Desire2Bwise,
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.
Answer: I can see that each question and answer will take many posts to complete if it is possible to complete any particular answer. But this looks like a great way to discuss items.
Of course I believe that the Salt Lake Church is the correct Church of Jesus Christ because I belong to it. You are certainly correct. There are many splinter churches that broke off from the Propjet Joseph Smith both before and after he was murdered. You again are correct that all of the three Witnesses, Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, and David Whitmer, and half of the eight witnesses I think either left the church or were excommunicated. What was interesting to me is that none of them ever denied their testimony even after being excommunicated. I think all but one or two repented and rejoined the church before their death.
Now comes what I think is the real question. If the original three did see the gold plates, and it was the Angel Moroni who showed the plates to them, why did they leave the church? A few months ago I spent many days reading on the internet articles from some newspapers of the mid 1800’s. The persecution from just the newspapers alone made me cringe. Ii is easy for me to see why someone especially in the 1800’s could not stand up to the pressure. Then when you add to that, some of the failures (that right I said failures) of Joseph Smith it is easy to see why they thought that Joseph was a fallen prophet. I find it fascinating to look back and I wondered why Joseph had these failures. After all, if he was the Prophet of God, he should have had protection from God.
My answers may not be exactly correct, but to me they are completely reasonable.
For the sake of briefness I will cover three of what may be considered major failures of Joseph Smith. Notice that I am not cut and pasting here, so forgive me if I make an error because I am going strictly from what I think, and my understandings of what I think what was going on.
First was the bank failure of Kirkland. Joseph started a bank to help members both earn interest on their savings and to help other members purchase property and buy or build homes as they arrived in Kirkland. I don’t think that the bank had sufficient funds to start with. Then there was a general failure of the majority of the banks at that time, Joseph’s bank also failed. Now, why God let the bank fail and Joseph Smith as well. You have probably noticed that many LDS members today have a lot of pride in the LDS Church. I think too much pride. In the 1800’s you have a small community called Kirkland. Here comes a dynamic personality by the name of Joseph Smith. He is telling his followers that he is under direct communication with God. He tells then that under God’s direction he is going to build Zion. Zion, the people who in the Old Testament lived in perfect harmony with God. The people follow Joseph and they come to Kirkland. They start buying up land and the prices skyrocket. The followers are over zealous and the people who lived in Kirkland feel like they are being overrun. The initial followers like the three witnesses and others became prideful. I think that God now decides to find out, who is really faithful and who will fold under pressure. I think the bank failure is the testing ground. And true to form many who lost money turned on Joseph called him a fallen prophet because, “isn’t God supposed to be on their side”?
Next Joseph sends members to Jackson County Mo. He tells them that this is where the new Zion is to be built. Again they buy land as a corporative venture. They farm and help each other. Therefore their yield of their crops is higher. They use their success to purchase more and more land. They kind of vote as a block because they believe that their leader is being led by God Himself. Again their pride gets in their way. There are actual accounts where the Saints tell the people of MO. that they “have” to sell their land. The people of MO. are a bit less civilized than the people of Kirkland so they use harsher means to drive the Mormons out stealing their lands as well. Now comes Joseph’s supposed second failure. Joseph gets together a small army called Zion’s camp. They believe that they are going to MO. to liberate their people and reclaim the lands that were stolen.
The march to MO. was extremely difficult and many lose their faith in Joseph and quit. The army finally arrives in MO. and guess what, Joseph tells them that they are not going to fight but go back home. More members are angry, and believe that Joseph is a fallen prophet. Looking back at history the leaders of the church for the next 50 to 75 years are those who remained faithful during the march. We in the church call it “the refiners fire”. The Lord is weeding out those who’s faith is not solid.
After bring driven out of Jackson County, then Clay County, then Far West, they start up again in Nauvoo. Again they prosper and again they are overcome with pride. Now we come to Joseph’s potential third failure, polygamy. Any reasonable person, in my mind, would ask why in the world would Joseph Smith start doing polygamy. He has started a new community. They already own the land. Nauvoo is now bigger than Chicago and growing faster than any could imagine.
Two of the most obvious answers to me are that either Joseph Smith was a pervert, or that God did not want His people in Nauvoo. I believe that God wanted the saints in the Salt Lake valley, where no one in his right mind would want to go. God also wanted to seal Joseph’s testimony by his martyrdom, Jopseph had to die. I asked my self the question would have the Saints left Nauvoo without being driven out? I say no, they were too successful in Nauvoo. The people of the surrounding areas and the state would not have banded together to drive the Saints out without something extremely compelling to anger them, and that was polygamy.
From each of what could be called Joseph Smith’s failures the people leaving the church set up churches of their own. Keeping some of the church’s teachings and rejecting others. The RLDS church wanted to keep the lineage of Joseph Smith as each succeeding prophet. That lineage failed I think in the early 1900’s when there wasn’t a male heir.
Wow, that is a lot of information that I think is correct and documented history.
I don’t know if you have heard but there are documented stories about when Sidney and Brigham addressed the congregation about who the next prophet would be. Very few of the members were moved spiritually by Sidney’s address. Many saints wrote in their journals, that when Brigham spoke he sounded like Joseph Smith and appeared to be much taller that he actually was. Joseph was at least 6 inches taller than Brigham. Those journals, that I read, said that they were moved by the Holy Ghost to believe and follow Brigham Young.
As I posted before, I am a convert. My wife has a copy of the testimony of a GGG Grandfather who testified of his experience at that conference.
Now back to your answer:
“Answer: The true church of Jesus Christ is His church. “
I do not know what your answer means. There are hundreds if not thousands of churches that profess to be His Church.
For example most Christians believe that Jesus was born of a virgin Mary. So do the LDS’. The Methodists do not believe in the virgin birth of Jesus. So are they part of His Church?
You posted a second response before I could complete this one but I think that this response may satisfy both of your responses. As to the man with two wife’s that you mentioned. As you know we reject him and his beliefs. Just because he believes in 99% of what we believe does not make him a believer. In fact because of his actions he must believe that Gordon B Hinckley is a fallen Prophet.
You mentioned Warren Jeffs. He is in my opinion no better than any other child molester. Just because he hides behind what he says his church beliefs are does not make him anything less than a child molster.
Back to our subject of offshoot churches.
If I remember correctly, Sidney Rigdon started the Church of Christ after his bid for leadership was rejected. Is this the same Church of Christ that we see today?
I again ask the question which Christian church in your opinion is “His Church”? I am looking for an answer like Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, another not listed or a combination of one or more.
You must certainly believe that the church you attend teaches all of Christ’s teachings because you are both devout and intelligent in your postings.
Stan
Re The Atonement
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
Hi Stan- That’s a lot of information. I feel like I’m in school. Your question is off-topic, but here’s a quick response to your last question.
You said:
I can only speak for myself. I belong to a non-denominational church that studies the Bible line-by-line, precept-upon-precept. We are definitely not ecumenical. Who is the True Church? It is the Body of Christ. You will find many who represent the Body of Christ in different Christian denominations; some don’t represent it very well. I gave my testimony in an earlier post where I recalled the time three Christians ministered to me when I was in the midst of a personal crisis. They belonged to three different denominations but they were of one mind. Again, let me stress that this is not ecumenism. I don’t know what it is you misunderstand about the denomination thing. but the Bible is not against denominations, rather it is against divisions and strife.
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
1Cor 1:12-13
Your focus on denominations is a red herring. Although the LDS preaches a different gospel, same kind of division exists among those who call themselves Mormon. So, what’s the common factor? We are all prideful human beings.
In contrast stands the example of the three who ministered to me. They all said the same thing; that I needed the Lord. I also never forgot how they demonstrated Christian unity. They never once tried to win me to one of their churches, they just preached the gospel. Furthermore, these living epistles were all on the same page about what the gospel is. I witnessed their unity in Christ.
Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. [There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all. Eph 4:3-6
Let’s get back to the Atonement. I began this discussion Aug 13. Many have responded but none have answered the question. Perhaps I in all my explaining the question got lost. The question is this: Is Mormon teaching on the Atonement conjecture or bibilical? One post said that it was definitely biblical but offered nothing to back it up. Jesus repeatedly referred to the Old Testament Scriptures to explain all that He did. The New Testament book of Hebrews offers continuity in its side-by-side illustrations from the Old Testament. What scriptures from the Bible can you show that the LDS teaching on the Atonement is consistent with what Jesus explained? Let me put it another way. How has the LDS teaching continued in what the original apostles received from Jesus regarding the Atonement?
Remember, let’s stay on topic.Bye for now.
You said:
I again ask the question which Christian church in your opinion is “His Church”? I am looking for an answer like Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, another not listed or a combination of one or more.
You must certainly believe that the church you attend teaches all of Christ’s teachings because you are both devout and intelligent in your postings.
