# Are Mormons real Christians?



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

I don't really care at all about the politics involved with the question...just curious what the general feeling is here about the religious side. Seemed a couple years ago that the majority considered Mormonism a cult, or at least not entirely sound in doctrine.


----------



## chickenslayer (Apr 20, 2010)

Define real christians


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

I thought all religions were a cult.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

I don't know if they are real Christians, but as far as I can tell they strongly - very strongly - support American conservative, traditional values and are extremely patriotic and pro-American. That's good enough for me and way more than I can say for many religions.


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

American politics is pretty amazing. People tend to justify just about anything if it has the right label...


----------



## HeelSpur (May 7, 2011)

I don't know a thing about religion, but as long as a
person is decent I could care less what their beliefs are.


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

It doesn't fit my understanding of Christianity, but my understanding isn't the definitive one. That's God's decision not mine.

Putting the question another way, if they were the only church within a week's drive of where I live, I wouldn't go.

Lot's of people feel the same way about my religion though


----------



## Hollowdweller (Jul 13, 2011)

I voted yes. Paul never met Jesus, and was actually condemned by a lot of the people who actually knew him. But most of what we call Christianity today came from him. So if we are ok with that then Joseph Smith bring it on.:hysterical:


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

Christian by definition: 
A Christian ( pronunciation (helpÂ·info)) is a person who adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic *religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as recorded in the Canonical gospels and the letters of the New Testament.* "Christian" derives from the Koine Greek word Christ, a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term Messiah.[1]

They do believe in Jesus Christ, and they follow his teachings. That makes them Christians.

Cult by definition:

cult (klt)
n.
1.
a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
b. The followers of such a religion or sect.
2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.
4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.
5.
a.* Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.*
b. The object of such devotion.
6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.

by definition, any religion could be considered a cult, heck even the boy scouts of America, could be considered a cult.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

chickenslayer said:


> Define real christians


The point of the question is for you to use your own definition.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

I guess I was mostly interested in the perspective of people who consider themselves Christians. I left that out, but that's OK. It was just an afternoon curiosity. I won't share my own belief on the subject because it's complicated and not important. But I definitely think Mormons tend to be more family oriented in actual practice than mainstream "Christians." That's worth a lot to me.

As far as the political side of it, I don't consider Mormonism an issue at all. I would have no problem supporting a Mormon. That's why I didn't post this in politics. It's irrelevant in that arena.


----------



## Narshalla (Sep 11, 2008)

Some are, and some are not, just like any other religion.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

Narshalla said:


> Some are, and some are not, *just like any other religion.*


Not sure what you mean by the bolded part...are you saying there are Christians in every religion?
ETA: Nevermind, I think I understand now...sorry, I'm sleep deprived right now.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

They have their own bible.


----------



## preparing (Aug 4, 2011)

Anyone who believes Jesus is the son of G-d and gives their life over to his purpose.

Christian=follower of Christ.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

LDS believe they are the only Christians.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

More acuratly they beleve that only the ordainanes of the LDS will ensure salvation.


----------



## preparing (Aug 4, 2011)

QUOTE]LDS believe they are the only Christians. 
[/QUOTE]


> More acuratly they beleve that only the ordainanes of the LDS will ensure salvation.[


That doesn't mean they aren't Christians, it just means they are Christians who happen to be wrong


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

Hollowdweller said:


> I voted yes. Paul never met Jesus, and was actually condemned by a lot of the people who actually knew him. But most of what we call Christianity today came from him. So if we are ok with that then Joseph Smith bring it on.:hysterical:


*Yes he did.*...Acts 9:3-6
King James Version (KJV)
3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:

4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

preparing said:


> That doesn't mean they aren't Christians, it just means they are Christians who happen to be wrong


There is no theologial support for being a member of the new covenant and being wrong.

Being a Christian and being wrong that there is though.


Matthew 7:22-23

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


22 Many will say to me on that day, &#8216;Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?&#8217; 23 Then I will tell them plainly, &#8216;I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!&#8217;


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

If they profess Faith in Christ to save them then yes they are.
the bible says 1 Faith, 1 Lord 1 baptism, it does not say 1 religion.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Since I am not God is it my call? Mormon do not threaten to kill me for my faith so this is a moot point to me. Every Mormon walking the walk (honestly that is really the only kind I have ever personally met--kinda odd when I think about it) has been people I respect for their charity, family, work efforts, and honest living. God cast his vote even for me heck I could be a thumbs down.


----------



## Kevingr (Mar 10, 2006)

For me to be a Christian you need to follow the Bible, the Bible is Gods word, his laws and instructions for us. Jesus came to fulfill the prophecies (sp?) of the old testament and to give us further instructions and die to save us from our sins. Period. I do not follow additional books written by a man in the 1800's that tells us we are sinning if we don't have our kids baptized by the time they are 8 years old. In the Bible, neither God or Jesus told us that. I also do not follow a Pope or Bishop or other Leader that makes up their own rules that are not taught to us by God or Jesus in the Bible.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Are Mormons real Christians? There are 41,000 Christian denominations. So who gets to decide which ones of them are real Christians and which ones are not? You can bet each one of those 41,000 sects is going to say that they are real Christians.

A rose by any other name smells just as sweet. There are Christians and Christians and Christians, some of them are whacky, some are not, they're all the same to me if they call themselves Christians.

.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

postroad said:


> LDS believe they are the only Christians.


So do Catholics.

.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

Hollowdweller said:


> I voted yes. Paul never met Jesus, and was actually condemned by a lot of the people who actually knew him. But most of what we call Christianity today came from him. So if we are ok with that then Joseph Smith bring it on.:hysterical:


Paul did meet Jesus and knew him intimately! 



> Acts 26:9 &#8220;Indeed, I myself thought I must do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. 10 This I also did in Jerusalem, and many of the saints I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them. 11 And I punished them often in every synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities.
> 
> 12 &#8220;While thus occupied, as I journeyed to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, 13 at midday, O king, along the road I saw a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining around me and those who journeyed with me. 14 And when we all had fallen to the ground, I heard a voice speaking to me and saying in the Hebrew language, &#8216;Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.&#8217; 15 So I said, &#8216;Who are You, Lord?&#8217; And He said, &#8216;I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. 16 But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you. 17 I will deliver you from the Jewish people, as well as from the Gentiles, to whom I now[a] send you, 18 to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.&#8217;
> 
> ...


 New King James Version


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijUc7NI2O28]Is Mormonism Christian? - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## defenestrate (Aug 23, 2005)

For their "quirks", I have found LDS/Mormon followers to have a better sense of family and community than most denominations, and people of all walks of life can learn from their example in this.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

To follow Christ.......

Now would that mean to follow Him to the cross, or to follow Him into the world's lap of civil government compromise and luxury ?


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

naturelover said:


> So do Catholics.
> 
> .


Not true, and explicitly stated so at Vatican II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Mormons are just as real as all the other Christian denominations are. They all believe in Christ regardless of their selected views, saints prophets etc.


----------



## wwubben (Oct 13, 2004)

I believe that you are a christian if you believe the apostles creed.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

NoClue said:


> Not true, and explicitly stated so at Vatican II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church


But the RCC does believe that the LDS denomination in particular are not saved.


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

postroad said:


> But the RCC does believe that the LDS denomination in particular are not saved.


It is true that this is the opinion of many in the Church heirarchy and lay-people alike, but officially the Church hasn't commented on LDS specifically and won't. It's also true that there are a great number of very conservative Catholics who are of the opinion that Protestants aren't saved. It is only their opinion though, and not actually part of the Church's teachings. It's also true that some of these will overstep their authority and use their position to propagate their opinions. They are wrong in doing this however, and responsible Catholics will call them out on it. I've several times pointed out when this has happened and have seen priests make public apologies for having propogated their opinions as the teachings of the Church.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

Here's a catechism that a true Christian can say from their heart. Those who are trusting in their own works or their "own righteousness" _cannot_ be true Christians. There is nothing I can do to be saved. Trusting in Christ is my only hope of being accepted by God. All the cults are seeking to establish their own righteousness, not Christ's. Sadly, many who think they are Christians are making the same mistake.

Question 1. What is thy only comfort in life and death?

Answer: That I with body and soul, both in life and death, (a) am not my own, (b) but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; (c) who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, (d) and delivered me from all the power of the devil; (e) and so preserves me (f) that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; (g) yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, (h) and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, (i) and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him. (j)

Each of these truths has it's origin in Scripture.

(a) Rom.14:7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. Rom.14:8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. (b) 1 Cor.6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? (c) 1 Cor.3:23 And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's. Tit.2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. (d) 1 Pet.1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 1 Pet.1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. 1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:12 I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake. (e) Heb.2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 1 John 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. John 8:34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. John 8:35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever. John 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. (f) John 6:39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. John 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 2 Thess.3:3 But the Lord is faithful, who shall stablish you, and keep you from evil. 1 Pet.1:5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. (g) Matt.10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. Matt.10:30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Matt.10:31 Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows. Luke 21:18 But there shall not an hair of your head perish.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

NoClue said:


> It is true that this is the opinion of many in the Church heirarchy and lay-people alike, but officially the Church hasn't commented on LDS specifically and won't. It's also true that there are a great number of very conservative Catholics who are of the opinion that Protestants aren't saved. It is only their opinion though, and not actually part of the Church's teachings. It's also true that some of these will overstep their authority and use their position to propagate their opinions. They are wrong in doing this however, and responsible Catholics will call them out on it. I've several times pointed out when this has happened and have seen priests make public apologies for having propogated their opinions as the teachings of the Church.


Are you indicating that the RCC now does afirm that an LDS baptism is valid and efective?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

So most of you would agree that Satan is a Christian, right? After all he BELIEVED that Christ was the Son of God and if all that is necessary is to believe then he fits the bill.

Hate to bust so many bubbles but being a Christian is NOT just 'believing in Christ'. Its not calling yourself Christian. Its not going to church. Its not carrying a Bible with you every where you go. Its not reading the Bible and being about to quote scriptures. There are plenty of people out there who do this stuff who will be turned away on judgment day, Christ told us this.

Being a Christian is submitting yourself to God, believing that Christ is the Son of God, that He was born of a virgin, died on the cross for atonement of sin, was resurrected. Its living your life in accordance to His teachings AND being truly remorseful and repentant when you fail.

From my discussions with Mormons and reading what the are told to follow I do not believe they are Christians. They will be part of the crowd standing in front of God going _Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?_ only to hear _I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers._

But they won't be alone. There will be plenty of Catholics, Baptist, Lutherans, Anabaptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Quakers, non-denominational and more standing there with them.


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

postroad said:


> Are you indicating that the RCC now does afirm that an LDS baptism is valid and efective?


I had to look it up, but the answer is no
Statement by the Catholic Church on the LDS Mormon church

The answer, however, only applies to those wishing to convert to Catholicism, and LDS isn't the only faith whose baptisms aren't considered valid for those wishing to enter the Catholic Church.

For those who practice their (own and different) faiths in sincere belief, however, the Church teaches that Salvation is a gift from God, and God alone, not by man, and he uses his own Divine Nature in dispensing it.

EDIT: By the way, this statement also disproves my earlier statement that the Catholic Church hadn't commented on LDS specifically, at least in this context, and I, accordingly, stand corrected. My apologies.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

NoClue said:


> I had to look it up, but the answer is no
> Statement by the Catholic Church on the LDS Mormon church
> 
> The answer, however, only applies to those wishing to convert to Catholicism, and LDS isn't the only faith whose baptisms aren't considered valid for those wishing to enter the Catholic Church.
> ...


I thought I had missed out on some late breaking news from the Vatican.


----------



## Old John (May 27, 2004)

They seem to follow good, traditional, Conservative Values and be good, Patriotic Americans who do their civic duties. The few I've known were good Neighbors and good Family Folks. They follow their version of the Christian Faith intensly.
That's good enough for me.


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

It doesn't however mean that LDS members aren't saved, just that their faith is incompatible with Catholicism. Salvation is still for God alone to dispense


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

watcher said:


> So most of you would agree that Satan is a Christian, right? After all he BELIEVED that Christ was the Son of God and if all that is necessary is to believe then he fits the bill.
> 
> Hate to bust so many bubbles but being a Christian is NOT just 'believing in Christ'. Its not calling yourself Christian. Its not going to church. Its not carrying a Bible with you every where you go. Its not reading the Bible and being about to quote scriptures. There are plenty of people out there who do this stuff who will be turned away on judgment day, Christ told us this.
> 
> ...


