Jump to content

Baptists Coming Back to Utah to Evangelize Mormons


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Free in Christ said:

Not at all.  I reject the concepts of Calvinism completely.  

Wouldn't the belief that grace is not sufficient be rejecting grace?

But if we're free to accept or reject grace, isn't that us doing something?

I don't understand why you object to our letting grace infuse us so that we want to obey the commandments. The scriptures that tell us of God's commandments are part of his grace given to us. If you say doing that is wrong, aren't you actually denying God's grace?

Edited by clarkgoble
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Free in Christ said:

You must realize that you have no life in you - you are dead spiritually within and it is only through Jesus Christ that you can have eternal life in you.

You say you are "Free in Christ", and yet there is scant evidence of Him in your words.  You have obviously gone through the scriptures;  how sad you have never let the scriptures go through you.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Free in Christ said:

Makes sense to me.  Those who do not agree with LDS theology should be banned?

So you admit that you're trying to deceive us by creating a sock puppet to get around mod discipline?  Or are you saying something else?

And no, people who don't agree with LDS theology don't get banned.  The board is full of people who don't agree with LDS theology who aren't banned.  

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

But if we're free to accept or reject grace, isn't that us doing something?

Belief is a choice not a work that we do.  Romans 4:5 contrasts belief and works.  They are opposite of each other.

6 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I don't understand why you object to our letting grace infuse us so that we want to obey the commandments. 

Do you want to obey the commandments, or do you need to obey the commandments?  Huge difference.

8 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

The scriptures that tell us of God's commandments are part of his grace given to us. If you say doing that is wrong, aren't you actually denying God's grace?

Where does the scripture tell us God's commandments are part of His grace?

It's like claiming the bank was so kind they gave me a home...for only "all that I can do for the rest of my life".  

What kind of "grace" is that??

Barabbas was saved by grace.  Didn't matter how good or bad he was or what he did.  The savior took his cross and gave Him life.

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Okrahomer said:

You say you are "Free in Christ", and yet there is scant evidence of Him in your words.  You have obviously gone through the scriptures;  how sad you have never let the scriptures go through you.

"Free in Christ" means I no longer am required to obey the laws and ordinances of the gospel in order to receive eternal life.  I am free from the law of obedience and personal worthiness.

FIC means that I have eternal life already forevermore.  I have His life, His works and His perfection imputed upon me.

I could never claim to have this as a LDS.

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Free in Christ said:

"Free in Christ" means I no longer am required to obey the laws and ordinances of the gospel in order to receive eternal life.  I am free from the law of obedience and personal worthiness.

FIC means that I have eternal life already forevermore.  I have His life, His works and His perfection imputed upon me.

I could never claim to have this as a LDS.

 

"Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness; for they shall be filled."

"Blessed are they that are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

"Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you."

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Free in Christ said:

"Free in Christ" means I no longer am required to obey the laws and ordinances of the gospel in order to receive eternal life.  I am free from the law of obedience and personal worthiness.

FIC means that I have eternal life already forevermore.  I have His life, His works and His perfection imputed upon me.

I could never claim to have this as a LDS.

You believe that you will receive eternal life without wanting and trying to be obedient to Christ's commandments?  How is that not believing that Christ is going to save you in your sins?

Link to comment
38 minutes ago, Free in Christ said:

Belief is a choice not a work that we do.  Romans 4:5 contrasts belief and works.  They are opposite of each other.

But accepting or rejecting grace isn't only about belief. That seems an odd thing to say. 

Ignoring that though, it seems odd to appeal to Romans 4. After all if I believe God, as Abraham did, then won't I believe we ought keep his commandments? If I don't think we ought keep his commandments, how can we say we believe him? 

This returns us back to where I said these debates quickly become about phrasing rather than content. The passages you objected to note that trying to keep God's commands isn't enough. However we have to try if we believe. But trying won't be enough. So we need more grace beyond the grace that led to believing in God's commandments.

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Free in Christ said:

"Free in Christ" means I no longer am required to obey the laws and ordinances of the gospel in order to receive eternal life.  I am free from the law of obedience and personal worthiness.