I can only speak for myself. I belong to a non-denominational church that studies the Bible line-by-line, precept-upon-precept. We are definitely not ecumenical. Who is the True Church? It is the Body of Christ. You will find many who represent the Body of Christ in different Christian denominations; some don’t represent it very well. I gave my testimony in an earlier post where I recalled the time three Christians ministered to me when I was in the midst of a personal crisis. They belonged to three different denominations but they were of one mind. Again, let me stress that this is not ecumenism. I don’t know what it is you misunderstand about the denomination thing. but the Bible is not against denominations, rather it is against divisions and strife.
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
1Cor 1:12-13
Your focus on denominations is a red herring. Although the LDS preaches a different gospel, same kind of division exists among those who call themselves Mormon. So, what’s the common factor? We are all prideful human beings.
In contrast stands the example of the three who ministered to me. They all said the same thing; that I needed the Lord. I also never forgot how they demonstrated Christian unity. They never once tried to win me to one of their churches, they just preached the gospel. Furthermore, these living epistles were all on the same page about what the gospel is. I witnessed their unity in Christ.
Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. [There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all. Eph 4:3-6
Let’s get back to the Atonement. I began this discussion Aug 13. Many have responded but none have answered the question. Perhaps I in all my explaining the question got lost. The question is this: Is Mormon teaching on the Atonement conjecture or bibilical? One post said that it was definitely biblical but offered nothing to back it up. Jesus repeatedly referred to the Old Testament Scriptures to explain all that He did. The New Testament book of Hebrews offers continuity in its side-by-side illustrations from the Old Testament. What scriptures from the Bible can you show that the LDS teaching on the Atonement is consistent with what Jesus explained? Let me put it another way. How has the LDS teaching continued in what the original apostles received from Jesus regarding the Atonement?
Remember, let’s stay on topic.Bye for now.
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
Stan-
This cut and paste is from a church that identifies with a particular denomination. As stated, I belong to a non-denominational church. My family and I could worship alongside these believers because the things that distinguish this church from ours are non-essentials. That said, there are essentials that unify our faith. I''ve also provided the link to this church's statement of faith if you want to take a look at it for yourself. This post is for information purposes. You've been honest, respectful and pleasant so, if you have some questions about these things, I'll be happy to address them once we've finished discussing the Atonement.
The Church.
Universal Church: We believe that the Church, which is the body of Christ, is a spiritual organism made up of all born-again believers of this dispensation (Church Age) irrespective of their affiliation with Christian organizations (Ephesians 1:22,23; 4:4-6; 1st Corinthians 12:12-14; Colossians 1:18,24). In the future, the body of Christ will become the bride of Christ (Ephesians 5:25-27; Revelation 19:7,8).
Local Church: We further believe that the local church is an assembly of believers meeting together in a specific location with Biblically ordained leadership for the purpose of Bible study, worship, prayer, observation of the Lord’s Supper, fellowship, and witnessing (Acts 2:42; 6:1-6; 1st Corinthians 1:2; 1st Timothy 3:1-13; Hebrews 10:25).
Church Ordinances: We believe the Lord Jesus Christ instituted the ordinance of baptism by immersion and the Lord’s Supper (communion) to be observed until His return (Matthew 28:19,20; 1st Corinthians 11:23-26). Baptism is for believers only and is a symbolic testimony of a past identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:3,4). The Lord’s Supper is also for believers only and commemorates the unique person (bread) and the perfect work (cup) of Christ dying on the cross for our sins. http://www.austinbiblechurch.com/statement.asp
We believe the Word of God never changes; likewise, our interpretation of the essentials haven't changed. However, we do have a Living Prophet, Jesus Christ. He is our Prophet, High Priest and King. The LDS is outside of the Body of Christ because it does not hold to these essentials. It uses terms taken from the Bible, but rejects what the says about these things. This point is illustrated with our main topic, the Atonement.
My non-denominational church also agrees with this church about the Bible itself.
Canonicity: based upon the principle of the self-authentication of Scripture and upon the objective criteria for determining canonicity (both O.T. and N.T.), we accept the sixty-six books and these alone as canonical (the inspired Word of God) (Galatians 1:8). We do not accept the apocryphal books or any other writing as canonical (Revelation 22:18-19).
This church shall not at any time become a member, sanction, or support the National Council of Churches of Christ in America, the World Council of Churches, or any other such organizations.
We believe that the Bible is inspired of God that it can withstand all criticisms about it's reliability, consistancy and authority. The disciplines of History, Anthropology and Archaeology have been friends of the Bible. Man fails but God's Word doesn't. The Atonement is one of many things that can be examined according to objective criteria.
Thanks
This cut and paste is from a church that identifies with a particular denomination. As stated, I belong to a non-denominational church. My family and I could worship alongside these believers because the things that distinguish this church from ours are non-essentials. That said, there are essentials that unify our faith. I''ve also provided the link to this church's statement of faith if you want to take a look at it for yourself. This post is for information purposes. You've been honest, respectful and pleasant so, if you have some questions about these things, I'll be happy to address them once we've finished discussing the Atonement.
The Church.
Universal Church: We believe that the Church, which is the body of Christ, is a spiritual organism made up of all born-again believers of this dispensation (Church Age) irrespective of their affiliation with Christian organizations (Ephesians 1:22,23; 4:4-6; 1st Corinthians 12:12-14; Colossians 1:18,24). In the future, the body of Christ will become the bride of Christ (Ephesians 5:25-27; Revelation 19:7,8).
Local Church: We further believe that the local church is an assembly of believers meeting together in a specific location with Biblically ordained leadership for the purpose of Bible study, worship, prayer, observation of the Lord’s Supper, fellowship, and witnessing (Acts 2:42; 6:1-6; 1st Corinthians 1:2; 1st Timothy 3:1-13; Hebrews 10:25).
Church Ordinances: We believe the Lord Jesus Christ instituted the ordinance of baptism by immersion and the Lord’s Supper (communion) to be observed until His return (Matthew 28:19,20; 1st Corinthians 11:23-26). Baptism is for believers only and is a symbolic testimony of a past identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:3,4). The Lord’s Supper is also for believers only and commemorates the unique person (bread) and the perfect work (cup) of Christ dying on the cross for our sins. http://www.austinbiblechurch.com/statement.asp
We believe the Word of God never changes; likewise, our interpretation of the essentials haven't changed. However, we do have a Living Prophet, Jesus Christ. He is our Prophet, High Priest and King. The LDS is outside of the Body of Christ because it does not hold to these essentials. It uses terms taken from the Bible, but rejects what the says about these things. This point is illustrated with our main topic, the Atonement.
My non-denominational church also agrees with this church about the Bible itself.
Canonicity: based upon the principle of the self-authentication of Scripture and upon the objective criteria for determining canonicity (both O.T. and N.T.), we accept the sixty-six books and these alone as canonical (the inspired Word of God) (Galatians 1:8). We do not accept the apocryphal books or any other writing as canonical (Revelation 22:18-19).
This church shall not at any time become a member, sanction, or support the National Council of Churches of Christ in America, the World Council of Churches, or any other such organizations.
We believe that the Bible is inspired of God that it can withstand all criticisms about it's reliability, consistancy and authority. The disciplines of History, Anthropology and Archaeology have been friends of the Bible. Man fails but God's Word doesn't. The Atonement is one of many things that can be examined according to objective criteria.
Thanks
-
_sruggio
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:47 pm
Desire2Bwise;
Quote “I can only speak for myself. I belong to a non-denominational church that studies the Bible line-by-line, precept-upon-precept. We are definitely not ecumenical. Who is the True Church? It is the Body of Christ. You will find many who represent the Body of Christ in different Christian denominations; some don’t represent it very well.”]
Thank you for your answer. I can see why my question on denomination could not be answered by pointing out a specific denomination. If you read LDS church history you will find that the majority of the early converts to the LDS church followed the same road that you are on. I believe that you have chosen a wonderful path to learn line-by-line, precept-upon-precept using only the Bible.
I think that it would be safe to say that you believe that there is no denomination that has all of the truths, but, that there are members of each that have the Spirit of Christ and are doing Christ’s work. Fair enough, I would say to you that members of the LDS church also fall into your category of followers of Christ.
I will let your answer stand a sufficient enough to move on.
I absolutely believe that those who ministered to you did so with their faith in Jesus’ healing power. I would also say that your faith in Jesus’ ability to heal you was also a major factor in your healing.
Not long ago my younger brother and I were attending to our uncle who is just a few years older than us. He had been taking medication that had put him into a state where he was mentally unstable. My brother and I ministered to him. My brother is a Methodist and my uncle is Four Square. The Lord saw fit to heal my uncle. Of course non-believers would say that it was only by changing his medicine that he was healed. But my uncle had been having this mental problem for many months and what ever the doctors were doing wasn’t helping.
Now to your question on “Although the LDS preaches a different gospel, same kind of division exists among those who call themselves Mormon. So, what’s the common factor?”
Maybe you like I, grew up in a denomination type of church. In our church some of the doctrines changed when we got a new minister even though he graduated from our church university. I believe that this is true in all “traditional Christian Churches” because I can see it within my family of preachers. I am the only LDS person in my extended family.
