JB –
Now I’m really confused. I went to the LDS.org site for help, and I was surprised to find that….
The Book of Mormon refers to the Law of Moses:
“Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I acreated the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. bI am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name. I came unto my own, and my own areceived me not. And the scriptures bconcerning my coming are fulfilled. And as many as have received me, to them have I agiven to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me bredemption cometh, and cin me is the dlaw of Moses fulfilled. 3Nephi 15-17
Therefore, if ye teach the alaw of Moses, also teach that it is a bshadow of those things which are to come— Mosiah 16:14
Does this Book of Mormon reference refer to some other Law of Moses than what is in the Old Testament? The topical guide cross references Mosiah 16:14 to Hebrews 10:1. The Law is a fixed point of reference that the Book of Mormon agrees is the context of all that Jesus did.
The book of Hebrews was written for a Jewish audience to show them how Jesus established the New Covenant in terms familiar to them. Hebrews places the Levitical system, as it is described in the Old Testament, and Jesus’ work side-by-side. We know that Jesus, a Jew, kept the Law perfectly. Hebrews explains how Jesus did what he did in keeping with the Law. If He failed in the smallest detail then He could not atone for us. Had he failed, Jesus would no longer be qualified to be our Savior. Small details in Hebrews distinguished the true Messiah from a false messiah. It illustrates how the Levitical system of the Mosaic Law looked forward to Jesus’ Atonement; and from the Atonement looks back to the Levitical system. When you consider all this, I don’t understand how LDS teaching could say otherwise.
It appears that your understanding comes from this source:
In the Garden of Gethsemane, the weight of our sins caused him to feel such agony and heartbreak that he bled from every pore (see D&C 19:18–19).
Is there something I’ve missed? I understand when you say that Mormon doctrine is an open cannon. What I don't underdstand is how "open canon" can alter history?
Re The Atonement
-
_sruggio
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:47 pm
Dezire2Bwise writes:
The Book of Mormon refers to the Law of Moses:
“Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. I am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name. I came unto my own, and my own received me not. And the scriptures concerning my coming are fulfilled. And as many as have received me, to them have I given to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me redemption cometh, and in me is the law of Moses fulfilled. 3Nephi 15-17 "
I believe that these verses help us with our knowledge that Jesus Christ is the Jehovah of the Old Testament. Using this as a basis, Jesus was the creator in Genesis, He was the one who talked to Abraham, He was the one who Moses talked to face to face, ETC, ETC, ETC. you can understand most of the confusion in the Bible about who Jesus Christ is and His relationship with God The Father.
The Law of Moses was given to the children of Israel to teach them how to worship God and how to treat one another. Because they were so “stiff necked”, God had to make it simple for them to understand. The LDS people believe that the Mosaic Law is a watered down version of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The rules and sequences for sacrifice and the other temple ordinances were spelled out in minute detail because, of the children of Israel, only the tribe of Levi could follow the rules and even they had a hard time following them.
The shedding of un-blemished offerings was a symbol of Christ’s ultimate sacrifice. After Jesus shed His blood He said that the Law of Moses is fulfilled, and sacrifice ended. Now the emblems of Christ’s blood and body are found in the Sacrament.
We, as LDS, partake of the Lord’s Sacrament each week. (there are a few exceptions) The Sacrament to us is the renewing of the baptismal covenant that we made. It helps remind us that we promised the Lord to keep His commandments, and to do His will every day.
Dezire2Bwise; You say that “It illustrates how the Levitical system of the Mosaic Law looked forward to Jesus’ Atonement; and from the Atonement looks back to the Levitical system. When you consider all this, I don’t understand how LDS teaching could say otherwise.”
I believe that our answer to you is that the Levitical Priesthood was the lesser Priesthood of God. (the higher Priesthood being the Melchedizec Priesthood). Remember that we believe that everything that Moses did, he did for a group of people who couldn’t wait forty days to receive revelation from God through Moses. Therefore, to put it in a nutshell, the Levitical system did in deed look forward to the Messiah and the Atonement. But to conclude that the Atonement was dependent upon a Priesthood given to a people who couldn’t control themselves with all of the miracles they had received is stretching ones imagination.
Dezire2Bwise; “Therefore, if ye teach the law of Moses, also teach that it is a shadow of those things which are to come— Mosiah 16:14”
Notice here that Mosiah is saying that the Law of Moses is a shadow of those things which are to come. In other words “The law that Jesus Christ will bring will be much greater than the Law of Moses which is a shadow (subset) of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You know the new commandments that Jesus taught. They go way beyond the Law of Moses.
Dezire2Bwise; “Does this Book of Mormon reference refer to some other Law of Moses than what is in the Old Testament? The topical guide cross references Mosiah 16:14 to Hebrews 10:1. The Law is a fixed point of reference that the Book of Mormon agrees is the context of all that Jesus did.”
Yes indeed, the other law is called the Gospel of Jesus Christ and we all know that it is much more encompassing than the Law of Moses.
Stan
The Book of Mormon refers to the Law of Moses:
“Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. I am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name. I came unto my own, and my own received me not. And the scriptures concerning my coming are fulfilled. And as many as have received me, to them have I given to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me redemption cometh, and in me is the law of Moses fulfilled. 3Nephi 15-17 "
I believe that these verses help us with our knowledge that Jesus Christ is the Jehovah of the Old Testament. Using this as a basis, Jesus was the creator in Genesis, He was the one who talked to Abraham, He was the one who Moses talked to face to face, ETC, ETC, ETC. you can understand most of the confusion in the Bible about who Jesus Christ is and His relationship with God The Father.