I might add.

Matthew 5:48
Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect

Hebrews 10:26
If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left,


1 John 3:5-9

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


5 But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. 6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.

7 Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. 8 He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devilâs work. 9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because Godâs seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

NoClue said:


> It doesn't however mean that LDS members aren't saved, just that their faith is incompatible with Catholicism. Salvation is still for God alone to dispense


Good Gravy. Are you indiating that their are multiple gosples that lead to salvation?


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

postroad said:


> Good Gravy. Are you indiating that their are multiple gosples that lead to salvation?


I'm not saying that at all.

We all read the same scriptures and we all come away with the same message but nuanced differently. What I say is that if one set of nuances helps you accept the message and another gets in your way, go with the set that helps you, if you're on the right path and accept Christ, those flawed nuances will fall away and become irrelevant.

Everyone believes that their 'WAY' is right, otherwise they wouldn't be following it - nobody I"ve ever met intentionally chose a path they believed took them away from Salvation. I'm no different. I recognize however, that as a human, my understanding is inherently incapable of being perfect.

In other words, I believe that there is one path to God, but there is more than one way to get to that one path.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

postroad said:


> LDS believe they are the only Christians.


you are mistaken
LDS believe that ALL christian denominations have access to the truth. LDS believe SALVATION (entrance into & gaining Gods inheritance) is a GIFT from Christ predicated SOLELY on acceptance
LDS believe that EXALTATION (what portion you recieve of GOD's inheritance) is PREDICATED upon how hard you try to live the gospel (following Christ's example)
however from my childhood attendance of various churches, this philosophy (our denomination is the only ones that are saved & all others are wallowing in falsehood) is COMMON among protestants of of various denominations.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

mekasmom said:


> They have their own bible.


We use the regular KJV version of the Bible, same as many Churches do.
We do have the Book of Mormon - which is another Testament of Jesus Christ if that is what you refer to.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

postroad said:


> LDS believe they are the only Christians.


No we do not, please stop misstating our beliefs


----------



## HOTW (Jul 3, 2007)

I have quite a few LDS clients and yes they are christian. Also a few of them are converts so they understand it even more so than those raised in th ereligion. Just because they read an additonal book doe snot make them anything else..if you realize how many books have been removed from the bible doe sthta make thoise who read them not Chrisitan? Or if someone recognizes th eteachings of Christ but does not elevate him to God like ability doe sthat make them wrong? In the Catholic CHurch the Pope is elevated to a very high godlike status but noone says that is wrong? 

There are a lot of questions and definitions amongst Christians and it gets pretty amazing how many differences there are.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> Being a Christian is submitting yourself to God, believing that Christ is the Son of God, that He was born of a virgin, died on the cross for atonement of sin, was resurrected. Its living your life in accordance to His teachings AND being truly remorseful and repentant when you fail.


 All things Mormons believe



watcher said:


> From my discussions with Mormons and reading what the are told to follow I do not believe they are Christians. [/I]


 You said they needed to believe the above, which they do, then you deny it, which is it?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

mnn2501 said:


> We use the regular KJV version of the Bible, same as many Churches do.
> We do have the Book of Mormon - which is another Testament of Jesus Christ if that is what you refer to.


Correct.
Although I am not LDS I have gone to their church a few times while living in AZ. I stayed with a Mormon family for 10 years. They are very good people. Well I didn't actually stay in their house but a one bedroom apartment as a care taker for a large horse boarding stable on their place in Tempe, AZ. And yes they are Christians as far as I am concerned.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

If someone claims to be a Christian, I take their word for it.

I believe Latter-Day Saints generally consider themselves to be Christians.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Pops2 said:


> you are mistaken
> LDS believe that ALL christian denominations have access to the truth. LDS believe SALVATION (entrance into & gaining Gods inheritance) is a GIFT from Christ predicated SOLELY on acceptance
> LDS believe that EXALTATION (what portion you recieve of GOD's inheritance) is PREDICATED upon how hard you try to live the gospel (following Christ's example)
> however from my childhood attendance of various churches, this philosophy (our denomination is the only ones that are saved & all others are wallowing in falsehood) is COMMON among protestants of of various denominations.


Afirm this statement then. " Christ has authorised the ordainances performed by the clergy in other than LDS church for the remison of sin and exaltation.

Converts to the LDS therefore do not have to repent of a previous baptism in order to beome a member of the LDS.

Previous Apostles and Prophets within the LDS where mislead in their beliefs."


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> No we do not, please stop misstating our beliefs


Afirm this statement then. " Christ has authorised the ordainances performed by the clergy in other than LDS church for the remison of sin and exaltation.

Converts to the LDS therefore do not have to repent of a previous baptism in order to beome a member of the LDS.

Previous Apostles and Prophets within the LDS where mislead in their beliefs."


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> We use the regular KJV version of the Bible, same as many Churches do.
> We do have the Book of Mormon - which is another Testament of Jesus Christ if that is what you refer to.



Afirm this statement. "The KJV is the uncorrupted revelation of God outlining the completness of doctrine neccesary for salvation."

Still waiting on this one?

I am willing to substitute "Bible" for "KJV"


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

I encourage any LDS to afirm above statements


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

postroad said:


> Afirm this statement then. " Christ has authorised the ordainances performed by the clergy in other than LDS church for the remison of sin and exaltation.
> 
> Converts to the LDS therefore do not have to repent of a previous baptism in order to beome a member of the LDS.
> 
> Previous Apostles and Prophets within the LDS where mislead in their beliefs."


i never had to repent of previous baptism. nor was any ordinances for remission of sins or exaltation ever performed in any denomination i ever attended. and at least one prophet has said that they are only infallible when they act in accordance w/ the instruction of god and that they are as fallible as any man when they act according to their own will.
what i told you is church doctrine provided BY the prophets IN the teaching manuals of the church. so you can take whatever nonsense you want and make whatever claims you want but i know it's just the rambling of hate.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

I believe that God looks at a person's heart, not the name over the door of where they choose to worship. Religion, IMO, is nothing more than cults. Christianity isn't about organized religion, it's about a person's relationship with Jesus. I can't see what's in someone's heart, but we can see how others react to those around them or to situations. So, I'm assuming this came up because Romney is a Mormon. I think Romney is an honest man who genuinely cares about this country. He has many of the same conservative values as I do. So, I really don't care if he's a Mormon or not. The rest of it doesn't really matter to me either. He is free to worship as he sees fit according to his own convictions.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Pops2 said:


> i never had to repent of previous baptism. nor was any ordinances for remission of sins or exaltation ever performed in any denomination i ever attended. and at least one prophet has said that they are only infallible when they act in accordance w/ the instruction of god and that they are as fallible as any man when they act according to their own will.
> what i told you is church doctrine provided BY the prophets IN the teaching manuals of the church. so you can take whatever nonsense you want and make whatever claims you want but i know it's just the rambling of hate.


Then go ahead and afirm the statement.


----------



## zant (Dec 1, 2005)

I think to the lamestream and their followers-being bigoted and hateful towards Mormons is OKAY.....the left figures hating Jews is okay,why not Mormons too.....Disgusting...but they love the islamofascists-Scotty,beam me up...


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Beam me up is right.

As far as American values, I agree with the positive postings in the Mormons' regard.

The label, "christian", has lost it's meaning in this day of fashionable religion.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

Sonshine said:


> I believe that God looks at a person's heart, not the name over the door of where they choose to worship. Religion, IMO, is nothing more than cults. Christianity isn't about organized religion, it's about a person's relationship with Jesus. I can't see what's in someone's heart, but we can see how others react to those around them or to situations. So, I'm assuming this came up because Romney is a Mormon. I think Romney is an honest man who genuinely cares about this country. He has many of the same conservative values as I do. So, I really don't care if he's a Mormon or not. The rest of it doesn't really matter to me either. He is free to worship as he sees fit according to his own convictions.


Good to see you back in these parts, Sonshine! Great post! The question did come up because of the Mitt Romney/Billy Graham thing, but I'm with you. It doesn't matter one bit to me that Romney is a Mormon. And you're right, the values are very similar to mainstream Christian values (but from what I've seen Mormons tend to live by their values better).

Having had some discussion on the topic, now I'm most interested in hearing more from the Christians who believe Mormons can be Christians. Has that always been your view, or is that a conclusion you came to after learning more about Mormonism lately because Romney happens to be one?


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

kasilofhome said:


> Since I am not God is it my call? Mormon do not threaten to kill me for my faith so this is a moot point to me. Every Mormon walking the walk (honestly that is really the only kind I have ever personally met--kinda odd when I think about it) has been people I respect for their charity, family, work efforts, and honest living. God cast his vote even for me heck I could be a thumbs down.


Mormons have just as many good and just as many disgusting members as any group of people. Some are real Christians some are not.

I am sure that all of Ted Bundy's victims were consoled that Bundy was walking the walk. And Elizabeth Smart could also console herself with the high family values of her kidnapper and rapist Mitchell.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> Afirm this statement then. " Christ has authorised the ordainances performed by the clergy in other than LDS church for the remison of sin and exaltation.
> 
> Converts to the LDS therefore do not have to repent of a previous baptism in order to beome a member of the LDS.
> 
> Previous Apostles and Prophets within the LDS where mislead in their beliefs."


Before I affirm or deny anything (which I will gladly do), I'd like you to provide us with the sources of these quotes you are supplying. These quotes have some truth, but some falsehoods in them. Where did you find them?


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> I encourage any LDS to afirm above statements


Who made these statements??


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

ryanthomas said:


> Good to see you back in these parts, Sonshine! Great post! The question did come up because of the Mitt Romney/Billy Graham thing, but I'm with you. It doesn't matter one bit to me that Romney is a Mormon. And you're right, the values are very similar to mainstream Christian values (but from what I've seen Mormons tend to live by their values better).
> 
> Having had some discussion on the topic, now I'm most interested in hearing more from the Christians who believe Mormons can be Christians. Has that always been your view, or is that a conclusion you came to after learning more about Mormonism lately because Romney happens to be one?


It has not always been my beliefs, but it's also not something I came to due to Romney running for office. About 15 or 20 years ago I began studying other religions/doctrines. Also, my own life experiences on how certain people calling themselves Christians act or have treated me etc, made me re-read the scriptures. I don't believe any organized religion teaches 100% of the truth and have never met a person who I would call a perfect Christian. However, if a person has repented of their sins, has acknowledged Jesus as God's son, the only perfect man, and accepted him as their Savior, then according to my understanding of the scriptures, that makes them a Christian. I don't agree with all that the LDS church teaches, I don't agree with all that the Catholic church teaches, I don't even agree with everything the church I attend teaches, so I stopped trying to play God and pray that all of us that have accepted Jesus as our Savior will listen to Him and follow Him and show us the truth. I have been judged harshly by many so called Christians because I don't agree with everything they do, or because I choose to hang out with some people they don't think I should hang out with, but I know that God knows my heart, and only God knows any of our hearts. I think many will be surprised if they make it to Heaven just who else will be there.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

thequeensblessing said:


> Before I affirm or deny anything (which I will gladly do), I'd like you to provide us with the sources of these quotes you are supplying. These quotes have some truth, but some falsehoods in them. Where did you find them?


I just made them up. I put them in quotes simply to show that they do not neccesarly represent my point of view.

Here is another. "Authority through the Holy Spirit rests in the clergy and the sects apart from the LDS to perform baptisms efective for the remision of sin. No further baptism is neccesary in order to be a member in good standing in the LDS or to obtain salvation" 

From the LDS members, confirm or deny?


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> I just made them up. I put them in quotes simply to show that they do not neccesarly represent my point of view.
> 
> Here is another. "Authority through the Holy Spirit rests in the clergy and the sects apart from the LDS to perform baptisms efective for the remision of sin. No further baptism is neccesary in order to be a member in good standing in the LDS or to obtain salvation"
> 
> From the LDS members, confirm or deny?


You make up your own "quotes" and then ask us to refute them...sounds like you're looking for an argument. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, ok?