In the Salt Lake LDS church as you call it, (13 million members world wide) there is ABSOLUTLY NO division. I could go to any congregation in the world and the Gospel that would be taught there will be exactly the same as in my home congregation. In my younger years, I traveled as part of my job, selling and training software. I have been to many congregations within the USA and I can tell you for absolutely sure that there was no deviation.
There have been times in the past, and there will be probably times in the future, where someone who is in local authority may teach something that is not “The Gospel”. If that happens, someone will take that person aside and try to help that person understand where he/she is wrong in their understanding of the Gospel.
I was in a Priesthood meeting where a person said something in error, and that person was corrected on the spot. Because it was a small group of less than fifty it was done without embarrassment because the instructor said “isn’t that right brother ……”. The brother then said “ no that is not correct, it is” then he stated the correct principal.
In the past, I have given talks where I said something that wasn’t exactly correct. Because what I said was a small error, a brother took me aside after the meeting and showed me where I was in error. If I had made a major error I would expect the person who was in charge of the meeting to get up, after I finished, and corrected me from the pulpit so that my major error could not effect the congregation.
Now back to your original question on the Atonement. “What scriptures from the Bible can you show that the LDS teaching on the Atonement is consistent with what Jesus explained? Let me put it another way. How has the LDS teaching continued in what the original apostles received from Jesus regarding the Atonement?”
Desire2Bwise; When I read the following three Bible accounts;
Matthew 26:36 Then cometh Jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unto the disciples, Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder.
37 And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy.
38 Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
Mark 14:32 And they came to a place which was named Gethsemane: and he saith to his disciples, Sit ye here, while I shall pray.
33 And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and began to be sore amazed, and to be very heavy;
34 And saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful unto death: tarry ye here, and watch.
35 And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him.
36 And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.
And, Luke 22:39 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him.
40 And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation.
41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,
42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.
45 And when he rose up from prayer, and was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow,
To me all three Gospels are telling me that Jesus suffered greatly in the Garden. Mathew and Mark use the same words “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death:” this sounds bad enough to me but then Luke says; “And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.”
Luke says that an Angel came and strengthened Jesus. When Jesus was on the cross there is nothing in scriptures that says that an Angel strengthened Him in His agony of death.
Our position is best said by one of our Prophets.
Ezra Taft Benson, “Five Marks of the Divinity of Jesus Christ,” New Era, Dec 1980, 44
It was in Gethsemane where Jesus took on Himself the sins of the world, in Gethsemane where His pain was equivalent to the cumulative burden of all men, in Gethsemane where He descended below all things so that all could repent and come to Him.
The mortal mind fails to fathom, the tongue cannot express, the pen of man cannot describe the breadth, depth, or height of the suffering of our Lord—or His infinite love for us.
Yet there are those who arrogantly declare the most pernicious heresy, that the blood which extruded from the physical body of our Lord on that night had no efficacy for the redemption of man. They would have you believe the only significance to Gethsemane was that Jesus made His decision there to go to the cross. They say that any suffering Jesus endured was only personal, not redemptive for the whole human race. I know of no heresy more destructive to faith than this, for the individual who so accepts this delusion is beguiled to believe that he can achieve exaltation on the basis of his own merit, intelligence, and personal effort.
Never forget, my young friends, that “it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do”
Dear2Bwise, I hope this answers your question about why we believe that the Atonement began in the Garden and finished on the Cross. Our belief is Biblical.
We also agree with you “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? 1Cor 1:12-13”
Contrary to what you may have heard there is no division in the church that everyone calls “The Mormons”. Ie.SLC-LDS.
You posted a new post that defines basically the church that you worship with. On the surface, without looking up the scriptures posted, I say that the paragraph starting with “Local Church” including the “Church Ordinances” portion match LDS beliefs.
Your post; “We believe the Word of God never changes; likewise, our interpretation of the essentials haven't changed. However, we do have a Living Prophet, Jesus Christ. He is our Prophet, High Priest and King.” Is again essentially what we believe, with the exception that we believe that we have a mortal prophet, called by Jesus Christ, to receive revelations from Him for the church as a body just like Jesus called Peter to be the head of the physical church (prophet). Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. We say the “rock” is revelation the Catholics say the “rock” was Peter.
The post, “Universal Church: We believe that the Church, which is the body of Christ, is a spiritual organism made up of all born-again believers of this dispensation (Church Age)” I guess that the members of the LDS faith should also qualify here as well. Where we have a major split is “ irrespective of their affiliation with Christian organizations”.
We believe that there is “One Baptism” “One Gospel” “One Faith” as you quoted in 1Cor 1:12-13. the “Christian organizations” as you call them, each as a “church of believers”, would not qualify by your definition or mine as to following Paul’s instructions.
Stan
Quote “I can only speak for myself. I belong to a non-denominational church that studies the Bible line-by-line, precept-upon-precept. We are definitely not ecumenical. Who is the True Church? It is the Body of Christ. You will find many who represent the Body of Christ in different Christian denominations; some don’t represent it very well.”]
Thank you for your answer. I can see why my question on denomination could not be answered by pointing out a specific denomination. If you read LDS church history you will find that the majority of the early converts to the LDS church followed the same road that you are on. I believe that you have chosen a wonderful path to learn line-by-line, precept-upon-precept using only the Bible.
I think that it would be safe to say that you believe that there is no denomination that has all of the truths, but, that there are members of each that have the Spirit of Christ and are doing Christ’s work. Fair enough, I would say to you that members of the LDS church also fall into your category of followers of Christ.
I will let your answer stand a sufficient enough to move on.
I absolutely believe that those who ministered to you did so with their faith in Jesus’ healing power. I would also say that your faith in Jesus’ ability to heal you was also a major factor in your healing.
Not long ago my younger brother and I were attending to our uncle who is just a few years older than us. He had been taking medication that had put him into a state where he was mentally unstable. My brother and I ministered to him. My brother is a Methodist and my uncle is Four Square. The Lord saw fit to heal my uncle. Of course non-believers would say that it was only by changing his medicine that he was healed. But my uncle had been having this mental problem for many months and what ever the doctors were doing wasn’t helping.
Now to your question on “Although the LDS preaches a different gospel, same kind of division exists among those who call themselves Mormon. So, what’s the common factor?”
Maybe you like I, grew up in a denomination type of church. In our church some of the doctrines changed when we got a new minister even though he graduated from our church university. I believe that this is true in all “traditional Christian Churches” because I can see it within my family of preachers. I am the only LDS person in my extended family.
In the Salt Lake LDS church as you call it, (13 million members world wide) there is ABSOLUTLY NO division. I could go to any congregation in the world and the Gospel that would be taught there will be exactly the same as in my home congregation. In my younger years, I traveled as part of my job, selling and training software. I have been to many congregations within the USA and I can tell you for absolutely sure that there was no deviation.
There have been times in the past, and there will be probably times in the future, where someone who is in local authority may teach something that is not “The Gospel”. If that happens, someone will take that person aside and try to help that person understand where he/she is wrong in their understanding of the Gospel.
I was in a Priesthood meeting where a person said something in error, and that person was corrected on the spot. Because it was a small group of less than fifty it was done without embarrassment because the instructor said “isn’t that right brother ……”. The brother then said “ no that is not correct, it is” then he stated the correct principal.
In the past, I have given talks where I said something that wasn’t exactly correct. Because what I said was a small error, a brother took me aside after the meeting and showed me where I was in error. If I had made a major error I would expect the person who was in charge of the meeting to get up, after I finished, and corrected me from the pulpit so that my major error could not effect the congregation.
Now back to your original question on the Atonement. “What scriptures from the Bible can you show that the LDS teaching on the Atonement is consistent with what Jesus explained? Let me put it another way. How has the LDS teaching continued in what the original apostles received from Jesus regarding the Atonement?”
Desire2Bwise; When I read the following three Bible accounts;
Matthew 26:36 Then cometh Jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unto the disciples, Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder.
37 And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy.
38 Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
Mark 14:32 And they came to a place which was named Gethsemane: and he saith to his disciples, Sit ye here, while I shall pray.
33 And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and began to be sore amazed, and to be very heavy;
34 And saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful unto death: tarry ye here, and watch.
35 And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him.
36 And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.
And, Luke 22:39 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him.
40 And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation.
41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,
42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.
45 And when he rose up from prayer, and was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow,
To me all three Gospels are telling me that Jesus suffered greatly in the Garden. Mathew and Mark use the same words “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death:” this sounds bad enough to me but then Luke says; “And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.”
Luke says that an Angel came and strengthened Jesus. When Jesus was on the cross there is nothing in scriptures that says that an Angel strengthened Him in His agony of death.
Our position is best said by one of our Prophets.
Ezra Taft Benson, “Five Marks of the Divinity of Jesus Christ,” New Era, Dec 1980, 44
It was in Gethsemane where Jesus took on Himself the sins of the world, in Gethsemane where His pain was equivalent to the cumulative burden of all men, in Gethsemane where He descended below all things so that all could repent and come to Him.
The mortal mind fails to fathom, the tongue cannot express, the pen of man cannot describe the breadth, depth, or height of the suffering of our Lord—or His infinite love for us.