The Law of Moses was given to the children of Israel to teach them how to worship God and how to treat one another. Because they were so “stiff necked”, God had to make it simple for them to understand. The LDS people believe that the Mosaic Law is a watered down version of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The rules and sequences for sacrifice and the other temple ordinances were spelled out in minute detail because, of the children of Israel, only the tribe of Levi could follow the rules and even they had a hard time following them.
The shedding of un-blemished offerings was a symbol of Christ’s ultimate sacrifice. After Jesus shed His blood He said that the Law of Moses is fulfilled, and sacrifice ended. Now the emblems of Christ’s blood and body are found in the Sacrament.
We, as LDS, partake of the Lord’s Sacrament each week. (there are a few exceptions) The Sacrament to us is the renewing of the baptismal covenant that we made. It helps remind us that we promised the Lord to keep His commandments, and to do His will every day.
Dezire2Bwise; You say that “It illustrates how the Levitical system of the Mosaic Law looked forward to Jesus’ Atonement; and from the Atonement looks back to the Levitical system. When you consider all this, I don’t understand how LDS teaching could say otherwise.”
I believe that our answer to you is that the Levitical Priesthood was the lesser Priesthood of God. (the higher Priesthood being the Melchedizec Priesthood). Remember that we believe that everything that Moses did, he did for a group of people who couldn’t wait forty days to receive revelation from God through Moses. Therefore, to put it in a nutshell, the Levitical system did in deed look forward to the Messiah and the Atonement. But to conclude that the Atonement was dependent upon a Priesthood given to a people who couldn’t control themselves with all of the miracles they had received is stretching ones imagination.
Dezire2Bwise; “Therefore, if ye teach the law of Moses, also teach that it is a shadow of those things which are to come— Mosiah 16:14”
Notice here that Mosiah is saying that the Law of Moses is a shadow of those things which are to come. In other words “The law that Jesus Christ will bring will be much greater than the Law of Moses which is a shadow (subset) of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You know the new commandments that Jesus taught. They go way beyond the Law of Moses.
Dezire2Bwise; “Does this Book of Mormon reference refer to some other Law of Moses than what is in the Old Testament? The topical guide cross references Mosiah 16:14 to Hebrews 10:1. The Law is a fixed point of reference that the Book of Mormon agrees is the context of all that Jesus did.”
Yes indeed, the other law is called the Gospel of Jesus Christ and we all know that it is much more encompassing than the Law of Moses.
Stan
-
_Jason Bourne
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9207
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm
Re: The Atonement
Dezire2BWise wrote:JB –
Now I’m really confused. I went to the LDS.org site for help, and I was surprised to find that….
The Book of Mormon refers to the Law of Moses:
“Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I acreated the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. bI am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name. I came unto my own, and my own areceived me not. And the scriptures bconcerning my coming are fulfilled. And as many as have received me, to them have I agiven to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me bredemption cometh, and cin me is the dlaw of Moses fulfilled. 3Nephi 15-17
Therefore, if ye teach the alaw of Moses, also teach that it is a bshadow of those things which are to come— Mosiah 16:14
Does this Book of Mormon reference refer to some other Law of Moses than what is in the Old Testament? The topical guide cross references Mosiah 16:14 to Hebrews 10:1. The Law is a fixed point of reference that the Book of Mormon agrees is the context of all that Jesus did.
The book of Hebrews was written for a Jewish audience to show them how Jesus established the New Covenant in terms familiar to them. Hebrews places the Levitical system, as it is described in the Old Testament, and Jesus’ work side-by-side. We know that Jesus, a Jew, kept the Law perfectly. Hebrews explains how Jesus did what he did in keeping with the Law. If He failed in the smallest detail then He could not atone for us. Had he failed, Jesus would no longer be qualified to be our Savior. Small details in Hebrews distinguished the true Messiah from a false messiah. It illustrates how the Levitical system of the Mosaic Law looked forward to Jesus’ Atonement; and from the Atonement looks back to the Levitical system. When you consider all this, I don’t understand LDS teaching could say otherwise.
It appears that your understanding comes from this source:
In the Garden of Gethsemane, the weight of our sins caused him to feel such agony and heartbreak that he bled from every pore (see D&C 19:18–19).
Is there something I’ve missed? I understand when you say that Mormon doctrine is an open cannon. What I don't underdstand is how "open canon" can alter history?
The reference in Mosiah to keeping the law of Moses takes place about 120 BC so it is pre Jesus' earthly ministry. 3 Nephi is after his ministry thus he tells the Nephites that the law is fullfillled. The Book of Mormon people were from Jerusalem and we believe led by God to leave about 600 BC and then he brought them to the Americas. Thus they had scriptures of the Old Testament up to Jeremiah who was a contemporary of Lehi. The Book of Mormon people kept the law before Jesus came but it seems they also had a more enlightened revelation about Jesus and also practiced baptism and a form of Christianity before he came as well as keeping the law of Moses.
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
Re: The Atonement
Hi Stan-
Mormons and non-Mormons have to us look back to the Old Testament to understand the context of the events in Jesus’ life and ministry. He kept the law as an anonymous carpenter’s son, throughout His ministry and in the Atonement. The Old Testament records form and function of the elaborate Mosaic Law that was ordained by God and served as the pattern of things that pointing, like a laser beam, to the Law of Christ. As I stated, the manner in which the Law was to be observed is a historical fact. The Law was
The Law had not been set aside in Jesus’ time. When he engaged others in ministry it was in context of the Mosaic Law.
Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. Jn 1:45
Did not Moses give you the law, and [yet] none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?... If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day—Jn 7: 19&23
God ordained that New Covenant, ( the Law of Christ), be understood in context with the Law of Moses. There’s a reason God allowed these historical markers; they are immune to “open canon”. These facts are well-established outside of religious discussions, but in religious discussions they help us test the heartfelt things we sincerely believe “beyond a shadow of a doubt”.