Your statements have bits of truth, with bits of untruth mixed into them. They are like... scriptures, mingled with the doctrines of men.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

We, in the LDS church, do not believe that we have a corner on the market when it comes to heaven. I don't pretend to know who will, or won't be there, as I am entirely too busy trying to keep myself on the straight and narrow path without worrying about what path my neighbor chooses. I'll help my neighbor on their journey anywhere I can, but ultimately, I can't travel the journey for them, nor can they travel it for me. 
We do believe in the necessity of the authority to act in the name of God, be that baptism, marriage, or healing. We believe in those keys as spoken of in the bible which keys are that authority to act in His name. 
Do we believe that being baptized in the catholic church, or anglican church, or baptist church is sufficient for membership in the LDS church, and that it is all you need for exaltation? No. Not hardly. Nor do we believe that baptism into the LDS church will assure you exaltation. 
I'm really not sure what else you're driving at with your "quotes".


----------



## jross (Sep 3, 2006)

I do not agree with the Mormon doctrine and dogma, but Jesus did say, "In my Fathers house, there are many mansions".


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

postroad said:


> I just made them up. I put them in quotes simply to show that they do not neccesarly represent my point of view.


When you start quoting only LDS Doctrinal positions I'll be happy to confirm or deny them, however when you make up wild statements, you're barking up the wrong tree.

I might as well ask you something like:
Have you stopped beating your wife yet? yes or no?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

I will answer your question about the Bible however
From our Articles of Faith:


> We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.


So while some errors may have crept in due to translation, there is nothing stating that we believe the Bible is corrupt as you have claimed.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

This thing about us believing the bible is "corrupt" is so reminiscent of the Jews accusing Christ of bringing a new gospel, of bringing a profane or heretical doctrine because of his teachings. We don't supplant the bible with the book of Mormon. They go together the same way the new testament goes with the old testament. One does not supplant the other.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

Sonshine said:


> It has not always been my beliefs, but it's also not something I came to due to Romney running for office. About 15 or 20 years ago I began studying other religions/doctrines. Also, my own life experiences on how certain people calling themselves Christians act or have treated me etc, made me re-read the scriptures. I don't believe any organized religion teaches 100% of the truth and have never met a person who I would call a perfect Christian. However, if a person has repented of their sins, has acknowledged Jesus as God's son, the only perfect man, and accepted him as their Savior, then according to my understanding of the scriptures, that makes them a Christian. I don't agree with all that the LDS church teaches, I don't agree with all that the Catholic church teaches, I don't even agree with everything the church I attend teaches, so I stopped trying to play God and pray that all of us that have accepted Jesus as our Savior will listen to Him and follow Him and show us the truth. I have been judged harshly by many so called Christians because I don't agree with everything they do, or because I choose to hang out with some people they don't think I should hang out with, but I know that God knows my heart, and only God knows any of our hearts. I think many will be surprised if they make it to Heaven just who else will be there.


Good answer. I'm not sure I agree 100%, but I can agree generally with you.


----------



## wally (Oct 9, 2007)

For those of you who would like to know what the mormons believe google the "articles of faith" perhaps this will answer many of your questions and yes we are LDS.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

ryanthomas said:


> Good answer. I'm not sure I agree 100%, but I can agree generally with you.


We don't have to agree 100% with each other. I've actually never met anyone who agrees with me 100% of the time on any issue.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

wally said:


> For those of you who would like to know what the mormons believe google the "articles of faith" perhaps this will answer many of your questions and yes we are LDS.


The articles of faith will give you one answer but there are also other interesting sites which also give answers. As with so many religions it depends on who you talk to.


Mormonism Disproved - Articles of Faith 

Mormonism Disproved - Articles of Faith


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Apparently Billy Graham has changed his mind and decided that Mormonism is no longer a cult.

(CNN) Shortly after Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney enjoyed cookies and soft drinks with the Rev. Billy Graham and his son Franklin Graham on Thursday at the elder Graham's mountaintop retreat, a reference to Mormonism as a cult was scrubbed from the website of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

In a section of the website called Billy Graham's My Answer there had been the question "What is a cult?"

Answer: "A cult is any group which teaches doctrines or beliefs that deviate from the biblical message of the Christian faith."

"Some of these groups are Jehovah's Witnesess, Mormons, the Unification Church, Unitarians, Spritualists, Scientologists, and others," the site continued.

No longer. On Tuesday, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association confirmed that page has recently been removed from the site.

âOur primary focus at the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association has always been promoting the Gospel of Jesus Christ," Ken Barun, chief of staff for the association, told CNN in a statement. "We removed the information from the website because we do not wish to participate in a theological debate about something that has become politicized during this campaign."

Coincidence? I think not.


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

Something I was given years ago. Compiled by some college students (I believe) who decided that the true church of Jesus Christ must include these 17 points. known as "the 17 points of the true church"

17 Points of the True Church of Christ

Christ organized the Church (Eph 4:11-14) 
The true church must bear the name of Jesus Christ (Eph 5:23) 
The true church must have a foundation of Apostles and Prophets (Eph 2:19-20) 
The true church must have the same organization as Christ's Church (Eph 4:11-14) 
The true church must claim divine authority (Heb 5:4-10) 
The true church must have no paid ministry (1 Cor 9:16-18; Acts 20:33-34; John 10:11-13) 
The true church must baptise by immersion (Matt 3:13-16) 
The true church must bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (Acts 8:14-17) 
The true church must practice divine healing (Mark 3:14-15) 
The true church must teach that God and Jesus are seperate and distinct individuals (John 17:11; 20:17) 
The true church must teach that God and Jesus have bodies of flesh and bone (Luke 23:36-39; Acts 1:9-11; Heb 1:1-3) 
The officers must be called by God (Heb 4:4; Ex 28:1; 40:13-16) 
The true church must claim revelation from God (Amos 3:7) 
The true church must be a missionary church (Matt 28:19-20) 
The true church must be a restored church (Acts 3:19-20) 
The true church must practice baptism for the dead (1Cor 15:16&29) 
"By their fruits ye shall know them." (Matt 7:20)

As far as I am able to discern, the LDS are the only ones who practice all 17 points. 
As a side note, each of those who compiled the list had independently joined the LDS church.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

postroad said:


> LDS believe they are the only Christians.


False. The believe they are, well, the best Christians. The believe other Christians will be allowed into Heaven, but at a lower "level."



ryanthomas said:


> I don't really care at all about the politics involved with the question...just curious what the general feeling is here about the religious side. Seemed a couple years ago that the majority considered Mormonism a cult, or at least not entirely sound in doctrine.


They believe very firmly in Jesus, and believe he is the absolute root of their religion. There is no reason to not consider them normal Christians just because they believe in, well, a lot of stuff.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

thequeensblessing said:


> This thing about us believing the bible is "corrupt" is so reminiscent of the Jews accusing Christ of bringing a new gospel, of bringing a profane or heretical doctrine because of his teachings. We don't supplant the bible with the book of Mormon. They go together the same way the new testament goes with the old testament. One does not supplant the other.


1 Nephi 

13:23 And he said: Behold it proceedeth out of the mouth of a Jew. And I, Nephi, beheld it; and he said unto me: The book that thou beholdest is a record of the Jews, which contains the covenants of the Lord, which he hath made unto the house of Israel; and it also containeth many of the prophecies of the holy prophets; and it is a record like unto the engravings which are upon the plates of brass, save there are not so many; nevertheless, they contain the covenants of the Lord, which he hath made unto the house of Israel; wherefore, they are of great worth unto the Gentiles. 
13:24 And the angel of the Lord said unto me: Thou hast beheld that the book proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew; and when it proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record; and they bear record according to the truth which is in the Lamb of God. 
13:25 Wherefore, these things go forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in God. 
13:26 And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of a great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away. 
13:27 And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men. 
13:28 Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God. 
13:29 And after these plain and precious things were taken away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles; and after it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles, yea, even across the many waters which thou hast seen with the Gentiles which have gone forth out of captivity, thou seest -- because of the many plain and precious things which have been taken out of the book, which were plain unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the plainness which is in the Lamb of God -- because of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over them. 
13:30 Nevertheless, thou beholdest that the Gentiles who have gone forth out of captivity, and have been lifted up by the power of God above all other nations, upon the face of the land which is choice above all other lands, which is the land that the Lord God hath covenanted with thy father that his seed should have for the land of their inheritance; wherefore, thou seest that the Lord God will not suffer that the Gentiles will utterly destroy the mixture of thy seed, which are among thy brethren. 
13:31 Neither will he suffer that the Gentiles shall destroy the seed of thy brethren. 
13:32 Neither will the Lord God suffer that the Gentiles shall forever remain in that awful state of blindness, which thou beholdest they are in, because of the plain and most precious parts of the gospel of the Lamb which have been kept back by that abominable church, whose formation thou hast seen


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> I will answer your question about the Bible however
> From our Articles of Faith:
> 
> 
> So while some errors may have crept in due to translation, there is nothing stating that we believe the Bible is corrupt as you have claimed.


Did I say corrupt or did I say corrupted? Would perverted be better?

1 Nephi

14:9 And it came to pass that he said unto me: Look, and behold that great and abominable church, which is the mother of abominations, whose founder is the devil. 
14:10 And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> 1 Nephi
> 
> 13:23 And he said: Behold it proceedeth out of the mouth of a Jew. And I, Nephi, beheld it; and he said unto me: The book that thou beholdest is a record of the Jews, which contains the covenants of the Lord, which he hath made unto the house of Israel; and it also containeth many of the prophecies of the holy prophets; and it is a record like unto the engravings which are upon the plates of brass, save there are not so many; nevertheless, they contain the covenants of the Lord, which he hath made unto the house of Israel; wherefore, they are of great worth unto the Gentiles.
> 13:24 And the angel of the Lord said unto me: Thou hast beheld that the book proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew; and when it proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record; and they bear record according to the truth which is in the Lamb of God.
> ...


Uhm....please don't just post random scriptures without some explanation of what your point is. I don't get your point.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> Did I say corrupt or did I say corrupted? Would perverted be better?
> 
> 1 Nephi
> 
> ...


Ahhh...Ok, I think I get it now. You're giving us an interpretation of this scripture by implication, right?


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

emdeengee said:


> Apparently Billy Graham has changed his mind and decided that Mormonism is no longer a cult.
> 
> (CNN) Shortly after Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney enjoyed cookies and soft drinks with the Rev. Billy Graham and his son Franklin Graham on Thursday at the elder Graham's mountaintop retreat, a reference to Mormonism as a cult was scrubbed from the website of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.
> 
> ...


I've been thinking about this lately because of all the talk about Romney's religion, but that incident is what brought me to ask the question. It doesn't necessarily mean Billy Graham has changed his mind, though. It could just be that he (or his organization) has chosen not to say it quite so explicitly.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

thequeensblessing said:


> Ahhh...Ok, I think I get it now. You're giving us an interpretation of this scripture by implication, right?


Was the Apostle Pratt authorised by the Holy Spirit to make this implication?


"Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the "whore of Babylon" whom the Lord denounces... as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. And any person who shall be so wicked as to receive a holy ordinance of the gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent of the unholy and impious act. If any penitent believer desires to obtain forgiveness of sins through baptism, let him beware of having any thing to do with the churches of apostate Christendom, lest he perish in the awful plagues and judgments, denounced against them. The only persons among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people who have authority from Jesus Christ to administer any gospel ordinance are those called and authorized among the Latter-day Saints. Before the restoration of the church of Christ to the earth in the year 1830, there have been no people on the earth for many generations possessing authority from God to minister gospel ordinances. We again repeat. Beware of the hypocritical false teachers and imposters of Babylon!
- Apostle Orson Pratt The Seer, Vol.2, No.4, p.255


----------



## Marshloft (Mar 24, 2008)

I think too many folks look at differing religeons,, and feel if its not their religeon,, it must be a cult.
What some don't realize,, there are several churches/organizations that could be considered cult-like. Most non-denominational churches as an example.
The deciding factor for non-denominational church is are the people following scripture, being spiritually fed, and souls coming to Christ.
The opposite would be,, the people are following the pastor,, not Christ.
Sometimes,, that takes awhile being involved with a church to discover the difference.
The deciding factor on if a religeon is cultic, or not. Is if the church teaches Jesus Christ crucified. Saved by Grace, and nothing of ourselves.
Discovering a cultic religeon is not my forte, I didn't even know LDS and Mormon were one and the same.
I have a feeling someone is attempting to throw a kink in our christian armour.
Its called, devide and conquer.
GH


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

emdeengee said:


> Apparently Billy Graham has changed his mind and decided that Mormonism is no longer a cult.
> 
> (CNN) Shortly after Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney enjoyed cookies and soft drinks with the Rev. Billy Graham and his son Franklin Graham on Thursday at the elder Graham's mountaintop retreat, a reference to Mormonism as a cult was scrubbed from the website of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.
> 
> ...