Yet there are those who arrogantly declare the most pernicious heresy, that the blood which extruded from the physical body of our Lord on that night had no efficacy for the redemption of man. They would have you believe the only significance to Gethsemane was that Jesus made His decision there to go to the cross. They say that any suffering Jesus endured was only personal, not redemptive for the whole human race. I know of no heresy more destructive to faith than this, for the individual who so accepts this delusion is beguiled to believe that he can achieve exaltation on the basis of his own merit, intelligence, and personal effort.
Never forget, my young friends, that “it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do”
Dear2Bwise, I hope this answers your question about why we believe that the Atonement began in the Garden and finished on the Cross. Our belief is Biblical.
We also agree with you “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? 1Cor 1:12-13”
Contrary to what you may have heard there is no division in the church that everyone calls “The Mormons”. Ie.SLC-LDS.
You posted a new post that defines basically the church that you worship with. On the surface, without looking up the scriptures posted, I say that the paragraph starting with “Local Church” including the “Church Ordinances” portion match LDS beliefs.
Your post; “We believe the Word of God never changes; likewise, our interpretation of the essentials haven't changed. However, we do have a Living Prophet, Jesus Christ. He is our Prophet, High Priest and King.” Is again essentially what we believe, with the exception that we believe that we have a mortal prophet, called by Jesus Christ, to receive revelations from Him for the church as a body just like Jesus called Peter to be the head of the physical church (prophet). Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. We say the “rock” is revelation the Catholics say the “rock” was Peter.
The post, “Universal Church: We believe that the Church, which is the body of Christ, is a spiritual organism made up of all born-again believers of this dispensation (Church Age)” I guess that the members of the LDS faith should also qualify here as well. Where we have a major split is “ irrespective of their affiliation with Christian organizations”.
We believe that there is “One Baptism” “One Gospel” “One Faith” as you quoted in 1Cor 1:12-13. the “Christian organizations” as you call them, each as a “church of believers”, would not qualify by your definition or mine as to following Paul’s instructions.
Stan
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
Your post
“We believe the Word of God never changes; likewise, our interpretation of the essentials haven't changed.
I have found that Roman Catholic doctrine also has the same kinds of "interpretations". that cannot be supported from the Bible. Where subjective, untestable, interpretations rule, then 2 +2 = 5. A "mortal" living prophet is no more reliable than a mortal high priest. Our respective views on the Atonement is something that can be tested.
Your post
To me all three Gospels are telling me that Jesus suffered greatly in the Garden. Mathew and Mark use the same words “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death:” this sounds bad enough to me but then Luke says; “And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. Luke says that an Angel came and strengthened Jesus. When Jesus was on the cross there is nothing in scriptures that says that an Angel strengthened Him in His agony of death.”
Jesus distress and “great drops of blood”, or the angels in this passage signify that the Atonement has begun. For now, let's look at the who, what, when, where of Gethsemane before coming to a conclusion one way or the other about the Atonement. Ok?
Here are a few things to consider:
As you indicated, the angels came to Jesus in the garden. The Bible does not contradict itself. The "rule of first mention" is a principle of systematic Bible study that says first-time events is the precedent that interprets subsequent like events.
When was the only other time angels directly ministered to Jesus? Satan boldly tempted Jesus three times in the desert. What was the significance of Satan’s appearance at this time? He tempted Jesus at the beginning; just before His earthly ministry.
Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him. Matt 4:11
And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him. Mark 1:13
In Gethsemane, Jesus warned His disciples to keep watch through the night and pray.
Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed [is] willing, but the flesh [is] weak. He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. Matt 26:41-44
What was the importance of the occasion in Gethsemane? Satan sought to tempt Jesus out of His earthly ministry and tried to do the same thing when Jesus was about to complete His earthly ministry.
We can also look at events on either side of the scene in Gethsemane. Jesus’ High Priestly prayer in John 17 is an intercessory prayer that took place just before He went to Gethsemane. After Gethsemane, Jesus also intercedes on the cross, (Lk 23:33-44) None of the gospels record any intercessory statements in His prayers in Gethsemane. Isaiah and Hebrews also describe the scene in Gethsemane:
This verse describes what did not happen in Gethsemane...
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
Is 5:7
In contrast, this verse directly compares to the gospel accounts of Gethsemane.
Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered Heb 5:8 KJV
In earlier posts I also mentioned correlations to the Mosaic Law. These are other evidences that we'll discuss later. For now, I want to just look at the plain reading of the text.
“We believe the Word of God never changes; likewise, our interpretation of the essentials haven't changed.
I have found that Roman Catholic doctrine also has the same kinds of "interpretations". that cannot be supported from the Bible. Where subjective, untestable, interpretations rule, then 2 +2 = 5. A "mortal" living prophet is no more reliable than a mortal high priest. Our respective views on the Atonement is something that can be tested.
Your post
To me all three Gospels are telling me that Jesus suffered greatly in the Garden. Mathew and Mark use the same words “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death:” this sounds bad enough to me but then Luke says; “And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. Luke says that an Angel came and strengthened Jesus. When Jesus was on the cross there is nothing in scriptures that says that an Angel strengthened Him in His agony of death.”
Jesus distress and “great drops of blood”, or the angels in this passage signify that the Atonement has begun. For now, let's look at the who, what, when, where of Gethsemane before coming to a conclusion one way or the other about the Atonement. Ok?
Here are a few things to consider:
As you indicated, the angels came to Jesus in the garden. The Bible does not contradict itself. The "rule of first mention" is a principle of systematic Bible study that says first-time events is the precedent that interprets subsequent like events.
When was the only other time angels directly ministered to Jesus? Satan boldly tempted Jesus three times in the desert. What was the significance of Satan’s appearance at this time? He tempted Jesus at the beginning; just before His earthly ministry.
Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him. Matt 4:11
And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him. Mark 1:13
In Gethsemane, Jesus warned His disciples to keep watch through the night and pray.
Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed [is] willing, but the flesh [is] weak. He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. Matt 26:41-44
What was the importance of the occasion in Gethsemane? Satan sought to tempt Jesus out of His earthly ministry and tried to do the same thing when Jesus was about to complete His earthly ministry.
We can also look at events on either side of the scene in Gethsemane. Jesus’ High Priestly prayer in John 17 is an intercessory prayer that took place just before He went to Gethsemane. After Gethsemane, Jesus also intercedes on the cross, (Lk 23:33-44) None of the gospels record any intercessory statements in His prayers in Gethsemane. Isaiah and Hebrews also describe the scene in Gethsemane:
This verse describes what did not happen in Gethsemane...
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
Is 5:7
In contrast, this verse directly compares to the gospel accounts of Gethsemane.
Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered Heb 5:8 KJV
In earlier posts I also mentioned correlations to the Mosaic Law. These are other evidences that we'll discuss later. For now, I want to just look at the plain reading of the text.
-
_sruggio
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:47 pm
Desire 2Bwise; There is something to your approach in reading the Bible that bothers me. You said “The "rule of first mention" is a principle of systematic Bible study that says first-time events is the precedent that interprets subsequent like events.”
For some reason the scripture; 1 Corinthians 2: 12-14 “12 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.13 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.14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” jumped into my mind.
I have the feeling that this” first rule of mention” smacks of the understanding of “the natural man”. I had never heard of this principal before your post. I had to look it up on the internet. My way in reading the scriptures is with prayer, I let the Holy Ghost direct me.
You posted; “When was the only other time angels directly ministered to Jesus? Satan boldly tempted Jesus three times in the desert. What was the significance of Satan’s appearance at this time? He tempted Jesus at the beginning; just before His earthly ministry.”
This is a true statement. After forty days of fasting, the spirit tells me that Jesus was hungry and close to death. This is why the angels came and ministered. After all wasn’t Jesus in the desert? I am confident that the angels brought Him food and water.
You posted; “In Gethsemane, Jesus warned His disciples to keep watch through the night and pray.
Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed [is] willing, but the flesh [is] weak. He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. Matt 26:41-44 “
Other than providing an accurate posting, I do not see the point that you are making here. But I will address this scripture later in this post.
You posted “What was the importance of the occasion in Gethsemane? Satan sought to tempt Jesus out of His earthly ministry and tried to do the same thing when Jesus was about to complete His earthly ministry.”
Where in the world did you get the idea that satan was tempting Jesus in the Garden? It certainly is not scripture. For someone who does not “add” to the scriptures you have violated your standards.
But your question “What was the importance of the occasion in Gethsemane?” is extremely valid.
The LDS answer is that “this is where He was paying the price for our sins”. Do you have any other answer other than satan was there tempting Him? Neither of us have any scriptural basis for our answer, but to think that satan was there tempting Jesus without any mention of him in the scriptures sounds like a stretch of one’s imagination. On the flip side to imagine that Jesus was praying to The Father the entire time to save us from our sins is extremely reasonable.
Oh by the way, if Jesus and the Father are the same person as the trinity claims, who is Jesus praying to? Certainly He wasn’t praying to show the disciples how to pray, the three couldn’t stay awake. Why couldn’t they stay awake? Because, Jesus wasn’t in their presence. He was separated from them. The amount of time that He was separated from them had to be more than a few minutes. It was probably for hours each time that He separated from them to pray.