The focus here is the Levitical system under the Law of Moses and how that relates to the Atonement. Hebrews puts Jesus’ work of Atonement side-by-side with the Levitical system to illustrate how Jesus claims and His works fit perfectly according to the patterns of the Law. Christ fulfilled and put away the Mosaic Law and the Levitical system.
To answer you question.
“Have I helped you understand that we as LDS people believe without a shadow of doubt that only Jesus has the authority to save?”
Jesus said,
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.- Matt 27:7
And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here [is] Christ; or, lo, [he is] there; believe [him] not: For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect. But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.- Matt 13:21-23
Jesus didn'tt hide behind His authority, instead, He invited “doubting” Thomas to touch His wounds; He wasn’t offended at all. You see, Thomas wanted to make sure that this was the real Jesus. Notice that Jesus is not offended by honest questions and discussions when the participants have the right heart. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Jesus of the Bible has the authority to save. I accept the Bible as God’s word from Genesis to Revelation. I only ask that like Jesus, you condescend and let me “touch the wounds” in a way that makes sense to me as Jesus did with Thomas. Is the LDS Jesus the real Jesus or is this a case of “identity theft”? Show me in your response that the LDS teaching on the Atonement is true according to the Mosaic Law; the immutable standard set by both the Bible and the Book of Mormon.
If the LDS claim fails to meet the very standard which it acknowledges the then all that the LDS practices is fruitless.
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 2Tim 3:5
Bye for now
Mormons and non-Mormons have to us look back to the Old Testament to understand the context of the events in Jesus’ life and ministry. He kept the law as an anonymous carpenter’s son, throughout His ministry and in the Atonement. The Old Testament records form and function of the elaborate Mosaic Law that was ordained by God and served as the pattern of things that pointing, like a laser beam, to the Law of Christ. As I stated, the manner in which the Law was to be observed is a historical fact. The Law was
The Law had not been set aside in Jesus’ time. When he engaged others in ministry it was in context of the Mosaic Law.
Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. Jn 1:45
Did not Moses give you the law, and [yet] none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?... If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day—Jn 7: 19&23
God ordained that New Covenant, ( the Law of Christ), be understood in context with the Law of Moses. There’s a reason God allowed these historical markers; they are immune to “open canon”. These facts are well-established outside of religious discussions, but in religious discussions they help us test the heartfelt things we sincerely believe “beyond a shadow of a doubt”.
The focus here is the Levitical system under the Law of Moses and how that relates to the Atonement. Hebrews puts Jesus’ work of Atonement side-by-side with the Levitical system to illustrate how Jesus claims and His works fit perfectly according to the patterns of the Law. Christ fulfilled and put away the Mosaic Law and the Levitical system.
To answer you question.
“Have I helped you understand that we as LDS people believe without a shadow of doubt that only Jesus has the authority to save?”
Jesus said,
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.- Matt 27:7
And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here [is] Christ; or, lo, [he is] there; believe [him] not: For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect. But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.- Matt 13:21-23
Jesus didn'tt hide behind His authority, instead, He invited “doubting” Thomas to touch His wounds; He wasn’t offended at all. You see, Thomas wanted to make sure that this was the real Jesus. Notice that Jesus is not offended by honest questions and discussions when the participants have the right heart. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Jesus of the Bible has the authority to save. I accept the Bible as God’s word from Genesis to Revelation. I only ask that like Jesus, you condescend and let me “touch the wounds” in a way that makes sense to me as Jesus did with Thomas. Is the LDS Jesus the real Jesus or is this a case of “identity theft”? Show me in your response that the LDS teaching on the Atonement is true according to the Mosaic Law; the immutable standard set by both the Bible and the Book of Mormon.
If the LDS claim fails to meet the very standard which it acknowledges the then all that the LDS practices is fruitless.
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 2Tim 3:5
Bye for now
-
_sruggio
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:47 pm
Dezire2Bwise
Well I am back from taking may grandson to the MTC in Provo. It was such a beautiful experience seeing the hundreds of young men and women who are willing to give two years (men) or 18 months (women) to serve Jesus Christ 24 hours a day seven days a week.
I guess one place that you and I differ in opinion is on the Levitical Priesthood and the Mosaic Law. It looks like you believe that everything is based on these two points. I firmly believe that the Law of Moses was a lesser law than what God had intended for the people to live. Heck, who can’t live the law of Moses? Ie. the ten commandments. I agree with you that the Mosaic Law pointed to the Law of Christ. I never said that Jesus set aside the Mosaic Law, I said that Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Law and then added to the Law the Higher Law of Christ.
I think that it would be a waste of time to cut and paste the many New Testament scriptures where Jesus is expounding His higher expectations than the Law Of Moses required, because I believe that you already know them and I feel that you probably live up to the New Commandments just like I try to do.
Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. Jn 1:45
No conflict here we both believe that the Mosaic Law, and that the Prophets taught the people to look forward to the Messiah (Jesus Christ).
"Did not Moses give you the law, and [yet] none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?... If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day—Jn 7: 19&23"
Again we have no conflict here, but you fail to point out that “none of you keepeth the Law”. Christ is telling the religious leaders of the “Mosaic Law” that they are not keeping the law of Moses. For how many years previous to this were they “not keeping the law”?
For me I cannot put a lot of credence only on the Mosaic Law that the leaders were not following, combined with my belief that the Mosaic Law was just a sub-set of the "Law of Christ" we call the Gospel. I believe that Moses tried to bring the fullness of Christ’s Gospel to the people the first time he came down with the tablets. The second time he came down he brought the watered down Mosaic Law. You have to agree that the Gospel that Jesus taught, goes way beyond the Mosaic Law.