Very troubling. May God in his mercy raise up more men for us like Paul who feared God and not men. 



> Acts 20:5 âAnd indeed, now I know that you all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face no more. 26 Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. 27 For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God. 28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God[c] which He purchased with His own blood. *29 For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. 31 Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.*
> 
> 32 âSo now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

ryanthomas said:


> I've been thinking about this lately because of all the talk about Romney's religion, but that incident is what brought me to ask the question. It doesn't necessarily mean Billy Graham has changed his mind, though. It could just be that he (or his organization) has chosen not to say it quite so explicitly.


That reminds me of an unforgettable quote I read from Martin Luther.



> If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved; and to be steady on all the battlefield besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point. --Martin Luther (1483-1546)


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> Was the Apostle Pratt authorised by the Holy Spirit to make this implication?
> 
> 
> "Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the "whore of Babylon" whom the Lord denounces... as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. And any person who shall be so wicked as to receive a holy ordinance of the gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent of the unholy and impious act. If any penitent believer desires to obtain forgiveness of sins through baptism, let him beware of having any thing to do with the churches of apostate Christendom, lest he perish in the awful plagues and judgments, denounced against them. The only persons among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people who have authority from Jesus Christ to administer any gospel ordinance are those called and authorized among the Latter-day Saints. Before the restoration of the church of Christ to the earth in the year 1830, there have been no people on the earth for many generations possessing authority from God to minister gospel ordinances. We again repeat. Beware of the hypocritical false teachers and imposters of Babylon!
> - Apostle Orson Pratt The Seer, Vol.2, No.4, p.255


Ahhh yes, "Colorful" Orson Pratt. He certainly had a way with words...didn't he? 
His sentiment is certainly true and is sanctioned by God. His delivery could use some work. He sounds a bit like a modern day evangelical talking about Mormons in this bit, doesn't he?


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

dang, I'm going to hell


----------



## Smalltowngirl (Mar 28, 2010)

wyld thang said:


> dang, I'm going to hell


I'll save a seat for you! :dance:


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

ryanthomas said:


> I've been thinking about this lately because of all the talk about Romney's religion, but that incident is what brought me to ask the question. It doesn't necessarily mean Billy Graham has changed his mind, though. It could just be that he (or his organization) has chosen not to say it quite so explicitly.


True, this is a possibility. But I would rather they be "explicit" if this is their view. In fact I respect their right to state that Mormonism is a cult if they sincerely believe this. It may be an incorrect belief but at least it has been an honestly expressed belief.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

ryanthomas said:


> I've been thinking about this lately because of all the talk about Romney's religion, but that incident is what brought me to ask the question. It doesn't necessarily mean Billy Graham has changed his mind, though. It could just be that he (or his organization) has chosen not to say it quite so explicitly.


 Romney's religion shouldn not affect anyone's voting decision. Aside from some strong views (abortion, taxes, etc.) Mormons are very conservative. Romney is fairly liberal for a Mormon, but as I am pointing out, he is an individual. LDS is a very benign religion. Most Mormons are encouraged to take on huge responsibility loads, which tends to make many more responsible. (Generalizing here.)
But just as people voted for or against Obama because he was black is every bit as bad as voting for or against Romney because he is Mormon. Voting for Obama because he is black is also just as bad as voting against him because he is black. His color should not be an issue; if he is a bad President, he is simply a bad President! Voting against Romney because he is a Mormon is plain stupid, though I know many people are thinking in this manner. But he is a far better choice than Obama. He at least has sense. If we get another 4 Obama years, the nation is doomed to near certain destruction.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

> Romney's religion shouldn not affect anyone's voting decision.


I agree it shouldn't, but it no doubt does matter to some people...less so now than in the primaries. With all those choices, I bet a lot of people voted for others for no other reason than religion.



> But just as people voted for or against Obama because he was black is every bit as bad as voting for or against Romney because he is Mormon.


I don't think many will vote against Romney because he's a Mormon. Those who can't bring themselves to vote for him for that reason will most likely not vote at all.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> dang, I'm going to hell


according to LDS doctrine, not if you are trying to be a good person within the limits of your spiritual understanding. technically even a professed aethist that is utterly ignorant of the gospel but tries to be a good person is not going to hell. and yes they can know all the words in it & still be utterly ignorant of the gospel.


----------



## NoClue (Jan 22, 2007)

I can say quite honestly that Romney's religion has no part in my decision not to vote for him. Equally so, the fact that Obama is black has no bearing in my decision to not vote for him.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Pops2 said:


> according to LDS doctrine, not if you are trying to be a good person within the limits of your spiritual understanding. technically even a professed aethist that is utterly ignorant of the gospel but tries to be a good person is not going to hell. and yes they can know all the words in it & still be utterly ignorant of the gospel.


In fact you may find that at the judgement you may have been baptised into the LDS after you died.

In fact an atheist or an agnostic is closer to salvation in this regard beause they have not accepted the corrupted doctrine of the church of Satan.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Heritagefarm said:


> False. The believe they are, well, the best Christians. The believe other Christians will be allowed into Heaven, but at a lower "level."
> 
> 
> 
> They believe very firmly in Jesus, and believe he is the absolute root of their religion. There is no reason to not consider them normal Christians just because they believe in, well, a lot of stuff.



Are you saying that the LDS now believe that an indviidual who has not been baptised for the dead into the LDS or one who refuses to repent of their previous non LDS baptism at the judgement will find Salvation?


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

thequeensblessing said:


> Ahhh yes, "Colorful" Orson Pratt. He certainly had a way with words...didn't he?
> His sentiment is certainly true and is sanctioned by God. His delivery could use some work. He sounds a bit like a modern day evangelical talking about Mormons in this bit, doesn't he?


So.......???

LDS are now trained in the use of non answers?


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

The number one sign of a cult is that they have a "further revelation" and write their own bible. You just can't get around Rev 22.18-19. Look at all the sideline "denominations". If you write your own bible then it just speaks for itself as to whether it is a cult or not.


----------



## Elffriend (Mar 2, 2003)

mekasmom said:


> The number one sign of a cult is that they have a "further revelation" and write their own bible.


Then all Christians are part of a cult, having tacked their New Testament onto the Tanakh.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Smalltowngirl said:


> I'll save a seat for you! :dance:


I am beginning to think Hell may be too crowded.
The streets of Heaven may look like a ghost town.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Based on the interview with B Graham's son I saw the other day, they do not believe Mormons are real Christians. The interviewer asked him this probably 5 times, and he kept changing the subject and refused to answer. When pushed to answer, he would only say "I refuse to debate this topic with you." There was no "debate" he simply refused to answer it for obvious reasons..


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

mekasmom said:


> The number one sign of a cult is that they have a "further revelation" and write their own bible. You just can't get around Rev 22.18-19. Look at all the sideline "denominations". If you write your own bible then it just speaks for itself as to whether it is a cult or not.


But wait, you and other mainstream Christians do this every single day. Isn't this being a little hypocritical? I guess, from your definition, Christianity itself is a cult, right?

You can't take the warning in Revelation to be literal if you are so easily willing to discard the exact same warning in Deuteronomy. That warning in Deuteronomy, according to your interpretation, would negate everything that comes after it, everything, yet you hold the remaining books of the Old Testament and the New Testament to all be scripture, ie, the word of God. There is no difference...NONE. As I said, it's no different at all to the early Jews and the way they viewed any continuing prophecy and their views of the NT. Its Hypocrisy coming from any Christian.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> So.......???
> 
> LDS are now trained in the use of non answers?


I'm sorry, I deleted my reply as it was rude. See my explanation below.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> Are you saying that the LDS now believe that an indviidual who has not been baptised for the dead into the LDS or one who refuses to repent of their previous non LDS baptism at the judgement will find Salvation?


This very question goes to show how little you truly know about the LDS faith. Let me give you a quick primer on how we view this thing you call salvation. We call it eternal life. It is a gift of the Savior. It is what he died for, that all men might gain eternal life. Some will be resurrected to eternal life, others to ----ation. You don't have to be baptized into any church to be given the gift of eternal life. Atheists will be granted eternal life. Jim Jones, and Charlie Manson will have eternal life. 
We then believe in exaltation, or being given a place in the highest degree of glory. Not all people will gain exaltation. Not all Mormons will gain exaltation. Not everyone who is baptized and goes to the temple will gain exaltation. Much depends on the individual's worthiness, (their heart, their faith, their works, and their knowledge). Not every dead person who is baptized posthumously will be granted exaltation. 
So you see, in the LDS view of things, Salvation is a free gift of the Savior to all mankind. The ability to repent and be redeemed are likewise gifts of the savior. Exaltation is not a free, or automatic gift. It is predicated upon our own faith, our own worthiness. Although that worthiness might include baptism (and it doesn't always as there are people who will never be baptized who will achieve exaltation), it includes much more that that. But this is a sufficient explanation for now.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

postroad said:


> Are you saying that the LDS now believe that an indviidual who has not been baptised for the dead into the LDS or one who refuses to repent of their previous non LDS baptism at the judgement will find Salvation?


Salvation is a free gift for all mankind. Jesus paid the price and unless you both know Him and reject Him, salvation is yours.


As far as your previous quote from Nephi, you are trying to portray it as saying something it does not. 
All it means is that you either follow Christ or you don't. Its not saying that only the LDS follow Christ as you are trying to imply.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

pancho said:


> I am beginning to think Hell may be too crowded.
> The streets of Heaven may look like a ghost town.


No, really the LDS don't believe as so many mainstream Christians do, in a hell with some literal lake of fire ready to consume the souls of all those who are "unworthy". I can't think of any merciful, just, loving Father who would do that to his children. God is merciful. God is just. God is loving. God created the notion of forgiveness. I don't believe he's going to take delight in turning his sons and daughters over to some demon who will delight in roasting them as a piggy on a spit over a fire in some attempt to consume their flesh for eternity. Thankfully, that's not the LDS view. 
No, hell will be one of our own making, a separation from God and from our loved ones. It will be, as old Marley says, a chain we forge link by link.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

mekasmom said:


> The number one sign of a cult is that they have a "further revelation" and write their own bible. You just can't get around Rev 22.18-19. Look at all the sideline "denominations". If you write your own bible then it just speaks for itself as to whether it is a cult or not.


If you knew when the various books of the Bible were written and how it was decided where the books would be placed you would know that your argument holds no water. A little research goes a long way.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

mnn2501 said:


> Salvation is a free gift for all mankind. Jesus paid the price and unless you both know Him and reject Him, salvation is yours.
> 
> 
> As far as your previous quote from Nephi, you are trying to portray it as saying something it does not.
> All it means is that you either follow Christ or you don't. Its not saying that only the LDS follow Christ as you are trying to imply.


You're right. In reality, it is saying just the opposite to what he is trying to imply. It is saying that there ARE only two churches, the church of God, and the church of Satan. We all, whether in the LDS church or out, have to decide where we are on the journey, which road we're on, and who we follow.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> If you knew when the various books of the Bible were written and how it was decided where the books would be placed you would know that your argument holds no water. A little research goes a long way.


Very good point. Too many Christians are completely ignorant of the history of the canon.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

thequeensblessing said:


> You're right. In reality, it is saying just the opposite to what he is trying to imply. It is saying that there ARE only two churches, the church of God, and the church of Satan. We all, whether in the LDS church or out, have to decide where we are on the journey, which road we're on, and who we follow.


The text of Nephi implies exactly what I posted.