You posted; “This verse describes what did not happen in Gethsemane...
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
Is 5:7 “
Isaiah isn’t prophesying what would or would not happen in the Garden. He is prophesying what Jesus would do in front of Pilate. Matthew 27:12 And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, “he answered nothing”. 13 Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee?14 And he “answered him to never a word”; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.
My quotations, added for clarity. How can you use Isaiah’s prophecy to say what didn’t happen in Gethsemane. Your statement here doesn’t make any sense nor is it scriptural.
Your post; “In contrast, this verse directly compares to the gospel accounts of Gethsemane”.
Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered Heb 5:8 KJV
This has been my point all along. Jesus when He was alive offered up prayers to God The Father who was the only one who could save Jesus from His death. The words “supplications”, “strong crying”, and “tears” are telling me that Jesus was suffering for our sins. Jesus was the Son of God He was obedient to The Father through His sufferings for us.
Desire2Bwise. Clear your mind of the understandings of the natural man. I testify to you that the major portion of Jesus’ Atonement started. and was accomplished, in the Garden, in the name of Jesus Christ.
Stan
For some reason the scripture; 1 Corinthians 2: 12-14 “12 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.13 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.14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” jumped into my mind.
I have the feeling that this” first rule of mention” smacks of the understanding of “the natural man”. I had never heard of this principal before your post. I had to look it up on the internet. My way in reading the scriptures is with prayer, I let the Holy Ghost direct me.
You posted; “When was the only other time angels directly ministered to Jesus? Satan boldly tempted Jesus three times in the desert. What was the significance of Satan’s appearance at this time? He tempted Jesus at the beginning; just before His earthly ministry.”
This is a true statement. After forty days of fasting, the spirit tells me that Jesus was hungry and close to death. This is why the angels came and ministered. After all wasn’t Jesus in the desert? I am confident that the angels brought Him food and water.
You posted; “In Gethsemane, Jesus warned His disciples to keep watch through the night and pray.
Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed [is] willing, but the flesh [is] weak. He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. Matt 26:41-44 “
Other than providing an accurate posting, I do not see the point that you are making here. But I will address this scripture later in this post.
You posted “What was the importance of the occasion in Gethsemane? Satan sought to tempt Jesus out of His earthly ministry and tried to do the same thing when Jesus was about to complete His earthly ministry.”
Where in the world did you get the idea that satan was tempting Jesus in the Garden? It certainly is not scripture. For someone who does not “add” to the scriptures you have violated your standards.
But your question “What was the importance of the occasion in Gethsemane?” is extremely valid.
The LDS answer is that “this is where He was paying the price for our sins”. Do you have any other answer other than satan was there tempting Him? Neither of us have any scriptural basis for our answer, but to think that satan was there tempting Jesus without any mention of him in the scriptures sounds like a stretch of one’s imagination. On the flip side to imagine that Jesus was praying to The Father the entire time to save us from our sins is extremely reasonable.
Oh by the way, if Jesus and the Father are the same person as the trinity claims, who is Jesus praying to? Certainly He wasn’t praying to show the disciples how to pray, the three couldn’t stay awake. Why couldn’t they stay awake? Because, Jesus wasn’t in their presence. He was separated from them. The amount of time that He was separated from them had to be more than a few minutes. It was probably for hours each time that He separated from them to pray.
You posted; “This verse describes what did not happen in Gethsemane...
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
Is 5:7 “
Isaiah isn’t prophesying what would or would not happen in the Garden. He is prophesying what Jesus would do in front of Pilate. Matthew 27:12 And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, “he answered nothing”. 13 Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee?14 And he “answered him to never a word”; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.
My quotations, added for clarity. How can you use Isaiah’s prophecy to say what didn’t happen in Gethsemane. Your statement here doesn’t make any sense nor is it scriptural.
Your post; “In contrast, this verse directly compares to the gospel accounts of Gethsemane”.
Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered Heb 5:8 KJV
This has been my point all along. Jesus when He was alive offered up prayers to God The Father who was the only one who could save Jesus from His death. The words “supplications”, “strong crying”, and “tears” are telling me that Jesus was suffering for our sins. Jesus was the Son of God He was obedient to The Father through His sufferings for us.
Desire2Bwise. Clear your mind of the understandings of the natural man. I testify to you that the major portion of Jesus’ Atonement started. and was accomplished, in the Garden, in the name of Jesus Christ.
Stan
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
Your post:
“I have the feeling that this” first rule of mention” smacks of the understanding of “the natural man”. I had never heard of this principal before your post. I had to look it up on the internet. My way in reading the scriptures is with prayer, I let the Holy Ghost direct me.”…..
Fascinating…..you remind me of my Catholic relatives. Are you Angry; you sound angry. I’m not mad at you. You know, I’m just a housewife, not a teacher like you. I honestly thought you’d heard of this rule before, so I was attempting to come up to your level of scholarship. Stan, it’s great that you pray and want to be open to the leading of the Holy Ghost. However, you have superimposed your strongly-held belief upon Scripture. The Bible states that the Holy Ghost will “guide you into all truth.” (Jn 16:13) The Holy Spirit has led me to learn the principals of hermaneutics and to study the history and culture of Jesus’ day. What is so wacky about that? What I have found is that there’s more to Gethsemane than meets the eye. No part of the Atonement happened in Gethsemane, but there are multiple threads of resolution just before the Atonement. In earlier posts, you agreed that things in the Old Testament looked forward to the New Testament. When you look back at the Old Testament what are you looking at? History. A few years ago, I began to study Hebrews and discovered that it explains Christ’s earthly ministry and Atonement historically and in context of the culture of his own people group, the Jews. I started investigating the rest of the Bible in the same way. This has helped me greatly in my own devotions. For example, The term “rightly dividing” is one of the “jots and tittles” that I used to overlook.
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2Tim 2:15
Obviously, Paul is saying that we should be careful in how we handle scripture. What I learned in my studies is that this choice of words emphasizes the degree of care we must take in how we handle scripture. Paul and Timothy were dealing with Jewish believers and our English language bibles do not reflect how this epistle is also crafted for Jewish ears. “Rightly dividing” is an allusion to how the priests cut up the sacrifices. There was only one way to butcher the animal in keeping with the Law, so that it was acceptable to God. I already believe that the Bible is true, so I what I think I understand must agree with scripture, not the other way around. With this understanding, I am as careful as I can be to ensure that I rightly divide scripture otherwise, I keep my trap shut.
We Christians have a saying. “The Bible is like a tiger in a cage. If you let it out it can defend itself.” The rule of first mention is a proven method of study which forces the reader to interpret God’s Word with God’s Word, and not mere opinion. The process in very deliberate. The Bible's internal consistancy demonstrates the Sovereign Hand of God upon it. Thr threads of history come together in such a way that refutes questions about its reliability. Because Christians believe the Bible is God’s Word, infalliable, and inspired by the Holy Spirit; it is sacred. I don’t know what website you visited, but have a look at this one. -- http://www.biblicalresearch.information/page56.html
Christians believe that well-meaning people can be misled even they sincerely believe in their heart that the Holy Ghost is leading them. But you have to remember…
The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it? I the LORD search the heart, [I] try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, [and] according to the fruit of his doings. Jer 17:9-10
God His puts His reputation on the line with His Word.
I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name. Ps 138:2
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it. Ps 55:11
The Desert-
I asked:
When was the only other time angels directly ministered to Jesus? Satan boldly tempted Jesus three times in the desert. What was the significance of Satan’s appearance at this time? He tempted Jesus at the beginning; just before His earthly ministry.
Your post:
This is a true statement. After forty days of fasting, the spirit tells me that Jesus was hungry and close to death. This is why the angels came and ministered. After all wasn’t Jesus in the desert? I am confident that the angels brought Him food and water.
I’m not sure what you mean, here. Are you agreeing that this was the only other time the angels minister directly to Jesus?
We have to look at what’s going on. Jesus was physically spent but strong spiritually because He beat Satan. (by the way Jesus beat Satan with the truth of rightly divided scripture)
Satan challenged Jesus three times, and Jesus responded three times. Satan left, and the angels came.
Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him. Matt 4:11
BUT, there would be a re-match. I suggest that the place would be Gethsemane. Why? Gethsemane is next time that the angels directly minister to Jesus. It is one common denominator recorded in both events. At this point it is simply a clue.
And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season. Lk 4:13
Do you agree that there was a rematch?
Gethsemane -
Your post
Where in the world did you get the idea that satan was tempting Jesus in the Garden? It certainly is not scripture. For someone who does not “add” to the scriptures you have violated your standards.
This excerpt is from a turn-of-the century historical work. the author is a Jewish believer. This author describes preparations for the Day of Atonement. The High Priest (HP) would follow another course of ritual preparations on Passover, so the question is, if Gethsemane happened during the Passover, why does Jesus’ actions parallel the Levitical HP preparations for the Day of Atonement?” Today, the Jews have a movement to restore the Temple because Messiah is coming. (we know it's his Second Coming) The point is that they are restoring everything as it was at the time of Jesus, according to the Law, so this next quote is accurate. Something to think about, eh?