Dezire2Bwise; Here I am trying to answer you line by line, by pasting your comments into my response, and then I find this comment “The focus here is the Levitical system under the Law of Moses and how that relates to the Atonement. Hebrews puts Jesus’ work of Atonement side-by-side with the Levitical system to illustrate how Jesus claims and His works fit perfectly according to the patterns of the Law. Christ fulfilled and put away the Mosaic Law and the Levitical system.” I thought that in your previous posts you said that Christ did not put away the Mosaic Law. I never said that He "put away" the Mosaic Law, I said that He fulfilled the Law, and then added to it.
Dezire2Bwise; The following I do find to be offensive.
(Stan) “To answer you question.
“Have I helped you understand that we as LDS people believe without a shadow of doubt that only Jesus has the authority to save?” “
(Dezire2Bwise) “Jesus said,
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.- Matt 27:7
And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here [is] Christ; or, lo, [he is] there; believe [him] not: For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect. But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.- Matt 13:21-23”
You are assuming that I am being deceived. I can make the same argument that you may be the one being deceived. After all you are relying only upon scriptures that someone decided should make up the Bible. We all know that there are minor errors in the Bible, we also know from the Bible itself that there are missing writings of the prophets. You probably spurn the idea of modern day prophets. If you receive personal revelations I hope that you don’t think that God is giving you revelations to pass on to me, because that would make you a prophetess that you probably don’t think even exists.
Dezire2Bwise “Jesus didn'tt hide behind His authority, instead, He invited “doubting” Thomas to touch His wounds; He wasn’t offended at all.”
Yes, but you fail to post all of what Jesus said about Thomas. John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
Wait a minute! What is this in verse 30? John 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
Jesus did many other signs, which are not written in this book?????? Wow! I wonder if that could be called scripture as well.
Dezire2Bwise “I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Jesus of the Bible has the authority to save.” So do I.
Dezire2Bwise “I accept the Bible as God’s word from Genesis to Revelation.” I do too except for the errors of men.
Dezire2Bwise “I only ask that like Jesus, you condescend and let me “touch the wounds” in a way that makes sense to me as Jesus did with Thomas.”
Wow! Do you really mean “condescend” “1 a : to descend to a less formal or dignified level : UNBEND b : to waive the privileges of rank
2 : to assume an air of superiority”
I can’t quite figure out if you think that I am putting myself above someone else or that I think that I am superior to anyone, I pray not. And your words “let me “touch the wounds” in a way that makes sense to me as Jesus did with Thomas.” Are you saying that you want to heal or fix me? I pray not.
Thomas didn’t put himself above the other Apostles, he only said that he had to see to believe.
Dezire2Bwise “Is the LDS Jesus the real Jesus or is this a case of “identity theft”? Show me in your response that the LDS teaching on the Atonement is true according to the Mosaic Law; the immutable standard set by both the Bible and the Book of Mormon.”
I stand behind my belief that the Mosaic Law was a sub-set of Jesus’ Law. Remember that it was given to a “stiffed necked people” who couldn’t wait forty days for Moses to return from talking to God. Therefore your “immutable standard” is a phony standard.
Dezire2Bwise “If the LDS claim fails to meet the very standard which it acknowledges the then all that the LDS practices is fruitless.”
The LDS faith knows that God gave the Law to Moses. I believe that it was a sub-standard law that everyone was expected to live.
Dezire2Bwise “Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 2Tim 3:5”
We quote the same verse to you.
Stan
Well I am back from taking may grandson to the MTC in Provo. It was such a beautiful experience seeing the hundreds of young men and women who are willing to give two years (men) or 18 months (women) to serve Jesus Christ 24 hours a day seven days a week.
I guess one place that you and I differ in opinion is on the Levitical Priesthood and the Mosaic Law. It looks like you believe that everything is based on these two points. I firmly believe that the Law of Moses was a lesser law than what God had intended for the people to live. Heck, who can’t live the law of Moses? Ie. the ten commandments. I agree with you that the Mosaic Law pointed to the Law of Christ. I never said that Jesus set aside the Mosaic Law, I said that Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Law and then added to the Law the Higher Law of Christ.
I think that it would be a waste of time to cut and paste the many New Testament scriptures where Jesus is expounding His higher expectations than the Law Of Moses required, because I believe that you already know them and I feel that you probably live up to the New Commandments just like I try to do.
Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. Jn 1:45
No conflict here we both believe that the Mosaic Law, and that the Prophets taught the people to look forward to the Messiah (Jesus Christ).
"Did not Moses give you the law, and [yet] none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?... If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day—Jn 7: 19&23"
Again we have no conflict here, but you fail to point out that “none of you keepeth the Law”. Christ is telling the religious leaders of the “Mosaic Law” that they are not keeping the law of Moses. For how many years previous to this were they “not keeping the law”?
For me I cannot put a lot of credence only on the Mosaic Law that the leaders were not following, combined with my belief that the Mosaic Law was just a sub-set of the "Law of Christ" we call the Gospel. I believe that Moses tried to bring the fullness of Christ’s Gospel to the people the first time he came down with the tablets. The second time he came down he brought the watered down Mosaic Law. You have to agree that the Gospel that Jesus taught, goes way beyond the Mosaic Law.
Dezire2Bwise; Here I am trying to answer you line by line, by pasting your comments into my response, and then I find this comment “The focus here is the Levitical system under the Law of Moses and how that relates to the Atonement. Hebrews puts Jesus’ work of Atonement side-by-side with the Levitical system to illustrate how Jesus claims and His works fit perfectly according to the patterns of the Law. Christ fulfilled and put away the Mosaic Law and the Levitical system.” I thought that in your previous posts you said that Christ did not put away the Mosaic Law. I never said that He "put away" the Mosaic Law, I said that He fulfilled the Law, and then added to it.