13th LDS President Ezra Taft Benson, âThis is not just another Church. This is not just one of a family of Christian churches. This is the Church and kingdom of God, the only true Church upon the face of the earth...â (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p.164-165). This church is the only true and living church on the face of the whole earth (D and C 1:30) âThere is no salvation outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter -day Saints (Mormon Doctrine, p.670) 

âBehold there are save two churches only; the one is the Church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore who so belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.â (The Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:10) 

on April 8, 1973, LDS Apostle Mark E. Petersen proclaimed that salvation âcomes only through the Church itself as the Lord established it... Therefore it was made clearly manifest that salvation is in the Church, and of the Church, and is obtained only through the Church.â 

âThe Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon....â (Orson Pratt, Writings of an Apostle, âDivine Authenticity,â no.6, p.84). 

the LDS church is, âthe only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased ...â Brigham Young (Mormonism's Second President)


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

postroad said:


> Are you saying that the LDS now believe that an indviidual who has not been baptised for the dead into the LDS or one who refuses to repent of their previous non LDS baptism at the judgement will find Salvation?


People who are good Christians will find salvation. Even some good atheists are believed to have a chance later on. So, everyone has a fair and square chance. They believe in different levels of Heaven. So, the atheist will not "climb" as high as the Mormon. They know God is in charge though, and will qualify everything.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Post, when you quote only doctrinal sources and use the LDS interpretation of them we can talk, until then, forgetaboutit


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> Salvation is a free gift for all mankind. Jesus paid the price and unless you both know Him and reject Him, salvation is yours.
> 
> 
> As far as your previous quote from Nephi, you are trying to portray it as saying something it does not.
> All it means is that you either follow Christ or you don't. Its not saying that only the LDS follow Christ as you are trying to imply.


How can someone who has been known by Christ reject him? Now we are getting to the reason I remain an agnostic.



1 John 3:6-9

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.

7 Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. 8 He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devilâs work. 9 No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because Godâs seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.


Which matches perfectly with the OT prophesies regarding the new covenant of perfect obediance through the interention of the Spirit. And is in effect the proof that Christ requested be granted to validate his claims.


John 17:11-21

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)



11 I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your nameâthe name you gave meâso that they may be one as we are one. 12 While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.

13 âI am coming to you now, but I say these things while I am still in the world, so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them. 14 I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. 15 My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. 17 Sanctify[a] them by the truth; your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. 19 For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified.

Jesus Prays for All Believers


20 âMy prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> Post, when you quote only doctrinal sources and use the LDS interpretation of them we can talk, until then, forgetaboutit


You folks certainly are trained in the use of the non answer.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

postroad said:


> You folks certainly are trained in the use of the non answer.


 Why would I answer a strawman post?

You build up something non-doctrinal so you can knock it down.
I could do the same from any source for any group, I don't because I'm honest and let people or groups explain their own beliefs.
If someone says they believe 'x' I certainly don't tell them 'no you don't'


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> Why would I answer a strawman post?
> 
> You build up something non-doctrinal so you can knock it down.
> I could do the same from any source for any group, I don't because I'm honest and let people or groups explain their own beliefs.
> If someone says they believe 'x' I certainly don't tell them 'no you don't'


What now?

I posted text from the BOM which is perfectly plain in its meaning.

I posted interpretation on said text from recognised Apostles and Prophets of the LDS which confirms the plain interpretation of the meaning.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

thequeensblessing said:


> But wait, you and other mainstream Christians do this every single day. Isn't this being a little hypocritical? I guess, from your definition, Christianity itself is a cult, right?
> 
> You can't take the warning in Revelation to be literal if you are so easily willing to discard the exact same warning in Deuteronomy. That warning in Deuteronomy, according to your interpretation, would negate everything that comes after it, everything, yet you hold the remaining books of the Old Testament and the New Testament to all be scripture, ie, the word of God. There is no difference...NONE. As I said, it's no different at all to the early Jews and the way they viewed any continuing prophecy and their views of the NT. Its Hypocrisy coming from any Christian.


all of which actually shows that the scripture means that you are not supposed to interpret it to mean something it was never intended to mean, like PETA saying thou shalt not kill means animals for food as well.


----------



## houndlover (Feb 20, 2009)

This is a conservative site, and pro any candidate that isn't Obama. If this poll had been presented at a time when a Mormon wasn't running against Obama, it would be overwhelmingly NO. This question has been posted before with predictable results - Mormons are a cult, etc.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

"Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the "whore of Babylon" whom the Lord denounces... as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. And *any person who shall be so wicked as to receive a holy ordinance of the gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent *of the unholy and impious act. If any penitent believer desires to obtain forgiveness of sins through baptism, let him beware of having any thing to do with the churches of apostate Christendom, lest he perish in the awful plagues and judgments, denounced against them. The only persons among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people who have authority from Jesus Christ to administer any gospel ordinance are those called and authorized among the Latter-day Saints. Before the restoration of the church of Christ to the earth in the year 1830, there have been no people on the earth for many generations possessing authority from God to minister gospel ordinances. We again repeat. Beware of the hypocritical false teachers and imposters of Babylon!
- Apostle Orson Pratt The Seer, Vol.2, No.4, p.255




thequeensblessing said:


> Ahhh yes, "Colorful" Orson Pratt. He certainly had a way with words...didn't he?
> *His sentiment is certainly true and is sanctioned by God*. His delivery could use some work. He sounds a bit like a modern day evangelical talking about Mormons in this bit, doesn't he?


So to review and so I know where I stand..."technically"* I am a member of the Free Methodist Church, baptised therein(full immersion, got a certificate n everything). I take communion in any church that will serve it to me. I was married in the Free Methodist Church, by an ordained Free Methodist minister. My grandfather and my husband were ordained Free Methodist minsters to boot. I do not intend, ever, to repent of any of it.

Thus I'm hydroelectric dammed every which way according to the Mormon truth.** Am I correct in my understanding? I am NOT being facetious--please see **

*I don't "go" to (organized) church anymore. My journey has taken me out into the desert. That doesn't mean I have turned my back on my faith in Jesus Christ or refuse to "know" God. Quite the contrary. 

**And as blasphemous as it may sound I retain my right to Mormon hydroelectric dam-ation--this business of baptizing people after they die--who have no say in the matter-- really sticks in my craw. Just being honest. Ha, I can be "colorful" too.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

omg, now I am being facetious...I just realized finally here's a thread I can say I'm a whore for Jesus


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

First Orson Pratt was refuted by the President of the Church a number of times for teaching his personal views as doctrine and even excommunicated. 
So any quote from Orson Pratt or the paper he published "the Seer' you can throw away.

Secondly we do not believe in infallibility of anyone except for Christ 

Thirdly, non-LDS can not interpret scripture to suit their point of view and then declare it LDS doctrine. 
Every Church interprets scripture differently else there would not be dozens of major denominations and thousands and thousands of independent Churches. 




> Thus I'm hydroelectric dammed every which way according to the Mormon truth.** Am I correct in my understanding? I am NOT being facetious--please see **


 No you are not, see my above. Postroad is making up his own interpretation even though 3 LDS members so far have corrected him. Apparently nothing will change his mind, so be it, even he according to LDS beliefs will have salvation.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

wyld thang said:


> **And as blasphemous as it may sound I retain my right to Mormon hydroelectric dam-ation--this business of baptizing people after they die--who have no say in the matter-- really sticks in my craw.


And you are wrong, They do have say in the matter, they can accept it or reject it. Freedom of Choice is how God runs things, else we'd all be little pre-programmed robots unable to make any choices of our own.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

mnn2501 said:


> First Orson Pratt was refuted by the President of the Church a number of times and even excommunicated for teaching his personal views as doctrine.
> So any quote from Orson Pratt or the paper he published "the Seer' you can throw away.
> 
> Secondly, non-LDS can not interpret scripture to suit their point of view and then declare it LDS doctrine.
> ...


so you're saying thequeensblessing is misguided since she states Pratt's sentiment is "true and sanctioned by God?"

I've read what the answers have been--none of them have addressed present members of Catholic or Protestant faiths who remain in those faiths/versions of Christianity. Just atheists, or those from other faiths who convert to Mormonism.

I won't even get into the whole idea of unlocking levels of heaven by being good enough. Pity the poor starving child who gets slammed by a Taliban bullet before he can do enough good works--"sucks to be you". Yes, that is my own personal "issue"--for whatever religion that promotes it, christianity does it well too.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Where is ComfortablyNumb when we need him? ound:


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

mnn2501 said:


> And you are wrong, They do have say in the matter, they can accept it or reject it. Freedom of Choice is how God runs things, else we'd all be little pre-programmed robots unable to make any choices of our own.


so you're saying you communicate with the dead to get their permission to baptise them? you have the paperwork to show proof of consent?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

wyld thang said:


> I won't even get into the whole idea of unlocking levels of heaven by being good enough. Pity the poor starving child who gets slammed by a Taliban bullet before he can do enough good works--"sucks to be you". Yes, that is my own personal "issue"--for whatever religion that promotes it, christianity does it well too.


Again, we do not require good works. That is a fallacy. If you really want to know what we teach about this I would be happy to discuss it with you.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

wyld thang said:


> so you're saying you communicate with the dead to get their permission to baptise them? you have the paperwork to show proof of consent?


<<shakes head>> do you really care to know what we believe? or are you just trying to score points on the message board?


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

being good enough depends entirely on how hard you try to be good WITHIN THE SPIRITUAL KNOWLEDGE YOU HAVE. so the child killed by the taliban is judged based on what they know & their effort WITHIN the context of being a child.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

I will disregard Pratt.

then how are you exalted/gain exaltation without good works, being a really good Mormon, staying on the straight and narrow, working out your salvation with fear and trembling, discipline, or whatever else it might be called?

I googled "How to be a good Mormon wife"...


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

wyld thang said:


> so you're saying thequeensblessing is misguided since she states Pratt's sentiment is "true and sanctioned by God?"


I would have to say in this particular case she is -- sorry. But then I have done quite a bit of research on the subject of Orson Pratt also.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

The fact that Mormons baptise dead Jews is disgraceful. Just recently Elie Wiesel was outraged to learn that his parents had been baptized by proxy by the Mormon church. This shows such a lack of religious respect that it IS outrageous. Previous discoveries of proxy baptisms of Jews over the past 18 years have long outraged Jewish leaders but their complaints have been ignored. Such baptisms are especially problematic since so many Jewish people over the centuries had been forced to convert to Christianity against their will and murdered or expelled from countries when they did not. 

Romeny refused to answer when questioned directly as to whether or not he had participated in proxy baprtism as a Bishop of the Mormon church.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> so you're saying thequeensblessing is misguided since she states Pratt's sentiment is "true and sanctioned by God?"
> 
> I've read what the answers have been--none of them have addressed present members of Catholic or Protestant faiths who remain in those faiths/versions of Christianity. Just atheists, or those from other faiths who convert to Mormonism.
> 
> I won't even get into the whole idea of unlocking levels of heaven by being good enough. Pity the poor starving child who gets slammed by a Taliban bullet before he can do enough good works--"sucks to be you". Yes, that is my own personal "issue"--for whatever religion that promotes it, christianity does it well too.


I can answer for myself, thanks.  

I say that Orson Pratt was correct in his sentiments as being "true and sanctioned by God" in that he was basically elaborating on the passage of Nephi that Postroad already quoted. Postroad was using this passage to support the idea that there is the church of God and the church of Satan, as Nephi states. 
The part where I stated that the idea isn't right is that Pratt did what so many people do, he gave his own personal interpretation to scripture. (This is what Postroad seems to be doing as well.) Pratt assigned an intimate identity to the "whore of Babylon", something that is not scriptural at all, as far as I'm aware, and I'm fairly versed in church history/doctrine. So, we now come full circle back to my initial statement that it seems to be "scripture, mingled with the doctrines of men". I stand by that statement. 
Postroad takes a scripture and uses a very controversial member of the church, who makes sensational claims (he was very "colorful", as I said) to try to bolster his argument. This may work with folks who don't know who Orson Pratt was, or his history within the church, but it doesn't work with anyone who knows anything about the church history. It only makes the person stating it look ignorant. Orson Pratt had a very checkered past, including excommunication from the church. While much of what he said was correct, he would often put his own personal spin or interpretation to it that ended up negating the entire message. This is one of those times. But, I suppose its more fun to use a controversial figure in the church to try to bolster your claims than it is to try to find a reputable one.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

mnn2501 said:


> I would have to say in this particular case she is -- sorry. But then I have done quite a bit of research on the subject of Orson Pratt also.


