to do with inerrancy. It has to do with the permanence of the law of Moses.

There is not one passage in the scriptures that says the Bible is inerrant. Like I said, a modern, fundamentalist heresy.

 

 

[Gray]

10 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

Nephi lived before Peter. There was ever only one Chief/Head Priest to serve in the Temple at Jerusalem at any one time. Christ is now the eternal Chief/High Priest. None of the Apostles or disciples of Christ were Mormon.

And Jesus was not a Christian.

[LittleNipper]

12 hours ago, Gray said:

And Jesus was not a Christian.

Jesus is the foundation and LORD of HIS CHURCH. And HIS followers are now referred to as CHRISTians.

Edited September 20, 2017 by LittleNipper

[Bobbieaware]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

And Jesus was not a Christian.

By this are you saying Jesus didn't believe he was the literal only begotten Son of God in the flesh, and he also didn't believe he was the Christ who would make an infinite and eternal sacrifice of suffering for the sins of humanity?

[Gray]

1 hour ago, LittleNipper said:

Jesus is the foundation and LORD of HIS CHURCH. And HIS followers are now referred to a CHRISTians.

Jesus lived and died as a Jewish man. His early followers were Jewish as well. Christianity evolved later. 

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Bobbieaware said:

By this are you saying Jesus didn't believe he was the literal only begotten Son of God in the flesh, and he also didn't believe he was the Christ who would make an infinite and eternal sacrifice of suffering for the sins of humanity?

It's unlikely that the historical Jesus would have had that self-conception. If he thought that about himself, he never said anything about it, and he seems to have said some things that contradict that notion. His immediate followers didn't quite have that conception of him either, at least not in exactly as you put it. 

Jesus was thoroughly Jewish, and the followers of Jesus were part of a Jewish sect for some decades after his crucifixion. Christianity as we think of it today evolved over time. 

Edited September 19, 2017 by Gray

[pogi]

12 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

No one ever heard of Mormon before Joseph Smith's writing of the book of Mormon. 

How would anyone have heard about him before Joseph discovered the records?  His people were destroyed off the face of the earth.

Ancient people are discovered all the time that no one had heard of before the discovery. Your line of logic leaves me scratching my head. 

[Bobbieaware]

6 minutes ago, Gray said:

It's unlikely that the historical Jesus would have had that self-conception. If he thought that about himself, he never said anything about it, and he seems to have said some things that contradict that notion. His immediate followers didn't quite have that conception of him either, at least not in exactly as you put it. 

Jesus was thoroughly Jewish, and the followers of Jesus were part of a Jewish sect for some decades after his crucifixion. Christianity as we think of it today evolved over time. 

So you utterly reject the testimonies of Christ and his followers recorded in the New Testament, as you must, because those testimonies flatly contradict what you say.? And as you have before acknowledged, you also don't believe the historical Jesus made any of the statements attributed to Him in the Book of Mormon.

 Please explain to me how someone who believes the testimonies of the prophets recorded in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon is supposed to have a meaningful and productive dialogue with you when, by very nature, your comments are basically irrelevancies and non sequiturs inserted into the midst of the discussions that believers in the scriptures can't even relate to? It's as if there's an earnest discussion going on  among a group oh engineers focusing on the technical reasons why the World Trade Towers collapsed on 9/11, only to have someone without an engineering background chime in and say there were no planes that crashed into the towers that day and the videos that appear to show otherwise are trick photography.