Dezire2Bwise; The following I do find to be offensive.
(Stan) “To answer you question.
“Have I helped you understand that we as LDS people believe without a shadow of doubt that only Jesus has the authority to save?” “
(Dezire2Bwise) “Jesus said,
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.- Matt 27:7
And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here [is] Christ; or, lo, [he is] there; believe [him] not: For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect. But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.- Matt 13:21-23”
You are assuming that I am being deceived. I can make the same argument that you may be the one being deceived. After all you are relying only upon scriptures that someone decided should make up the Bible. We all know that there are minor errors in the Bible, we also know from the Bible itself that there are missing writings of the prophets. You probably spurn the idea of modern day prophets. If you receive personal revelations I hope that you don’t think that God is giving you revelations to pass on to me, because that would make you a prophetess that you probably don’t think even exists.
Dezire2Bwise “Jesus didn'tt hide behind His authority, instead, He invited “doubting” Thomas to touch His wounds; He wasn’t offended at all.”
Yes, but you fail to post all of what Jesus said about Thomas. John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
Wait a minute! What is this in verse 30? John 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
Jesus did many other signs, which are not written in this book?????? Wow! I wonder if that could be called scripture as well.
Dezire2Bwise “I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Jesus of the Bible has the authority to save.” So do I.
Dezire2Bwise “I accept the Bible as God’s word from Genesis to Revelation.” I do too except for the errors of men.
Dezire2Bwise “I only ask that like Jesus, you condescend and let me “touch the wounds” in a way that makes sense to me as Jesus did with Thomas.”
Wow! Do you really mean “condescend” “1 a : to descend to a less formal or dignified level : UNBEND b : to waive the privileges of rank
2 : to assume an air of superiority”
I can’t quite figure out if you think that I am putting myself above someone else or that I think that I am superior to anyone, I pray not. And your words “let me “touch the wounds” in a way that makes sense to me as Jesus did with Thomas.” Are you saying that you want to heal or fix me? I pray not.
Thomas didn’t put himself above the other Apostles, he only said that he had to see to believe.
Dezire2Bwise “Is the LDS Jesus the real Jesus or is this a case of “identity theft”? Show me in your response that the LDS teaching on the Atonement is true according to the Mosaic Law; the immutable standard set by both the Bible and the Book of Mormon.”
I stand behind my belief that the Mosaic Law was a sub-set of Jesus’ Law. Remember that it was given to a “stiffed necked people” who couldn’t wait forty days for Moses to return from talking to God. Therefore your “immutable standard” is a phony standard.
Dezire2Bwise “If the LDS claim fails to meet the very standard which it acknowledges the then all that the LDS practices is fruitless.”
The LDS faith knows that God gave the Law to Moses. I believe that it was a sub-standard law that everyone was expected to live.
Dezire2Bwise “Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 2Tim 3:5”
We quote the same verse to you.
Stan
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
Welcome back Stan. I admire that you have been in your grandson’s life through the years as well as for this milestone. No doubt the confidence you have in him is an encouragement for him to move on to other milestones.
Regarding my statements you deem offensive; religious discussions can get into tall weeds, but I just want to assure you that a personal attack is not my intention. I mean you no ill will whatsoever. I see the celestial forum as a place where we can vigorously discuss our differences and yet, “take off the gloves” in a respectful way. by the way, we are both busy people, and I do appreciate the time you’ve taken time to compose thoughtful responses…thorns and all. I could likewise be offended by the founder of the LDS:
18 My object in going to ainquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all awrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those bprofessors were all ccorrupt; that: “they ddraw near to me with their lips, but their ehearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the fcommandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the gpower thereof.”
--Joseph Smith, History of the Church http://scriptures.LDS.org/en/js_h/1
So you see, Joseph Smith, cast the first stone, laid down the gauntlet, drew the line in the sand, etc. Ironically, the content of his statements were taken from the Bible.
1. You said:“Wait a minute! What is this in verse 30? John 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
Jesus did many other signs, which are not written in this book?????? Wow! I wonder if that could be called scripture as well. “
You’re right, let’s quote the whole passage:
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed. And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: [i]But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.Jn 20:30-31[/i]
Dezire2Bwise “I accept the Bible as God’s word from Genesis to Revelation.” I do too except for the errors of men.
Ok Stan, I happen to believe that the Bible is 100% correct, you don’t, fair enough. You do agree that some of it is true, and that’s the part I wish to address. According to the verse in John 20, the original writers didn’t write down everything either, but what they did include of eyewitness accounts, cultural idioms and anecdotes, and historical markers was by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Now, if the original writer, John admits that there are other things Jesus said and did, why does he re-focus the reader's attention to what he has recorded? What was the puropse of he wrote--"that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." We can speculate about what isn't there, but we should test what is written. I certainly agree with you about the errors of men. God placed things in scripture that you and I can test doctrines that come our way. “Errors of men” are not a new thing. Jesus repeatedly quoted Scripture dealt with these things when He confronted the Pharisees who misrepresented the Law. Why? because the law pointed to Him. I don’t want to make things up, so I am going by His play book. Jesus illumined the errors of men with the truth of scripture. So, what specific errors of men have you identified?