Sorry hon, but I'm not "misguided" at all. Read my earlier post. Thanks.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

emdeengee said:


> The fact that Mormons baptise dead Jews is disgraceful. Just recently Elie Wiesel was outraged to learn that his parents had been baptized by proxy by the Mormon church. This shows such a lack of religious respect that it IS outrageous. Previous discoveries of proxy baptisms of Jews over the past 18 years have long outraged Jewish leaders but their complaints have been ignored. Such baptisms are especially problematic since so many Jewish people over the centuries had been forced to convert to Christianity against their will and murdered or expelled from countries when they did not.
> 
> Romeny refused to answer when questioned directly as to whether or not he had participated in proxy baprtism as a Bishop of the Mormon church.


The church actually agrees with you here! The church has repeatedly reminded members that the only people they are supposed to be baptizing posthumously anymore are their own deceased relatives, or they are to have permission from the next direct descendent to do so. Some individual members just don't listen though, and that's a shame as it does create a black mark for the the church as a whole.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

mnn2501 said:


> <<shakes head>> do you really care to know what we believe? or are you just trying to score points on the message board?


I see a question not being answered. Yes that gets my dander up.

And since I am who I am yes I simply relish the opportunity to say I'm a whore for Jesus(because of unrepentant activities presented) and as far as I can see from the answers given it's theologically correct per the Mormon doctrine. 

again, yes or no?

And yes I care to know what you believe, because of a situation in my personal life regarding loved ones. I'm not telling them "Mormons are nuts", I'm telling them, "understand what they believe so you can make an informed choice for yourself if you'd like to participate"

and another side to this, yes I want to understand better Romney's belief system


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

thequeensblessing said:


> Sorry hon, but I'm not "misguided" at all. Read my earlier post. Thanks.


And I can agree totally with what you posted above. Its when people start putting their own personal opinions as to interpretation (as postroad does and Pratt did) that they get into trouble.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

wyld thang said:


> I see a question not being answered. Yes that gets my dander up.
> 
> And since I am who I am yes I simply relish the opportunity to say I'm a whore for Jesus(because of unrepentant activities presented) and as far as I can see from the answers given it's theologically correct per the Mormon doctrine.
> 
> ...


As I have already said, no if I am understanding which question you refer to.

If you have a question, then please ask it directly. This thread is going so many different ways at once its hard to keep up.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

thequeensblessing said:


> I can answer for myself, thanks.
> 
> I say that Orson Pratt was correct in his sentiments as being "true and sanctioned by God" in that he was basically elaborating on the passage of Nephi that Postroad already quoted. Postroad was using this passage to support the idea that there is the church of God and the church of Satan, as Nephi states.
> The part where I stated that the idea isn't right is that Pratt did what so many people do, he gave his own personal interpretation to scripture. (This is what Postroad seems to be doing as well.) Pratt assigned an intimate identity to the "whore of Babylon", something that is not scriptural at all, as far as I'm aware, and I'm fairly versed in church history/doctrine. So, we now come full circle back to my initial statement that it seems to be "scripture, mingled with the doctrines of men". I stand by that statement.
> Postroad takes a scripture and uses a very controversial member of the church, who makes sensational claims (he was very "colorful", as I said) to try to bolster his argument. This may work with folks who don't know who Orson Pratt was, or his history within the church, but it doesn't work with anyone who knows anything about the church history. It only makes the person stating it look ignorant. Orson Pratt had a very checkered past, including excommunication from the church. While much of what he said was correct, he would often put his own personal spin or interpretation to it that ended up negating the entire message. This is one of those times. But, I suppose its more fun to use a controversial figure in the church to try to bolster your claims than it is to try to find a reputable one.


Thank you, I'm quite willing to throw out Pratt

again, my question, I am a member of and receive(d) sacraments in the Protestant church, a *christian* church (going back to the original question), have salvation/ticket to heaven according to the teachings of Jesus Christ in the NT(as well as on other facets I won't get into here). I will not become part of the Mormon church, nor follow its teachings. 

Will I be in the Mormon heaven? yes or no?


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> I see a question not being answered. Yes that gets my dander up.
> 
> And since I am who I am yes I simply relish the opportunity to say I'm a whore for Jesus(because of unrepentant activities presented) and as far as I can see from the answers given it's theologically correct per the Mormon doctrine.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure what your question is....Do we (the church) believe you are part of the "whore of Babylon" church? No...no, we don't. We don't believe any established church is the "whore of Babylon". We believe that is a metaphore, in much the same way that the "Bride of Christ" is a metaphore.


----------



## Bret (Oct 3, 2003)

willow_girl said:


> Where is ComfortablyNumb when we need him? ound:


Gone but not forgotten.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

metaphors still convey meaning...what is the meaning then?

catholic and Protestant, apostate would be metaphors for...what?


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

houndlover said:


> This is a conservative site, and pro any candidate that isn't Obama. If this poll had been presented at a time when a Mormon wasn't running against Obama, it would be overwhelmingly NO. This question has been posted before with predictable results - Mormons are a cult, etc.


That's why I asked now. I wanted to see if the general consensus had changed. Whether the change is a result of people needing to justify voting for a Mormon or something of that sort is debatable. It could also be that many people have had an honest change of heart simply because they have learned more about Mormonism lately.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

wyld thang said:


> Thank you, I'm quite willing to throw out Pratt
> 
> again, my question, I am a member of and receive(d) sacraments in the Protestant church, a *christian* church (going back to the original question), have salvation/ticket to heaven according to the teachings of Jesus Christ in the NT(as well as on other facets I won't get into here). I will not become part of the Mormon church, nor follow its teachings.
> 
> Will I be in the Mormon heaven? yes or no?


Yes you will, there is only one unpardonable sin according to the Bible (Matthew 12:31-32) as long as you don't commit that one, you're in. (and only God can judge that one, I wouldn't try)


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> metaphors still convey meaning...what is the meaning then?
> 
> catholic and Protestant, apostate would be metaphors for...what?


I'm sorry. Truly I am. I'm not trying to be dense. I just can't help it I guess. I really don't understand what you are asking here. 

Catholic and Protestant aren't metaphors for anything. "Whore of Babylon" is a metaphor for an idea of a church that opposes everything Christ stands for. It's not a substitute name for any existing Christian church I'm aware of.

Apostate is what a Mormon is who is not true to his/her covenants. 

Help me understand your question if this doesn't answer it.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

thequeensblessing said:


> I can answer for myself, thanks.
> 
> I say that Orson Pratt was correct in his sentiments as being "true and sanctioned by God" in that he was basically elaborating on the passage of Nephi that Postroad already quoted. Postroad was using this passage to support the idea that there is the church of God and the church of Satan, as Nephi states.
> The part where I stated that the idea isn't right is that Pratt did what so many people do, he gave his own personal interpretation to scripture. (This is what Postroad seems to be doing as well.) Pratt assigned an intimate identity to the "whore of Babylon", something that is not scriptural at all, as far as I'm aware, and I'm fairly versed in church history/doctrine. So, we now come full circle back to my initial statement that it seems to be "scripture, mingled with the doctrines of men". I stand by that statement.
> Postroad takes a scripture and uses a very controversial member of the church, who makes sensational claims (he was very "colorful", as I said) to try to bolster his argument. This may work with folks who don't know who Orson Pratt was, or his history within the church, but it doesn't work with anyone who knows anything about the church history. It only makes the person stating it look ignorant. Orson Pratt had a very checkered past, including excommunication from the church. While much of what he said was correct, he would often put his own personal spin or interpretation to it that ended up negating the entire message. This is one of those times. But, I suppose its more fun to use a controversial figure in the church to try to bolster your claims than it is to try to find a reputable one.


I only "used" Pratt because you responded to his sentiment as "true and sanctioned". Yes I'm not trained in interpreting the Mormon scrip. I've been doing background googling and reading of Mormon scrip on the subject--just as someone would go to the Bible and find verses which speak about a subject. I've looked up as much gamut as I can, old, new, etc. I can see where commentary is passed off as scripture by outsiders. I "get" that.

(googles and reads Mormon scripture)

haha, I have to chuckle...now I understand there *is* no hell per modern Mormon interpretation. That's why I aint' going to hell. Everyone gets in, eventually, to some level, (level is based on their hard work, "by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel" gospel meaning LDS interpretation--the others aren't gonna work). Unless you do the Really Bad Sin. 

Why didnt' you just say that?


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> I only "used" Pratt because you responded to his sentiment as "true and sanctioned". Yes I'm not trained in interpreting the Mormon scrip. I've been doing background googling and reading of Mormon scrip on the subject--just as someone would go to the Bible and find verses which speak about a subject. I've looked up as much gamut as I can, old, new, etc. I can see where commentary is passed off as scripture by outsiders. I "get" that.
> 
> (googles and reads Mormon scripture)
> 
> ...


not exactly. a buddhist or muslim that lives a good life of love & caring for others in accordance w/ the tenets of these religions AND after they die discover that Jesus really was the savior AND accept that, will have a higher place in heaven than the LDS that continuously chooses to NOT follow the gospel.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

"Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the Church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore whoso belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth." (The Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:10)

"Nothing less than a complete apostasy from the Christian religion would warrant the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." (Documentary History of the Church, Introduction, xl)

"I was answered that I must join none of them (Christian Churches), for they were all wrong...that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight" (Joseph Smith History 1:19).

"...orthodox Christian views of God are Pagan rather than Christian." (Mormon Doctrine of Deity by B.H. Roberts, p.116)

"...the God whom the 'Christians' worship is a being of their own creation..." (Apostle Charles W. Penrose, JD 23:243)

"The Christian world, so called, are heathens as to their knowledge of the salvation of God." (Brigham Young, JD 8:171)

"We may very properly say that the sectarian world do not know anything correctly, so far as pertains to salvation. Ask them where heaven is?- where they are going to when they die?-where Paradise is! -and there is not a priest in the world that can answer your questions. Ask them what kind of a being our Heavenly Father is, and they cannot tell you so much as Balaam's ass told him. They are more ignorant than children." (Brigham Young, JD 5:229).

"The Christian world, I discovered, was like the captain and crew of a vessel on the ocean without a compass, and tossed to and fro whithersoever the wind listed to blow them. When the light came to me, I saw that all the so-called Christian world was grovelling in darkness." (Brigham Young, JD 5:73).

"What! Are Christians ignorant? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute best." (John Taylor, JD 13:225)

"What does the Christian world know about God? Nothing...Why so far as the things of God are concerned, they are the veriest fools; they know neither God nor the things of God." (John Taylor, JI) 13:225)

"Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap ----ation to their souls (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.177)

"I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true." (Joseph Smith, DHC 1:6)

"I spoke of the impropriety of turning away from the truth, and going after a people so destitute of righteousness as the Methodists." (Joseph Smith, DHC 2:319)

"...brother Joseph B. Nobles once told a Methodist priest, after hearing him describe his god, that the god they worshiped was the "Mormon's" Devil-a being without a body, whereas our God has a body, parts and passions." (Brigham Young, JD 5:331)

"...brother Heber C. Kimball was beset by a number of Baptist priests who had been attending a conference. He read them all down out of the New Testament....With regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called Christian world." (Brigham Young, JD 8:199).

"The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon...." (Orson Pratt, Orson Pratt, Writings of an Apostle, "Divine Authenticity," no.6, p.84).