Such a statement is anti-Christian.  Regardless of how you explain this, if anyone believed you and acted upon those words, they would be at grave risk according to this, and the many other scriptures you ignore:

"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. (Denying the importance of good behavior and teaching others they don't need to try to obey Christ is a corruption of Christ's message.)
            20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, (FIC will probably say that "escaping" through knowledge of Jesus Christ does not constitute being "saved," by his definition) 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, (James is explaining to people who HAVE known Jesus Christ, who said "I am the way," ) than, after they have known it, (been saved,) to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. (IF FIC responds to this, watch how he wrests what this scripture says as plain as plain can be.)
            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." 2 Peter 2

Praching that doctrine "I am free from the law of obedience and personal worthiness," puts you in the crosshairs of Christ's teaching "Judge not, that ye be not judged," when you or those you preach to, choose disobedience, having known the way of righteousness: 
            2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
            3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
            4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
            5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye." From Matthew 7

Your judgments against the Mormons, who believe in Jesus Christ and try to live faithfully, are quite stern.  You generate considerable wasted time and bring in a spirit of contention denying their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, in my opinion. 

I second Blue Bell's comment:

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

FIC is sounding just like FormerLDS who was banned.  I would report FIC to the mods and they can check to see if he is a sock puppet. 

 

Edited by Meerkat
Link to comment
9 hours ago, bluebell said:

FIC is sounding just like FormerLDS who was banned.  I would report FIC to the mods and they can check to see if he is a sock puppet. 

Got to wonder about his habit of PMing the same stuff privately we are talking about in public.  Comes across as attempting to proselytize.

He has been asked numerous times if he is Former.  He has refused to answer (ignores the questions as if they weren't there).  At this point, I accept it as a given.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
6 hours ago, Free in Christ said:

I believe the septuagint is a corrupt Alexandrian text and the septuagint was not used by either Jesus or his Apostles.  

Then you have a problem, because the Greek NT which you aspire to believe plainly quotes the Greek Septuagint which you call corrupt. This is easily researched. It virtually never quotes the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Those were the two main sources of the OT. The third is found in the Syriac Peshitta, which usually conforms to the Masoretic Text. Your other problem is that you plainly believe as do I that Yeshua taught in Aramaic rather than Greek. So then you have the problem of tense again because of the Hebrew practice of using the present tense to refer to the future. When the present tense then got translated into the Greek, you would have the translators change the present tense words of Christ into future tense if it pertains to the future like I claim it does. You see it really doesn't matter how much of the NT was written in Greek. The people who wrote Yeshua's words would remember them in Aramaic complete with Hebrewisms such as using the present tense to refer to the future.

Quote

I believe the King James Bible contains the correctly and perfectly preserved word of God and transmission of doctrines for the English speaking people.

Uh huh. And who told you this? The spirit? Where does the Bible say that in the future the KJV will be the only correct English version of the Bible? Further, this is easily demonstrated not to be so. It almost never translates YHWH, but instead chooses to use the English equivalent LORD of the Hebrew adonai. It mistranslates a title in Jeremiah as a name instead. It includes the Johannine Comma which even the Catholic Church now confesses was an addition from a margin note, and is not in any ancient NT Greek manuscripts ie pre 500 AD. It is certainly far from a perfect translation.  

Edited by RevTestament
Link to comment
6 hours ago, Free in Christ said:

I believe the King James Bible contains the correctly and perfectly preserved word of God and transmission of doctrines for the English speaking people.

Assuming it is indeed inerrant, but that is moot until we have an inerrant INTERPRETATION of the Bible.

Satan himself quoted the Bible and then Christ provided the inerrant interpretation.  Where do we find that today == from the theologians and scholars who debate even basic salvation questions.

Edited by cdowis
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Assuming it is indeed inerrant, but that is moot until we have an inerrant INTERPRETATION of the Bible.

Satan himself quoted the Bible and then Christ provided the inerrant interpretation.  Where do we find that today == from the theologians and scholars who debate even basic salvation questions.