On the Day of Atonement, not ordinary priests, but the high-priest alone officiated, and that not in his ordinary dress, nor yet in that of the ordinary priesthood, but in one peculiar to the day, and peculiarly expressive of purity….“The evening meal of the high-priest before the great day was to be scanty. All night long he was to be hearing and expounding the Holy Scriptures, or otherwise kept employed, so that he might not fall asleep (for special Levitical reasons).The Temple; Chapter 16, Alfred Edelscheim
Comparison of Desert and Garden
In the Desert, Jesus was spiritually strong in the desert because the spirit directed Him there. He was physically weak at the end and the angels ministered to Him. But in Gethsemane, Jesus was greatly spiritually distressed at the beginning before he even started praying.
And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy.Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me. Matt 26:37-38
He was alone in the desert and here in Gethsemane He faces this spiritual crisis alone. For three years he taught, ministered, supported and protected His boys, but the one time Jesus needed them, they didn't support Him. Even though the Father was with him, Jesus wanted company...human fellowship. Imagine, there is no one like Him on earth. This was the depths of lonliness. Jesus understood because the disciples were flesh. He knew that they understood only as much as they could. They just didn't understand this night’s urgency.
And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour? Matt 26:40
Your post
The LDS answer is that “this is where He was paying the price for our sins”. Do you have any other answer other than satan was there tempting Him? Neither of us have any scriptural basis for our answer, but to think that satan was there tempting Jesus without any mention of him in the scriptures sounds like a stretch of one’s imagination. On the flip side to imagine that Jesus was praying to The Father the entire time to save us from our sins is extremely reasonable.
First of all, I never said that Satan is mentioned explicitly in the Gethsemane passages. I offered reasonable evidence to indicate that he is in the picture here. Satan challenged Jesus once again. The last time this happened was in the desert. I hope to have clarified some of these things for you in this posting.
Jesus warned His disciples to keep watch through the night and pray so they would not enter into temptation., why? Adam is the federal head of the human race. Where would we be if Adam resisted temptation and remained without sin? We know that Jesus, the last Adam did resist.
Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed [is] willing, but the flesh [is] weak.Mat 26:41
This garden is the rematch where Satan confronts the last Adam a second time. It is the intensity of this spiritual struggle that cause the “great drops of blood”, and are the focus the prayers and supplications of Hebrews 5:8.
Your post referring to Heb 5:8
This has been my point all along. Jesus when He was alive offered up prayers to God The Father who was the only one who could save Jesus from His death. The words “supplications”, “strong crying”, and “tears” are telling me that Jesus was suffering for our sins. Jesus was the Son of God He was obedient to The Father through His sufferings for us.
Scripture clearly tells us what Jesus prayed in Gethsemane. These are not intercessory prayers. Jesus is praying for Himself.
Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed [is] willing, but the flesh [is] weak. He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. Matt 26:41-44 “
And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. Lk 22:43
As I stated you have superimposed your belief on what scripture says. You maintain that Jesus prayers and supplications were intercessory; that’s wrong. Intercessory prayers are other-centered. In the earlier post I referred to Jesus prayers before and after Gethsemane. When we compare the plain reading, these are not obscure passages. We don’t even need any high brow systematic interpretation stuff because the content is crystal clear.
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word. (Jn 17:20)
Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots. (Lk 23:34)
Can you offer a better defense for your position than just because the LDS says so? The way you make your case is no different than Christians who can't defend their belief beyond "because the Bible says so"
-
_sruggio
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:47 pm
Desire2Bwise: Wow talk about miscommunication. From your postings I would have guessed you to be highly educated in religion.
“Fascinating…..you remind me of my Catholic relatives. Are you Angry; you sound angry. I’m not mad at you. You know, I’m just a housewife, not a teacher like you. I honestly thought you’d heard of this rule before, so I was attempting to come up to your level of scholarship.”
First, no I am not angry, nor am I mad or angry with you, nor am I a teacher other than in Sunday School classes. I went back and re-read my own post and I guess that I was feeling a bit overwhelmed by your answers. I assumed that they came from “educated religionist” ie. bachelors, masters or doctorate in specifically religion, at any level way over my head.
Second, I am an engineer who specialized in software development in the late 60’s. I am currently self-employed in the computer graphics field waiting until, my wife says that, it is time for me to retire. Other than attending Sunday School classes for 44 years both as a student and as a teacher, the only college religion classes that I took were at BYU in the mid 1960’s. Nothing deep in study, just trying to get a passing grade.
“Stan, it’s great that you pray and want to be open to the leading of the Holy Ghost. However, you have superimposed your strongly-held belief upon Scripture. The Bible states that the Holy Ghost will “guide you into all truth.” (Jn 16:13)”
I suppose that what you mean by “you have superimposed your strongly-held belief upon Scripture” is that you think that my beliefs override what the scriptures are really saying. I guess from someone else’s point of view that could be true.
I do not only “want to be open to the leading of the Holy Ghost”, I strive to have the Holy Ghost as my constant companion on a daily basis. I live my life every hour every day in such a manner that the Holy Ghost can guide me in every aspect of my daily life. Sometimes I am successful, sometimes I have to try harder.
Today, as before in my responses, I would read a paragraph, then respond line by line.
Then I read your next paragraph “The Holy Spirit has led me to learn the principals of hermaneutics and to study the history and culture of Jesus’ day. What is so wacky about that? What I have found is that there’s more to Gethsemane than meets the eye. No part of the Atonement happened in Gethsemane, but there are multiple threads of resolution just before the Atonement. In earlier posts, you agreed that things in the Old Testament looked forward to the New Testament. When you look back at the Old Testament what are you looking at? History. A few years ago, I began to study Hebrews and discovered that it explains Christ’s earthly ministry and Atonement historically and in context of the culture of his own people group, the Jews. I started investigating the rest of the Bible in the same way. This has helped me greatly in my own devotions. For example, The term “rightly dividing” is one of the “jots and tittles” that I used to overlook.”
What I think I see here, is a closed mind, one that is intellectualizing the scriptures.
My original intent, in reading and posting on this forum, was to dispel myths and correct the rumors about what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints teaches and believes. There are a lot of wacky rumors and myths.
It seems that this forum has become more about bashing. I do not want to bash. I think that bashing is a tool of satan. Whenever I begin to realize that I am in an exchange that has resorted to bashing I leave that exchange. I am afraid that I may be at this point on this forum.
I stated that I know, for myself, that the purpose of the Garden was for Jesus Christ to pay for our sins. You say that “No part of the Atonement happened in Gethsemane”. So we are in complete disagreement. I think that you intellectualized your belief, but then you probably think that I am intellectualizing. I stand on the good feelings in my heart that what I believe came from the Holy Ghost witnessing to me the truth, and what I believe to be scripture. I know by the witness from the Holy Ghost, that He did Atone for us in the Garden. Nothing that you can say or post will change that.
On another forum http://blog.beliefnet.com/blogalogue/20 ... ments.html you will see bashings from person named Javden. Both sides of the issue have condemned him for his viciousness. Then there is Chief1989 who started out thinking like most “traditional Christians” that hell would be full of Mormons. Chief1989 still thinks we are wrong on some points of doctrine, but from his posts he seems to acknowledge that we are not members of an anti-Christ cult, but Christians with another point of view. Many of the posts on that forum are also too intellectual for me, but the spirit of mutual understanding makes it worthwhile for me to remain and post responses.
You said, “Scripture clearly tells us what Jesus prayed in Gethsemane. These are not intercessory prayers. Jesus is praying for Himself.”
I say, why does Jesus have to pray for Himself? He was sinless. Especially praying for many hours, probably most of the night.
You also said, “These are not intercessory prayers”.
I ask, who told you that His prayers were not intercessory prayers? The scriptures don’t say so.
You said “As I stated you have superimposed your belief on what scripture says. You maintain that Jesus prayers and supplications were intercessory; that’s wrong. Intercessory prayers are other-centered.”
I say “exactly, Intercessory prayers are other-centered ”, Jesus was interceding for us! How can you categorically say that I am wrong? Were you there? Or are you “superimposing your belief" on what the scriptures say?
You said, “In the earlier post I referred to Jesus prayers before and after Gethsemane. When we compare the plain reading, these are not obscure passages. We don’t even need any high brow systematic interpretation stuff because the content is crystal clear.”
Then you quote “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word. (Jn 17:20)”
I re-read the entire chapter. Jesus is obviously referring to the Apostles in “Neither pray I for these alone”. Jesus is referring to us then He said; “but for them also which shall believe on me through their word”. Talk about simple and crystal clear. According to John this prayer, which is Chapter 17, occurs just before Jesus enters the Garden. It is clear to me that this prayer is for all of us and that it continued in the Garden.
I have stated what I believe what the LDS church teaches and believes. You can reject them if you want. I know them to be true from the testimony given to me by the Holy Ghost. No level of argument or intellectualizing will change my testimony.