"...all the priests who adhere to the sectarian religions of the day with all their followers, without one exception, receive their portion with the devil and his angels." (The Elders Journal, Joseph Smith Jr., editor, vol.1, no.4, p.60)

"And any person who shall be so wicked as to receive a holy ordinance of the gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent of the unholy and impious act." (Orson Pratt, OP-WA, "The Kingdom of God," no.2, p.6)

"...all other churches are entirely destitute of all authority from God; and any person who recieves baptism or the Lord's supper from their hands will highly offend God, for he looks upon them as the most corrupt people." (Orson Pratt, The Seer, pg. 255)

"...the great apostate church as the anti-christ...This great antichrist...is the church of the devil." (Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine p.40)

"Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the "whore of Babylon" whom the lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness." (Pratt, The Seer, p.255)

"Brother Taylor has just said that the religions of the day were hatched in hell. The eggs were laid in hell, hatched on its borders, and then kicked on to the earth." (Brigham Young, JD 6:176)

"Evil spirits control much of the so-called religious worship in the world; for instance, the great creeds of Christendom were formulated so as to conform to their whispered promptings." (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.246)

"After the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, there were only two churches upon the earth. They were known respectively as the Church of the Lamb of God and Babylon. The various organizations which are called churches throughout Christiandom, though differing in their creeds and organizations, have one common orgin. They belong to Babylon." (George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth, p.324)


"You may hear the divines of the day extol the character of the Saviour, undertake to exhibit his true character before the people, and give an account of his origin...I have frequently thought of mules, which you know are half horse and half ass, when reflecting upon the representations made by those divines. I have heard sectarian priests undertake to tell the character of the Son of God, and they make him half of one species and half of another, and I could not avoid thinking at once of the mule, which is the most hateful creature that ever was made, I believe. You will excuse me, but I have thus thought many a time" (Journal of Discourses 4:217).



These individuals including Joseph Smith have all been refuted by the LDS?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Postroad re: your above post -- Yawn!

You've been answered yet you continue to pontificate on subjects you are clueless about.
You're just spamming the board with things that actually don't even support your point of view in some cases.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

ryanthomas said:


> That's why I asked now. I wanted to see if the general consensus had changed. Whether the change is a result of people needing to justify voting for a Mormon or something of that sort is debatable. It could also be that many people have had an honest change of heart simply because they have learned more about Mormonism lately.


It could also be because people aren't voting for a spiritual leader, but a President.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

thequeensblessing said:


> I'm sorry. Truly I am. I'm not trying to be dense. I just can't help it I guess. I really don't understand what you are asking here.
> 
> Catholic and Protestant aren't metaphors for anything. "Whore of Babylon" is a metaphor for an idea of a church that opposes everything Christ stands for. It's not a substitute name for any existing Christian church I'm aware of.
> 
> ...


sorry I'm getting kinda behind

gong back to Pratt's colorful statement--which I can find plenty of other statements in Mormon scripture and commentary that *can be interpreted*(crux of this whole debate and why it's so...nailing jello to the wall)as the jist of what he is saying--that catholics and protestants are the Whore of Babylon--examples of the apostate church that has gone astray.

I think what you are saying, is that you agree with Pratt--there is an apostate church which to follow THEIR ordinances is wrong and does not get you exaltation--but you disagree with him that he got colorful and named names: "catholic and protestant". 

Which in the end really means nothing--catholic etc is *not* mormon, they have different dogma, different interpretations of the bible--even different books held as cannon. They do not adhere/recognize Mormon interpretation and teaching so by "default" are apostate(in the interpretation of Mormons). 

I got my question answered, thanks


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

Sonshine said:


> It could also be because people aren't voting for a spiritual leader, but a President.


I wasn't talking about supporting a Mormon for president. I was referring to the shift in belief as to whether Mormons are Christians...the non-political question I started with. There may be political reasons behind it, or there may not be.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> Yes you will, there is only one unpardonable sin according to the Bible (Matthew 12:31-32) as long as you don't commit that one, you're in. (and only God can judge that one, I wouldn't try)



The unpardonable sin is blasphemy of the Spirit. As the new covenant was prophiced to be the covenant of the Spirit transforming the recipiant into perfect obediance anyone who claims to be a member of the new covenant and continues to sin is in fact blasphemising the Spirit that they claim dwells in them.


Hebrews 10:26-27


26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.


Ezekiel 36:26-28


26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. 28 You will live in the land I gave your forefathers; you will be my people, and I will be your God.



Jeremiah 32:38-40


38 They will be my people, and I will be their God. 39 I will give them singleness of heart and action, so that they will always fear me for their own good and the good of their children after them. 40 I will make an everlasting covenant with them: I will never stop doing good to them, and I will inspire them to fear me, so that they will never turn away from me.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

wyld thang said:


> Which in the end really means nothing--catholic etc is *not* mormon, they have different dogma, different interpretations of the bible--even different books held as cannon. They do not adhere/recognize Mormon interpretation and teaching so by "default" are apostate(in the interpretation of Mormons).


Not to add to the confusion but they can not be Apostate because they never believed LDS Doctrine in the first place. They are Christians in their own right however and will enjoy all the blessings that gives them including reaching Heaven 

They may not have what we refer to as 'the fullness of the Gospel' but that doesn't mean they don't follow Christ or that they won't reach heaven. Mormons are a Covenant people, we Covenant with God to do (or not do) certain things. Protestants, Catholics, etc are not under those same Covenants, thus not following them has no effect on them.

Let me give you an real world example that might help: Mormons Covenant with God to live what we call 'The Word of Wisdom' which is basically a health code. Part of that is not drinking or smoking, so for a Mormon to drink or smoke is a sin since they Covenanted with God not to, but a Protestant or Catholic is not under that Covenant so its is not a sin for them to smoke or drink. Make sense?


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> sorry I'm getting kinda behind
> 
> gong back to Pratt's colorful statement--which I can find plenty of other statements in Mormon scripture and commentary that *can be interpreted*(crux of this whole debate and why it's so...nailing jello to the wall)as the jist of what he is saying--that catholics and protestants are the Whore of Babylon--examples of the apostate church that has gone astray.
> 
> I think what you are saying, is that you agree with Pratt--there is an apostate church which to follow THEIR ordinances is wrong and does not get you exaltation--but you disagree with him that he got colorful and named names: "catholic and protestant".


 Uhm....no. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the "whore of Babylon" is a metaphor for an idea, a concept, not any actual church, just as the "bride of Christ" doesn't refer to any actual woman. I agree with Pratt that there is good and evil, the church of God and the church of the devil, if you will. But I disagree that those descriptions should be leveled at any church. I can't make that any plainer. 


wyld thang said:


> Which in the end really means nothing--catholic etc is *not* mormon, they have different dogma, different interpretations of the bible--even different books held as cannon. They do not adhere/recognize Mormon interpretation and teaching so by "default" are apostate(in the interpretation of Mormons).
> 
> I got my question answered, thanks


No, again, you grossly misrepresent everything I'm saying. I don't believe a catholic/protestant/jew can be apostate. Only Mormons can be truly apostate today. I have far more danger of apostacy than you do.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

mnn2501 said:


> Not to add to the confusion but they can not be Apostate because they never believed LDS Doctrine in the first place. They are Christians in their own right however and will enjoy all the blessings that gives them including reaching Heaven
> 
> They may not have what we refer to as 'the fullness of the Gospel' but that doesn't mean they don't follow Christ or that they won't reach heaven. Mormons are a Covenant people, we Covenant with God to do (or not do) certain things. Protestants, Catholics, etc are not under those same Covenants, thus not following them has no effect on them.
> 
> Let me give you an real world example that might help: Mormons Covenant with God to live what we call 'The Word of Wisdom' which is basically a health code. Part of that is not drinking or smoking, so for a Mormon to drink or smoke is a sin since they Covenanted with God not to, but a Protestant or Catholic is not under that Covenant so its is not a sin for them to smoke or drink. Make sense?


Well put! Thank you. :clap:


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

thequeensblessing said:


> Uhm....no. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the "whore of Babylon" is a metaphor for an idea, a concept, not any actual church, just as the "bride of Christ" doesn't refer to any actual woman. I agree with Pratt that there is good and evil, the church of God and the church of the devil, if you will. But I disagree that those descriptions should be leveled at any church. I can't make that any plainer.
> No, again, you grossly misrepresent everything I'm saying. I don't believe a catholic/protestant/jew can be apostate. Only Mormons can be truly apostate today. I have far more danger of apostacy than you do.


Because the Holy Spirit only dwells in the LDS and to claim to be a LDS and then become apostate is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

You know postroad, for someone who claims to be agnostic, you sure quote a lot of scripture. One might start thinking your claim is not entirely truthful.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

postroad said:


> Because the Holy Spirit only dwells in the LDS


That's not true at all. There are so many examples of the Spirit guiding non-LDS people that your statement would be funny if it were not for that fact you believe it to be true which is really sad.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> You know postroad, for someone who claims to be agnostic, you sure quote a lot of scripture. One might start thinking your claim is not entirely truthful.


Raised conservative Anabaptist. Not married to the concept of no higher power so not Atheist.

Realised from young that there was somethng not computing if Christianity was the new covenant.

Never got baptised or dedicated my life to Christ. So not Apostate.

Whats left? Agnostic


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

postroad said:


> Raised conservative Anabaptist. Not married to the concept of no higher power so not Atheist.
> 
> Realised from young that there was somethng not computing if Christianity was the new covenant.
> 
> ...


Agnostics believe there may or may not be a higher power but if there is that no one can know what that is. Your posts portray you as intimately involved with Christianity, even if it is your own version/understanding of it. Just going by your posts and not knowing you personally, I would classify you as a non-denominational Christian. . A true agnostic wouldn't fight so hard against any religion as all would be equally likely to be true or false

Definition of AGNOSTIC
a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

thequeensblessing said:


> Uhm....no. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the "whore of Babylon" is a metaphor for an idea, a concept, not any actual church, just as the "bride of Christ" doesn't refer to any actual woman. I agree with Pratt that there is good and evil, the church of God and the church of the devil, if you will. But I disagree that those descriptions should be leveled at any church. I can't make that any plainer.
> No, again, you grossly misrepresent everything I'm saying. I don't believe a catholic/protestant/jew can be apostate. _Only Mormons can be truly apostate today._ I have far more danger of apostacy than you do.


Then you disagree with the founders and leaders of your own church--Postroad posted statements from Joseph Smith to present day on who the church of god is and whos is the church of the devil. which is important for a good Mormon to know because only following the teachings of the LDS gets you exaltation. 

"_Only Mormons can be truly apostate today._" is brilliant piece of semantics, I gotta say. well done!


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> That's not true at all. There are so many examples of the Spirit guiding non-LDS people that your statement would be funny if it were not for that fact you believe it to be true which is really sad.


What now? I thought that the LDS was the only church with authority on earth?

1 Nephi 14:10-11:
And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth. And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.

Joseph Smith History 1:18-20:

"My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong) and which I should join."

"I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof. He again forbade me to join with any of them;..."


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

postroad said:


> Raised conservative Anabaptist. Not married to the concept of no higher power so not Atheist.
> 
> Realised from young that there was somethng not computing if Christianity was the new covenant.
> 
> ...


I knew there's a reason I liked you ha! you remind me of the Anabaptist I dance with at the contra dances--lightning bolts come from his eyes. Dude's got fire ha.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Postroads statements are carefully culled by Anti-LDS websites and are taken out of context and ignore everything else the same person said on the same subject. Frankly I'm done with postroads spamming quotes. That he doesn't know what LDS Doctrine is, is very apparent to anyone who does.

Would you go to a Catholic to find out what a Methodist believes?
Would you go to a Baptist to find out what a Pentecostal believes?

You want to learn what Mormons believe - ask a Mormon.
I'm outa here for the evening, have a good night.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> Then you disagree with the founders and leaders of your own church--Postroad posted statements from Joseph Smith to present day on who the church of god is and whos is the church of the devil. which is important for a good Mormon to know because only following the teachings of the LDS gets you exaltation.
> 
> The italicized is brilliant piece of semantics, I gotta say. well done!


As I said, I disagree with Orson Pratt's interpetation, the only LDS member quoted. If you have some other indisputable, reputable source for your assumptions that we believe the catholic/protestant churches are the "whore of Babylon", by all means, please present them in their entirety. Postroad merely presented quotes that help to illustrate our belief that we have the fullness of the gospel. That's not the same thing at all as saying that any other church or all of them together, are the "whore of Babylon". That's an additional interpretation you two are choosing to put into the words.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> Agnostics believe there may or may not be a higher power but if there is that no one can know what that is. Your posts portray you as intimately involved with Christianity, even if it is your own version/understanding of it. Just going by your posts and not knowing you personally, I would classify you as a non-denominational Christian. . A true agnostic wouldn't fight so hard against any religion as all would be equally likely to be true or false
> 
> Definition of AGNOSTIC
> a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god



LDS just happens to be the topic of this thread?