2. You said
Here I am trying to answer you line by line, by pasting your comments into my response, and then I find this comment “The focus here is the Levitical system under the Law of Moses and how that relates to the Atonement. Hebrews puts Jesus’ work of Atonement side-by-side with the Levitical system to illustrate how Jesus claims and His works fit perfectly according to the patterns of the Law. Christ fulfilled and put away the Mosaic Law and the Levitical system.” I thought that in your previous posts you said that Christ did not put away the Mosaic Law. I never said that He "put away" the Mosaic Law, I said that He fulfilled the Law, and then added to it…… I stand behind my belief that the Mosaic Law was a sub-set of Jesus’ Law. Remember that it was given to a “stiffed necked people” who couldn’t wait forty days for Moses to return from talking to God. Therefore your “immutable standard” is a phony standard.
Apologies. Sometimes think I have correctly communicated what’s in my head, but it doesn’t always come out right.
If I understand you correctly, we agree that Jehovah of the Old Testament is Jesus, right? I think we also agree that the Mosaic Law cannot save. The point I wish to make here is this; God’s Law is Jehovah’s Law and the Law of Christ is the Spirit of the Law. God’s Law has never changed; it is immutable. That means was not added to or changed. The manner in which God’s Law was manifested in different ways, but again, God’s Law never changed. God’s Law is the open and closed parentheses around the Mosaic Law. The Jews lived inside the parenthesis as did Jesus during his earthly life. God’s Law, the “way of atonement”, was manifested by the Lord’s Passover, the Mosaic Law and restored to the Lord’s Passover by Jesus, the “Lamb of God”. A two-part atonement that began in Gethsemane as the LDS asserts, is simply not in view.
Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 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.” (Matt 5:17:18)
“Till heaven and earth pass” defines the time limits what we’re discussing; “…one jot or one tittle”, means the itty-bitty details of undisputed, historical things that were written. Jesus was obviously was referring to what we call the Old Testament and He addressed this Jewish audience in context of what they understood, the Law of Moses. This is an example of many things Jesus said that had a double meaning. Like the temple, the Law of Moses was only a pattern of heavenly things. In contrast, while the LDS agrees that the Atonement was an important event, it shuns as unimportant the itty-bitty details that Jesus, Himself said are still in effect, today. Why, then, do you day that this guidepost Jesus used is a is a “phony standard”?
Jesus told the woman at the well, ‘salvation is of the Jews’. And so it was at that time because the God’s Law was manifested in the Mosaic Law (Jn 4:22). Hebrews explains how Jesus’ work made the transition of God’s Law from it’s symbolic observance to the reality in Christ. While the Law pointed to Jesus’s work. Hebrews looks back at Christ’s work with historic references rooted in Law.
Jesus chided Nicodemus because as a teacher of the Law, he just wasn't getting the spiritual applications about the mission of the Messiah.
Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things....And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Jn 3:10,14-16
The reality of the law is spiritual and that is what the Jews did not apprehend, (Heb 9:9-11). Neither does the LDS, hence, its teaching on the Atonement. We know that Jesus manifested the spirit of the Law but He had to connect the dots for His Jewish disciples. Note that in this scene, we have even moved past the Atonement to the Resurrection yet Jesus begins with the Mosaic Law.
Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Lk 24: 25-2
I appreciate that you share LDS beliefs. I’m just asking that you cite biblical references to support your claim. Mormons understand that Jesus followed “the law” and that he kept “the law” perfectly. Since He applied details of the law to his ministry and work, what is your understanding of the Mosaic Law with respect to Christ’s work that supports the LDS teaching on the atonement? Since, as I’m told in another post, serious Mormons study the Bible two of every four years in Sunday school, my questions shouldn’t pose a problem.
Regarding my statements you deem offensive; religious discussions can get into tall weeds, but I just want to assure you that a personal attack is not my intention. I mean you no ill will whatsoever. I see the celestial forum as a place where we can vigorously discuss our differences and yet, “take off the gloves” in a respectful way. by the way, we are both busy people, and I do appreciate the time you’ve taken time to compose thoughtful responses…thorns and all. I could likewise be offended by the founder of the LDS:
18 My object in going to ainquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all awrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those bprofessors were all ccorrupt; that: “they ddraw near to me with their lips, but their ehearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the fcommandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the gpower thereof.”
--Joseph Smith, History of the Church http://scriptures.LDS.org/en/js_h/1
So you see, Joseph Smith, cast the first stone, laid down the gauntlet, drew the line in the sand, etc. Ironically, the content of his statements were taken from the Bible.
1. You said:“Wait a minute! What is this in verse 30? John 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
Jesus did many other signs, which are not written in this book?????? Wow! I wonder if that could be called scripture as well. “
You’re right, let’s quote the whole passage:
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed. And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: [i]But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.Jn 20:30-31[/i]
Dezire2Bwise “I accept the Bible as God’s word from Genesis to Revelation.” I do too except for the errors of men.
Ok Stan, I happen to believe that the Bible is 100% correct, you don’t, fair enough. You do agree that some of it is true, and that’s the part I wish to address. According to the verse in John 20, the original writers didn’t write down everything either, but what they did include of eyewitness accounts, cultural idioms and anecdotes, and historical markers was by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Now, if the original writer, John admits that there are other things Jesus said and did, why does he re-focus the reader's attention to what he has recorded? What was the puropse of he wrote--"that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." We can speculate about what isn't there, but we should test what is written. I certainly agree with you about the errors of men. God placed things in scripture that you and I can test doctrines that come our way. “Errors of men” are not a new thing. Jesus repeatedly quoted Scripture dealt with these things when He confronted the Pharisees who misrepresented the Law. Why? because the law pointed to Him. I don’t want to make things up, so I am going by His play book. Jesus illumined the errors of men with the truth of scripture. So, what specific errors of men have you identified?