If there is another point of Mormon LDS doctrine that bothers you, ask, and if I know the answer I will explain what exactly we believe and why we believe it. Remember my purpose of coming to this forum is to dispel the rumors and myths that are spewed by those who only pretend to know how and why the LDS teaches a certain doctrine. My intent is not to convert anyone to the LDS church. That is the job of the Holy Ghost who is far more capable.
The reason that I came to this forum is because of your post “Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:52 am “ “My point is that the LDS version of the atonement has implications that would undermine His authority to be our Savior.” Your statement was wrong then, and it is wrong now, because I think you are stating that we are undermining (denying) Jesus’ authority to be our savior.
I would venture to say that there is no Christian who believes more than any Latter-Day Saint, that; 1) The Divinity of Jesus Christ, 2) that Jesus Christ is the actual Son of God the Father, 3) That He suffered to pay the price for our sins, 4) that He and He alone had the absolute authority to atone for our sins, 5) that He was the first to be resurrected, 6) that today, He stands on the right hand of The Father, 7) that through His grace we will all be resurrected, and, 8) that He will be our judge on how we conducted our lives.
Call us whatever you may, because Paul said; “Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.”
May the Lord soften your heart towards the LDS people, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ my Savior.
Stan
“Fascinating…..you remind me of my Catholic relatives. Are you Angry; you sound angry. I’m not mad at you. You know, I’m just a housewife, not a teacher like you. I honestly thought you’d heard of this rule before, so I was attempting to come up to your level of scholarship.”
First, no I am not angry, nor am I mad or angry with you, nor am I a teacher other than in Sunday School classes. I went back and re-read my own post and I guess that I was feeling a bit overwhelmed by your answers. I assumed that they came from “educated religionist” ie. bachelors, masters or doctorate in specifically religion, at any level way over my head.
Second, I am an engineer who specialized in software development in the late 60’s. I am currently self-employed in the computer graphics field waiting until, my wife says that, it is time for me to retire. Other than attending Sunday School classes for 44 years both as a student and as a teacher, the only college religion classes that I took were at BYU in the mid 1960’s. Nothing deep in study, just trying to get a passing grade.
“Stan, it’s great that you pray and want to be open to the leading of the Holy Ghost. However, you have superimposed your strongly-held belief upon Scripture. The Bible states that the Holy Ghost will “guide you into all truth.” (Jn 16:13)”
I suppose that what you mean by “you have superimposed your strongly-held belief upon Scripture” is that you think that my beliefs override what the scriptures are really saying. I guess from someone else’s point of view that could be true.
I do not only “want to be open to the leading of the Holy Ghost”, I strive to have the Holy Ghost as my constant companion on a daily basis. I live my life every hour every day in such a manner that the Holy Ghost can guide me in every aspect of my daily life. Sometimes I am successful, sometimes I have to try harder.
Today, as before in my responses, I would read a paragraph, then respond line by line.
Then I read your next paragraph “The Holy Spirit has led me to learn the principals of hermaneutics and to study the history and culture of Jesus’ day. What is so wacky about that? What I have found is that there’s more to Gethsemane than meets the eye. No part of the Atonement happened in Gethsemane, but there are multiple threads of resolution just before the Atonement. In earlier posts, you agreed that things in the Old Testament looked forward to the New Testament. When you look back at the Old Testament what are you looking at? History. A few years ago, I began to study Hebrews and discovered that it explains Christ’s earthly ministry and Atonement historically and in context of the culture of his own people group, the Jews. I started investigating the rest of the Bible in the same way. This has helped me greatly in my own devotions. For example, The term “rightly dividing” is one of the “jots and tittles” that I used to overlook.”
What I think I see here, is a closed mind, one that is intellectualizing the scriptures.
My original intent, in reading and posting on this forum, was to dispel myths and correct the rumors about what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints teaches and believes. There are a lot of wacky rumors and myths.
It seems that this forum has become more about bashing. I do not want to bash. I think that bashing is a tool of satan. Whenever I begin to realize that I am in an exchange that has resorted to bashing I leave that exchange. I am afraid that I may be at this point on this forum.
I stated that I know, for myself, that the purpose of the Garden was for Jesus Christ to pay for our sins. You say that “No part of the Atonement happened in Gethsemane”. So we are in complete disagreement. I think that you intellectualized your belief, but then you probably think that I am intellectualizing. I stand on the good feelings in my heart that what I believe came from the Holy Ghost witnessing to me the truth, and what I believe to be scripture. I know by the witness from the Holy Ghost, that He did Atone for us in the Garden. Nothing that you can say or post will change that.
On another forum http://blog.beliefnet.com/blogalogue/20 ... ments.html you will see bashings from person named Javden. Both sides of the issue have condemned him for his viciousness. Then there is Chief1989 who started out thinking like most “traditional Christians” that hell would be full of Mormons. Chief1989 still thinks we are wrong on some points of doctrine, but from his posts he seems to acknowledge that we are not members of an anti-Christ cult, but Christians with another point of view. Many of the posts on that forum are also too intellectual for me, but the spirit of mutual understanding makes it worthwhile for me to remain and post responses.
You said, “Scripture clearly tells us what Jesus prayed in Gethsemane. These are not intercessory prayers. Jesus is praying for Himself.”
I say, why does Jesus have to pray for Himself? He was sinless. Especially praying for many hours, probably most of the night.
You also said, “These are not intercessory prayers”.
I ask, who told you that His prayers were not intercessory prayers? The scriptures don’t say so.
You said “As I stated you have superimposed your belief on what scripture says. You maintain that Jesus prayers and supplications were intercessory; that’s wrong. Intercessory prayers are other-centered.”
I say “exactly, Intercessory prayers are other-centered ”, Jesus was interceding for us! How can you categorically say that I am wrong? Were you there? Or are you “superimposing your belief" on what the scriptures say?
You said, “In the earlier post I referred to Jesus prayers before and after Gethsemane. When we compare the plain reading, these are not obscure passages. We don’t even need any high brow systematic interpretation stuff because the content is crystal clear.”
Then you quote “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word. (Jn 17:20)”
I re-read the entire chapter. Jesus is obviously referring to the Apostles in “Neither pray I for these alone”. Jesus is referring to us then He said; “but for them also which shall believe on me through their word”. Talk about simple and crystal clear. According to John this prayer, which is Chapter 17, occurs just before Jesus enters the Garden. It is clear to me that this prayer is for all of us and that it continued in the Garden.
I have stated what I believe what the LDS church teaches and believes. You can reject them if you want. I know them to be true from the testimony given to me by the Holy Ghost. No level of argument or intellectualizing will change my testimony.
If there is another point of Mormon LDS doctrine that bothers you, ask, and if I know the answer I will explain what exactly we believe and why we believe it. Remember my purpose of coming to this forum is to dispel the rumors and myths that are spewed by those who only pretend to know how and why the LDS teaches a certain doctrine. My intent is not to convert anyone to the LDS church. That is the job of the Holy Ghost who is far more capable.
The reason that I came to this forum is because of your post “Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:52 am “ “My point is that the LDS version of the atonement has implications that would undermine His authority to be our Savior.” Your statement was wrong then, and it is wrong now, because I think you are stating that we are undermining (denying) Jesus’ authority to be our savior.
I would venture to say that there is no Christian who believes more than any Latter-Day Saint, that; 1) The Divinity of Jesus Christ, 2) that Jesus Christ is the actual Son of God the Father, 3) That He suffered to pay the price for our sins, 4) that He and He alone had the absolute authority to atone for our sins, 5) that He was the first to be resurrected, 6) that today, He stands on the right hand of The Father, 7) that through His grace we will all be resurrected, and, 8) that He will be our judge on how we conducted our lives.
Call us whatever you may, because Paul said; “Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.”
May the Lord soften your heart towards the LDS people, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ my Savior.
Stan
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
I’ve been blessed to know some very fine people who happen to be Mormon. Out of fear, some of my Christian friends think Mormons have three heads, but I will speak up and tell them they’re wrong…they have four! (Relax, just joking.) Seriously, I don’t let them say bad things about Mormons. Mormons are just people. When my husband travels, a few of his colleagues may be scheduled for business in the same city. One of these guys is a Mormon, but my husband and this guy hang out together for accountability, but the other guys go to Hooters, the casinos, etc. Of course, the get into some debates, but they’re still friends. Also, I met other Mormons via my kids at the playground. I know they’re LDS, they know I’m not. Our kids play, we dish, no problem.
If you think that I’m Mormon-bashing far from it. However, I have obviously offended you, I apologize. I am puzzled, however. You continued to respond after it appeared that this forum was turning out to be a “vigorous” discussion. We would “take the gloves off”, but respectfully. (I think that this post was about week ago.)