Did you know the "inerrant" King James Version originally contained the Apocrypha for its first 150 years?  You can Wikipedia it.

If the KJV is inerrant, why did it include the Apocrypha for so many years?  Did God authorize the removal of the Apocrypha, or are Protestants just picking and choosing their scripture to best suit their doctrines?  Perhaps KJV inerrancy is yet another Baptist fairy tale?

I just find it fishy when Baptists claim authority based off the Bible, when they don't even believe all of it and have picked and chosen their cannon for their own disingenuous ends.  But whatever.

Edited by Waylon
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Waylon said:

Did you know the "inerrant" King James Version originally contained the Apocrypha for its first 150 years?  You can Wikipedia it.

If the KJV is inerrant, why did it include the Apocrypha for so many years?  Did God authorize the removal of the Apocrypha, or are Protestants just picking and choosing their scripture to best suit their doctrines?  Perhaps KJV inerrancy is yet another Baptist fairy tale?

The question on whether the KJV is inerrant is a moot issue.  It is meaningless unless there is an inerrant interpretation.

Got it?

Edited by cdowis
Link to comment
16 hours ago, Calm said:

Got to wonder about his habit of PMing the same stuff privately we are talking about in public.  Comes across as attempting to proselytize.

He has been asked numerous times if he is Former.  He has refused to answer (ignores the questions as if they weren't there).  At this point, I accept it as a given.

I wonder why all the piling on FIC? I remember other TBM's on this board that were banned and came back under a different name and didn't get this kind of backlash, as well as I know LDS missionaries do plenty to get their message across as well. 

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I wonder why all the piling on FIC? I remember other TBM's on this board that were banned and came back under a different name and didn't get this kind of backlash, as well as I know LDS missionaries do plenty to get their message across as well. 

I personally don't have any problems with FIC even if he is FormerLDS, but if he is, he is apparently circumventing the rules. I don't know why FormerLDS got banned. He didn't particularly rub me the wrong way. Maybe his offending post got deleted. I don't know. I believe he just got deceived by the modern Christian establishment just as he believes I am deceived, but I do think I at least understand some of his issues with the Church. I didn't get PM'ed by him, like apparently some others did. Aussieguy engaged in this tactic some, and was more annoying to me.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I wonder why all the piling on FIC? I remember other TBM's on this board that were banned and came back under a different name and didn't get this kind of backlash, as well as I know LDS missionaries do plenty to get their message across as well. 

If anyone shares they posted under another name, I don't care...I like to change my alias from time to time.  Actually I would change it constantly if it wouldn't confuse people because I love to play with names.

Those who try to hide who they were or to ignore previous incarnations so they can avoid the consequences of previous behaviours, I see that as pretty juvenile.  I therefore appreciate that the moderators insist people be accountable for past comments, in the sense of owning them.  

As far as proselyting, that is up to the board's owners imo.  If LDS missionaries showed up here, I wouldn't have a problem with them being banned for breaking board rules.  One can always share one's personal beliefs, imo, without breaking rules to do it.  Lots of posters have been asking Former to do just that, but he has refused to, refused to interact with many comments, and instead stuck to his chosen limited script.

If someone has put time and money into building a soccer field and then invited anyone who wants to play soccer to come in play with them, it is extremely rude to insist that you are going to play American football in the middle of others' games.  Go find someone's football field or build your own if that is the only game you are willing to play.

I think Former's avoidance of answering the question made people curious about his motivation, so it got bigger than it would have if he just said, yeah, it's me, I want to start the conversation fresh.  Of course, trying to get around a banning, that is something different.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
23 hours ago, Amulek said:

And all this time I thought he was saved by the political machinations of the men who were maneuvering to have Jesus executed. Who knew? ;)

 

          Barabbas was Saved by a earthly corrupt grace, not a True Grace Empowered Heavenly Grace, I do not know what FIC was thinking.

The Atonement It Is The Central Doctrine

Washing My Garment/Robe In His Blood

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

Anakin7

Edited by Anakin7
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...