2. You said
Here I am trying to answer you line by line, by pasting your comments into my response, and then I find this comment “The focus here is the Levitical system under the Law of Moses and how that relates to the Atonement. Hebrews puts Jesus’ work of Atonement side-by-side with the Levitical system to illustrate how Jesus claims and His works fit perfectly according to the patterns of the Law. Christ fulfilled and put away the Mosaic Law and the Levitical system.” I thought that in your previous posts you said that Christ did not put away the Mosaic Law. I never said that He "put away" the Mosaic Law, I said that He fulfilled the Law, and then added to it…… I stand behind my belief that the Mosaic Law was a sub-set of Jesus’ Law. Remember that it was given to a “stiffed necked people” who couldn’t wait forty days for Moses to return from talking to God. Therefore your “immutable standard” is a phony standard.
Apologies. Sometimes think I have correctly communicated what’s in my head, but it doesn’t always come out right.
If I understand you correctly, we agree that Jehovah of the Old Testament is Jesus, right? I think we also agree that the Mosaic Law cannot save. The point I wish to make here is this; God’s Law is Jehovah’s Law and the Law of Christ is the Spirit of the Law. God’s Law has never changed; it is immutable. That means was not added to or changed. The manner in which God’s Law was manifested in different ways, but again, God’s Law never changed. God’s Law is the open and closed parentheses around the Mosaic Law. The Jews lived inside the parenthesis as did Jesus during his earthly life. God’s Law, the “way of atonement”, was manifested by the Lord’s Passover, the Mosaic Law and restored to the Lord’s Passover by Jesus, the “Lamb of God”. A two-part atonement that began in Gethsemane as the LDS asserts, is simply not in view.
Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 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.” (Matt 5:17:18)
“Till heaven and earth pass” defines the time limits what we’re discussing; “…one jot or one tittle”, means the itty-bitty details of undisputed, historical things that were written. Jesus was obviously was referring to what we call the Old Testament and He addressed this Jewish audience in context of what they understood, the Law of Moses. This is an example of many things Jesus said that had a double meaning. Like the temple, the Law of Moses was only a pattern of heavenly things. In contrast, while the LDS agrees that the Atonement was an important event, it shuns as unimportant the itty-bitty details that Jesus, Himself said are still in effect, today. Why, then, do you day that this guidepost Jesus used is a is a “phony standard”?
Jesus told the woman at the well, ‘salvation is of the Jews’. And so it was at that time because the God’s Law was manifested in the Mosaic Law (Jn 4:22). Hebrews explains how Jesus’ work made the transition of God’s Law from it’s symbolic observance to the reality in Christ. While the Law pointed to Jesus’s work. Hebrews looks back at Christ’s work with historic references rooted in Law.
Jesus chided Nicodemus because as a teacher of the Law, he just wasn't getting the spiritual applications about the mission of the Messiah.
Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things....And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Jn 3:10,14-16
The reality of the law is spiritual and that is what the Jews did not apprehend, (Heb 9:9-11). Neither does the LDS, hence, its teaching on the Atonement. We know that Jesus manifested the spirit of the Law but He had to connect the dots for His Jewish disciples. Note that in this scene, we have even moved past the Atonement to the Resurrection yet Jesus begins with the Mosaic Law.
Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Lk 24: 25-2
I appreciate that you share LDS beliefs. I’m just asking that you cite biblical references to support your claim. Mormons understand that Jesus followed “the law” and that he kept “the law” perfectly. Since He applied details of the law to his ministry and work, what is your understanding of the Mosaic Law with respect to Christ’s work that supports the LDS teaching on the atonement? Since, as I’m told in another post, serious Mormons study the Bible two of every four years in Sunday school, my questions shouldn’t pose a problem.
-
_sruggio
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:47 pm
Hello Desire2Bwise
What a dummy I am. I just posted this response to you in the wrong discussion group.
I think that both of us post too much in each single posting.
We may come to a better understanding of each other if we address one point at a time.
So I am going to violate my proposal right away because one item is a simple clarification on LDS Sunday School, and how our meetings are organized.
The Gospel Doctrine classes for the Sunday School system in the LDS church follows a schedule for every member from 12 to ???. The Gospel Doctrine classes teach Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, D&C Pearl of Great Price and Church History once every four years. In each class Scriptures from all four sources are use to teach the class as well as written talks of our General Authorities. Each week the Sunday School Manual tells you what subject to cover, and gives you Scripture references to get you started. The teacher is expected to pray for inspiration and study the scriptures so that the teacher can convey the subject matter. As you can guess some do a better job than others.
In our Sacrament meetings, usually the first Sunday of the month is Fast Sunday. We are asked to fast two meals, donate the funds that we would have spent on those meals to the Bishop of use in helping those in need. Each individual starts and ends his/her fast by praying for those that they know might be in need of blessings from the Lord.
One week each month the “sermon” is given by two members of the Stake leadership. A Stake is a group pf 5 to 10 Wards (congregations).
Of the other 2 to 3 weeks, ninety percent of our sermons, as you would call them, are given by the members. The other ten percent may be given by the Bishop (preacher equivalent) or his councilors. If you were a member of the church, a member of the Bishopric wound ask you to give a 15 minute talk on lets say baptism, in two to four weeks. You have the right to refuse without being looked down upon. My wife has never given a talk in the 44 years we have been married. Because I have a calling in the Stake I give 8 to 10 talks a year.
I can see why you could be offended by Joseph Smith’s words. We as LDS believe that they were the words of God. Since you do not believe that Joseph saw and talked to God, and therefore do not believe that these were God’s words, then your offense would be justified.
Now here comes a question to you. Joseph Smith claims that God told him that none of the churches was the true church of Jesus Christ. He said in essence that all had a form of Godliness but that none had the full truth. By rejecting Joseph Smith’s claim, you probably believe that at least one had the truth. In your opinion which church today, teaches the true Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Remember one simple question and answer at a time.