My Sept 7 post
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:
You mentioned something about bashing that occurred on another website. I know nothing about that. As a matter of fact, I don’t participate in the other, edgy levels of this forum for the same reason. I refuse to get into that sort of thing. by the way, I am a bit disappointed. Who is being closed-minded here? When you asked me to read President Hinckley’s speech, I did. I also gave some feed back on the piece. Did you check the site I did recommended to you? There’s nothing offensive there. It’s just a site for Bible geeks like me.
http://www.biblicalresearch.information/page7.html
Yet your inference suggests that you attribute the silly behavior from the other website to me? That’s not fair
I often speak of “context” from the Jewish perspective. The Apostle Paul quoted phrases that are actually from Greek poets. These phrases are in the epistles. Paul was extremely “intellectual” and the Lord used Him to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. He was also used the “rightly divided” term. I explained that we must be very careful in how we handle scripture because a strictly intellectual approach is dangerous. However, when used by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the intellectual approach illumines Scripture. Who are you to say that the Holy Spirit doesn’t work that way? Are you God? I really don’t consider myself all that intellectual, but I’m smart enough to know that there are a lot of people way smarter than I.
Your post
My original intent, in reading and posting on this forum, was to dispel myths and correct the rumors about what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints teaches and believes. There are a lot of wacky rumors and myths
This is what it says on the Mormon Discussions homepage:
Here is a place of free discussion. Whether you want to discuss the finer intricacies of doctrine, or whether you want to discuss the truthiness of the church in general, your word will be heard here.
This describes the Celestial forum:
The upper-crust forum for [i]scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.[/i]
Stan, I respect that you strongly believe as you do, but honestly, what did you expect? “Scholarly” means that things might get a bit “intellectual”. Do you expect to say a few things and that the other person would say, “Wow.” I was blind but now I see! Sign me up for the LDS!” I don’t think so.
On Aug 22, this is how you introduced yourself:
I have been a member for 43 years, joining at the age of 23. I have held many responsible positions and taught many classes. I am currently on the Stake HC. Everything that I have read and taught agrees with what I think you say the Atonement is, how it was designed, and how it was accomplished. In fact I was assigned to talk on August 19 on the Atonement its grace and its mercies. Because this Sunday was also the “EXIT” talk given by my grandson who is leaving for the Dominican Republic, the entire SP’ency was there. I presented the Atonement exactly the way that I think that you believe. I received many “great talk” acknowledgements from each of the SP.
On Sep 12 you said:
Maybe you like I, grew up in a denomination type of church. In our church some of the doctrines changed when we got a new minister even though he graduated from our church university. I believe that this is true in all “traditional Christian Churches” because I can see it within my family of preachers. I am the only LDS person in my extended family.
Your last post
It seems that this forum has become more about bashing. I do not want to bash. I think that bashing is a tool of satan. Whenever I begin to realize that I am in an exchange that has resorted to bashing I leave that exchange. I am afraid that I may be at this point on this forum.
You admitted to being overwhelmed. That’s what this is all about, isn’t it; not some imagined “bashing” from me. If I were bashing you, the moderators would have kicked me off this form a long time ago. I suppose the way you presented yourself was just puffery. I thought you were some big brain in the LDS. Since you have Christian preachers in you family. I naturally assumed that you had at least heard of the Bible study methods I mentioned and thought I needed to come up to your level. You’ve been dishonest about this Stan---- dishonesty is a “tool of Satan”.
You know, Jesus is coming back very soon. When He returns, either you will wish you had listened to me or I’ll wish I had listened to you. One of us is wrong.
I will pray for you.
Good-bye my friend. And I do mean friend.
If you think that I’m Mormon-bashing far from it. However, I have obviously offended you, I apologize. I am puzzled, however. You continued to respond after it appeared that this forum was turning out to be a “vigorous” discussion. We would “take the gloves off”, but respectfully. (I think that this post was about week ago.)
My Sept 7 post
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:
You mentioned something about bashing that occurred on another website. I know nothing about that. As a matter of fact, I don’t participate in the other, edgy levels of this forum for the same reason. I refuse to get into that sort of thing. by the way, I am a bit disappointed. Who is being closed-minded here? When you asked me to read President Hinckley’s speech, I did. I also gave some feed back on the piece. Did you check the site I did recommended to you? There’s nothing offensive there. It’s just a site for Bible geeks like me.
http://www.biblicalresearch.information/page7.html
Yet your inference suggests that you attribute the silly behavior from the other website to me? That’s not fair
I often speak of “context” from the Jewish perspective. The Apostle Paul quoted phrases that are actually from Greek poets. These phrases are in the epistles. Paul was extremely “intellectual” and the Lord used Him to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. He was also used the “rightly divided” term. I explained that we must be very careful in how we handle scripture because a strictly intellectual approach is dangerous. However, when used by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the intellectual approach illumines Scripture. Who are you to say that the Holy Spirit doesn’t work that way? Are you God? I really don’t consider myself all that intellectual, but I’m smart enough to know that there are a lot of people way smarter than I.
Your post
My original intent, in reading and posting on this forum, was to dispel myths and correct the rumors about what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints teaches and believes. There are a lot of wacky rumors and myths
This is what it says on the Mormon Discussions homepage:
Here is a place of free discussion. Whether you want to discuss the finer intricacies of doctrine, or whether you want to discuss the truthiness of the church in general, your word will be heard here.
This describes the Celestial forum:
The upper-crust forum for [i]scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.[/i]
Stan, I respect that you strongly believe as you do, but honestly, what did you expect? “Scholarly” means that things might get a bit “intellectual”. Do you expect to say a few things and that the other person would say, “Wow.” I was blind but now I see! Sign me up for the LDS!” I don’t think so.
On Aug 22, this is how you introduced yourself:
I have been a member for 43 years, joining at the age of 23. I have held many responsible positions and taught many classes. I am currently on the Stake HC. Everything that I have read and taught agrees with what I think you say the Atonement is, how it was designed, and how it was accomplished. In fact I was assigned to talk on August 19 on the Atonement its grace and its mercies. Because this Sunday was also the “EXIT” talk given by my grandson who is leaving for the Dominican Republic, the entire SP’ency was there. I presented the Atonement exactly the way that I think that you believe. I received many “great talk” acknowledgements from each of the SP.
On Sep 12 you said:
Maybe you like I, grew up in a denomination type of church. In our church some of the doctrines changed when we got a new minister even though he graduated from our church university. I believe that this is true in all “traditional Christian Churches” because I can see it within my family of preachers. I am the only LDS person in my extended family.
Your last post
It seems that this forum has become more about bashing. I do not want to bash. I think that bashing is a tool of satan. Whenever I begin to realize that I am in an exchange that has resorted to bashing I leave that exchange. I am afraid that I may be at this point on this forum.
You admitted to being overwhelmed. That’s what this is all about, isn’t it; not some imagined “bashing” from me. If I were bashing you, the moderators would have kicked me off this form a long time ago. I suppose the way you presented yourself was just puffery. I thought you were some big brain in the LDS. Since you have Christian preachers in you family. I naturally assumed that you had at least heard of the Bible study methods I mentioned and thought I needed to come up to your level. You’ve been dishonest about this Stan---- dishonesty is a “tool of Satan”.
You know, Jesus is coming back very soon. When He returns, either you will wish you had listened to me or I’ll wish I had listened to you. One of us is wrong.
I will pray for you.
Good-bye my friend. And I do mean friend.
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
The Atonement
Hey I-Man, What's up?
I am thinking of leaving the forum, it's not what I thought was. I thought that a topic could be discussed in a objective way. In this short time in the forum, my impression has changed. Like you said LDS doctrine has puzzlel pieces that don't fit. I assume that those who believe LDS doctrine are willing to discuss it in a systematic way if they participate in the Celestial forum, but I sense that people are fearful to do so. What I observed in this short time is that the points of LDS doctrine have to be propped up with the force of one's conviction, rather than standing on its own in a reasoned arguement. What's the "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" and "I testify to you" all about? Is this some kind of Mormon mind trick? This is way too time consuming. I think I have probably misunderstood something all along. Anyway, take care and keep studying. Here are some good sites that have helped me.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/
http://www.realtime.net/~wdoud/topics/levitsac.html
http://www.biblicalresearch.information/page56.html
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/passover.html
http://www.khouse.org/
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pine ... pindex.htm
http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/jw ... CGR312.HTM
Bye
I am thinking of leaving the forum, it's not what I thought was. I thought that a topic could be discussed in a objective way. In this short time in the forum, my impression has changed. Like you said LDS doctrine has puzzlel pieces that don't fit. I assume that those who believe LDS doctrine are willing to discuss it in a systematic way if they participate in the Celestial forum, but I sense that people are fearful to do so. What I observed in this short time is that the points of LDS doctrine have to be propped up with the force of one's conviction, rather than standing on its own in a reasoned arguement. What's the "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" and "I testify to you" all about? Is this some kind of Mormon mind trick? This is way too time consuming. I think I have probably misunderstood something all along. Anyway, take care and keep studying. Here are some good sites that have helped me.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/
http://www.realtime.net/~wdoud/topics/levitsac.html
http://www.biblicalresearch.information/page56.html
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/passover.html
http://www.khouse.org/
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pine ... pindex.htm
http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/jw ... CGR312.HTM
Bye