Stan
What a dummy I am. I just posted this response to you in the wrong discussion group.
I think that both of us post too much in each single posting.
We may come to a better understanding of each other if we address one point at a time.
So I am going to violate my proposal right away because one item is a simple clarification on LDS Sunday School, and how our meetings are organized.
The Gospel Doctrine classes for the Sunday School system in the LDS church follows a schedule for every member from 12 to ???. The Gospel Doctrine classes teach Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, D&C Pearl of Great Price and Church History once every four years. In each class Scriptures from all four sources are use to teach the class as well as written talks of our General Authorities. Each week the Sunday School Manual tells you what subject to cover, and gives you Scripture references to get you started. The teacher is expected to pray for inspiration and study the scriptures so that the teacher can convey the subject matter. As you can guess some do a better job than others.
In our Sacrament meetings, usually the first Sunday of the month is Fast Sunday. We are asked to fast two meals, donate the funds that we would have spent on those meals to the Bishop of use in helping those in need. Each individual starts and ends his/her fast by praying for those that they know might be in need of blessings from the Lord.
One week each month the “sermon” is given by two members of the Stake leadership. A Stake is a group pf 5 to 10 Wards (congregations).
Of the other 2 to 3 weeks, ninety percent of our sermons, as you would call them, are given by the members. The other ten percent may be given by the Bishop (preacher equivalent) or his councilors. If you were a member of the church, a member of the Bishopric wound ask you to give a 15 minute talk on lets say baptism, in two to four weeks. You have the right to refuse without being looked down upon. My wife has never given a talk in the 44 years we have been married. Because I have a calling in the Stake I give 8 to 10 talks a year.
I can see why you could be offended by Joseph Smith’s words. We as LDS believe that they were the words of God. Since you do not believe that Joseph saw and talked to God, and therefore do not believe that these were God’s words, then your offense would be justified.
Now here comes a question to you. Joseph Smith claims that God told him that none of the churches was the true church of Jesus Christ. He said in essence that all had a form of Godliness but that none had the full truth. By rejecting Joseph Smith’s claim, you probably believe that at least one had the truth. In your opinion which church today, teaches the true Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Remember one simple question and answer at a time.
Stan
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
Good idea, one point at at time.
Answer: The true church of Jesus Christ is His church.
Now a question for you. Which Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the real Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? In my studies, I've come across more groups who claim to be true Mormons. I looked up the witnesses who affirmed Joseph Smith's testimony on Wikipedia and it says there was strife between Smith and these men.
I once met someone who said they were "Mormon", so I'm thinking Salt Lake City, right? Wrong. They were RLDS.
Thanks
Now here comes a question to you. Joseph Smith claims that God told him that none of the churches was the true church of Jesus Christ. He said in essence that all had a form of Godliness but that none had the full truth. By rejecting Joseph Smith’s claim, you probably believe that at least one had the truth. In your opinion which church today, teaches the true Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Answer: The true church of Jesus Christ is His church.
Now a question for you. Which Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the real Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? In my studies, I've come across more groups who claim to be true Mormons. I looked up the witnesses who affirmed Joseph Smith's testimony on Wikipedia and it says there was strife between Smith and these men.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_WitnessesThe Three Witnesses were Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, and David Whitmer, whose joint testimony, in conjunction with a separate statement by Eight Witnesses, has been printed with nearly every edition of the Book of Mormon since its first publication in 1830. All three witnesses eventually broke with Smith and were excommunicated from the church he founded,[1] but to varying degrees, they also all continued to testify to the divine origin of the Book of Mormon.
I once met someone who said they were "Mormon", so I'm thinking Salt Lake City, right? Wrong. They were RLDS.
Thanks
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
Good Morning Stan-
So that you don't get the wrong idea, I'm not offended at all by Joseph Smith's comments. I just offered that for the record. He was referring to the many different Christian denominations. As I get more into this from the LDS side of things he was a scoundrel. He was the Warren Jeffs of his day. I also know that contrary to the image that the Salt Lake City LDS advances there are also many denominations/sects of Mormons. The divisions between them are deep. We visted friends in SLC two years ago. The first morning, we had breakfast at the Denny's in Sandy. A 'family' took a table nearby; two women and one man. Each woman had a toddler. Both children called the man "Daddy", and both women called him "Honey." Like Mr. Spock from Star Trek, my husband and I looked at each other as if to say, "fascinating". They represented the polygamous denomination of Mormons that I know you disagree with. There was also a report on the radio about some tax dispute with the polygamous Hillsdale community. So, one could question the different denominations in Mormonism.
It is given that we disagree on certain doctrinal issues, but my original question, the issue that is still on the table, is what is your biblical support for the LDS teaching on the Atonement?
Talk to you later
So that you don't get the wrong idea, I'm not offended at all by Joseph Smith's comments. I just offered that for the record. He was referring to the many different Christian denominations. As I get more into this from the LDS side of things he was a scoundrel. He was the Warren Jeffs of his day. I also know that contrary to the image that the Salt Lake City LDS advances there are also many denominations/sects of Mormons. The divisions between them are deep. We visted friends in SLC two years ago. The first morning, we had breakfast at the Denny's in Sandy. A 'family' took a table nearby; two women and one man. Each woman had a toddler. Both children called the man "Daddy", and both women called him "Honey." Like Mr. Spock from Star Trek, my husband and I looked at each other as if to say, "fascinating". They represented the polygamous denomination of Mormons that I know you disagree with. There was also a report on the radio about some tax dispute with the polygamous Hillsdale community. So, one could question the different denominations in Mormonism.
It is given that we disagree on certain doctrinal issues, but my original question, the issue that is still on the table, is what is your biblical support for the LDS teaching on the Atonement?
Talk to you later