Start a thread about how Christ has fulfilled the new covenant and I guarentee that all denominations will be ticked.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

postroad said:


> "Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the Church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore whoso belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth." (The Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:10)
> 
> "Nothing less than a complete apostasy from the Christian religion would warrant the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." (Documentary History of the Church, Introduction, xl)
> 
> ...


I am asking again.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

thequeensblessing said:


> As I said, I disagree with Orson Pratt's interpetation, the only LDS member quoted. If you have some other indisputable, reputable source for your assumptions that we believe the catholic/protestant churches are the "whore of Babylon", by all means, please present them in their entirety. Postroad merely presented quotes that help to illustrate our belief that we have the fullness of the gospel. That's not the same thing at all as saying that any other church or all of them together, are the "whore of Babylon". That's an additional interpretation you two are choosing to put into the words.


You know what, no. There is no point. Again a variety of LDS founders and leaders and BOM have been quoted with the only response being "you dont' know what you're talking about"(and you won't know until you've been trained properly).

I've been looking up information on Orson Pratt, on MORMON websites. He's hardly portrayed as being excommunicated and defrocked or whatever it is you call it. I suspect his discipline for "bad doctrine" hinged on his being a polygamist and polygamy became a sticky witch for Mormons. I invite anyone to look up Orson Pratt and see what's out there written about him, and compare it to what you and others have have portrayed him as.

The jello will be obvious. In fact, I kinda like Pratt ha. This below is from the LDS website.
LDS.org - Ensign Article - Orson Pratt: Early Advocate of the Book of Mormon

1. He took a logical, systematic approach. For example, he began the essay by establishing an either/or proposition. (âEither the book is true or it is not.â) He then proceeded to argue that continuing revelation is necessary, scriptural, and reasonable. With these basic propositions in place, he employed a systematic process of reasoning to substantiate his assertion that the book is in fact true. This tack is not surprising in light of Orsonâs interest in and study of mathematics and astronomy. 

2. Orson drew upon the Bible as a proof text. In other words, he showed that the very arguments used to prove the divinity of the Bible could be used to support the claims of the Book of Mormon. Orson used this line of reasoning in many of his other writings and discourses. 4 

3. He relied heavily on archaeological and historical evidence to substantiate his position. 

4. He relied on material from an earlier period in Latter-day Saint literature, particularly the writings of his brother Parley. For him, the early events of the Restoration and the Joseph Smith story provided strong evidences of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. His major argument was always that the Book of Mormon provides evidence that God has continued to speak to mankind. 

5. Orson clarified and elaborated on arguments already advanced: first, the âtwo sticksâ argument of Ezekiel 37 [Ezek. 37], and second, that North and South America was the land of promise for the remnant of Joseph, as suggested in Genesis 49 [Gen. 49]. 

6. Finally, he compared events of the Book of Mormon with emerging archeological information on Central America, particularly that by Stephens and Catherwood. 5 For Orson Pratt, the detailed history of the Book of Mormon gave convincing evidence that a young New England farm boy could not have fabricated it. And he was confident that further discoveries would substantiate its truth. 

But, for all his study of the text of the Book of Mormon, for all his published defenses of it, and for all of his official assignments (including that of Church historian from 1874 until his death in 1881), his most lasting contribution was probably as editor of the 1879 edition of the Book of Mormon. Three decades earlier he had been responsible for helping prepare the important 1849 edition. But in the 1879 edition, he made the most extensive format changes to that point. He made smaller chapters, dividing the larger books; numbered verses; and added extensive references, including biblical citations, cross-references, and his own explanatory footnotes. These format changes, probably his greatest legacy to the modern Church, evidence his desire to make the scriptures more accessible to other Book of Mormon students.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

postroad said:


> I am asking again.


Postroad, none of these quotes are saying what YOU are trying to imply that they mean. YOU are giving them an interpretation they were never meant to have. You may not like the actual meaning, and that's fine. I can easily accept that, as its your prerogative. But don't try to intimate that they are saying something they, obviously, are not. 
I agree with mnn2501. You are just trying to argue anti-mormon rhetoric without coming out and doing so. You just post the statements and ask a mormon to refute them. If we don't (because we don't believe they are saying what YOU say they are saying) then you use YOUR interpretation of what they are saying to prove how divisive the church is. Its a pathetic attempt that has been made before, and it always fails to achieve the desired effect on anyone but the already rampantly stiff-necked.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

The evidence of Pratt's reputation in the church is widely available and well known. For example: 

There is this LDS website that deals with Pratt and his writings.

The Seer - FAIRMormon


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

I suspect he real crime was the "fiercely independent" part.

As for sentient particles, have you taken a gander at theoretical physics lately?

You forgot this tidbit part of the story:

On his return to America in 1841, Pratt found the Church membership in contention over several issues. Rumors and gossip were rife in Nauvoo, Illinois and Pratt found the religious principle of plural marriage difficult to accept. He rebelled against Smith when he found that his wife, Sarah Pratt, accused Smith of attempting to seduce her. Pratt was disciplined and excommunicated August 20, 1842. Some months later, he reconciled with Smith and requested re-baptism. *Pratt was reinstated in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles on January 20, 1843*.[4] (wikipedia entry)

or the mormon wikipedia puts it this way
Orson Pratt's return to America in 1841 thrust him into a maelstrom of rumors and gossip in Nauvoo: that the Prophet Joseph Smith was teaching plural marriage. His reactions to the situation led to his excommunication in August 1842. However, after several months of seeking the truth regarding both Joseph Smith's revelations and the newly introduced practice of plural marriage, Pratt accepted both with such assurance that he spent the rest of his life in their defense. *He was reinstated in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in January 1843*. Pratt, Orson - The Encyclopedia of Mormonism


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

OMG, it gets better...just like I suspected, personal cat fight, a woman, horny old men, lawsuits...

are you sure you want me to keep going? it's all there in google, either by Mormon records or "objective" thrid party historians.

Pratt's demotion was just moving him down on the list of seniority, by subtracting his year of excommunication for his years of service(which determined seniority for top dog leadership roles)--and from what I've been reading, I think I can "hypothesize" that it was done from personal spite. IMO of course.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> I suspect he real crime was the "fiercely independent" part.
> 
> As for sentient particles, have you taken a gander at theoretical physics lately?
> 
> ...


No, I didn't forget that part of the story. His reinstatement in the church wasn't at question. His excommunication was.  Nice attempt at a strawman though.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

wyld thang said:


> OMG, it gets better...just like I suspected, personal cat fight, a woman, horny old men, lawsuits...
> 
> are you sure you want me to keep going? it's all there in google, wither by Mormon records or "objective" thrid party historians.
> 
> Pratt's demotion was just moving him down on the list of seniority, by subtracting his year of excommunication for his years of service(which determined seniority for leadership roles)--and from what I've been reading, I think I can "hypothesize" that it was done from personal spite. IMO.


Ok, I finally see your angle. You just want to find something sensational and run with it, half cocked. Meh, go ahead. Your perverted version of church history events doesn't change the actual truth of any of it. I'm not out to change your mind either. I was willing to answer legitimate questions regarding our faith, but your questions aren't legitimate. You are simply here to mock.


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

thequeensblessing, and Mnn2501,

Both of you have put forth valiant efforts to defend the LDS religion. Unfortunately I feel you are speaking to deaf ears. They are just trying to get you to make one mistake so they can blast you. If they sincerely wish to know the truth, they can go look. They were told, now it's on their shoulders. Don't let yourself get trolled. 
I have a brother in law that tried just such tactics for several years, he joined the LDS church about a year ago.


----------



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

I have had many conversations with Mormons, but don't consider myself to know enough about the faith to try to quote and interpret the Book of Mormon. I also don't like to consider a persons' religion to be an issue when they are running for office.

A person can claim to be any denomination that they want to and it isn't my place to judge them for it and declare that they are a Christian or not. I judge cults a bit differently and don't believe that Mormonism fits my definition of a cult.

When the local Mormon missionaries came around to recruit new members, I was willing to listen to them but knew rather quickly that I could never convert. I was given my first copy of the Book of Mormon 23 years ago and I still have it. I was told that if I 'found even one thing that was untrue in the book, then it was all untrue.' I found too many things that I felt were not true, so I could never become a Mormon.

To my personal understanding of Christianity, the Mormon religion would pose a few issues, though. The Mormon faith believes that the Book of Mormon is an additional piece of scripture...something that was added after the Bible as another testimony of Jesus. In the way that I was raised, the Bible was the final word and there are no other pieces of scripture that should be held in equal regard.

I also have an issue with the proxy baptisms. In my mind, religion is about making a choice on Earth about how to live your life and that no one has the right to decide to change your faith status once you have departed. It feels disrespectful...especially so when someone already claimed a faith for themselves. I don't believe that anyone...even a siamese twin or a clone has the right to make a religious choice for anyone else.

I have a great deal of respect for people of all faiths, but know that some of those faith aren't for me. It is not an easy road when you decide to follow a path that offers very little in the way of earthly proof. You can't see God or touch him, so you have to rely solely on blind FAITH.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

thequeensblessing said:


> No, I didn't forget that part of the story. His reinstatement in the church wasn't at question. His excommunication was.  Nice attempt at a strawman though.


so tell me, what exactly was he excommunicated for?

let me state again the reason given in the Mormon wiki from BYU--I don't know how much better of a reference I can use???:

Orson Pratt's return to America in 1841 thrust him into a maelstrom of rumors and gossip in Nauvoo: that the Prophet Joseph Smith was teaching plural marriage. His reactions to the situation led to his excommunication in August 1842.

So you're going to base your dismissal on a guy acting like a human being? All the more for me to consider him a reliable souce. I will still wiat for more reasons.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

thequeensblessing said:


> Ok, I finally see your angle. You just want to find something sensational and run with it, half cocked. Meh, go ahead. Your perverted version of church history events doesn't change the actual truth of any of it. I'm not out to change your mind either. I was willing to answer legitimate questions regarding our faith, but your questions aren't legitimate. You are simply here to mock.


My "perverted" version of church history comes from the Mormon church itself, or third party reporting(newspaper, or "disinterested" parties like wikipedia). I have purposely stayed away from the Mormon hater sites(that's why I provided links, in good faith you would notice that, instead of accusing me of gleaning from hater sites).

I can't help it if Joseph Smith put the moves on Pratt's wife, Pratt got upset and bucked authority to say something about it. People are people are people, you dig far enough and it can usually be boiled down to sex, drugs and rock n roll(metaphorically of course, but sometimes, it's just that). 

I decided to see if your dismissal of Pratt as an unreliable source of LDS doctrine was endemic dismissal in church opinion. My impression is that it's not. And if he was as notoriously "colorful" as you make him out to be, they never would have given him the editorship on the BOM, or the position as church historian post excommunication/reinstatement.

I specifically chose this disconnect in presentation to examine--it deals with history, recorded reasons for events etc. If the "facts" match up then we could move on to something that is more nebulous and interpretive such as tenets of the faith/comparison with other christian dogma--I could discuss with confidence that your are reliably presenting information from your faith without personal bias/motive. So far you've thrown out an influential person on the basis that you dont' like his "colorful" language--language that is repeated by other pillars of your faith. OK then.

And I noticed your scrub on comment 172. Just sayin. Done now


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

jaredI said:


> thequeensblessing, and Mnn2501,
> 
> Both of you have put forth valiant efforts to defend the LDS religion. Unfortunately I feel you are speaking to deaf ears. They are just trying to get you to make one mistake so they can blast you. If they sincerely wish to know the truth, they can go look. They were told, now it's on their shoulders. Don't let yourself get trolled.
> I have a brother in law that tried just such tactics for several years, he joined the LDS church about a year ago.


I did want to know the truth, I went to the Mormon websites to see for myself. All I'm going to say is there, and here, is not matching up. Makes me wonder, why.


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

wyld thang said:


> I did want to know the truth, I went to the Mormon websites to see for myself. All I'm going to say is there, and here, is not matching up. Makes me wonder, why.


 Not one single person will ever "convert" you, to any faith let along the LDS faith. Conversion comes from within. The bible says one must sincerely want to know, then ask, and they will find out.
I say, grab a copy of the Book of Mormon (they are free, or at least were) read some of it, and if you truly want to know, ask in prayer. You wouldn't even need to BOM, the bible is sufficient.
There are vastly different idea's about religion. Thus all the churches, obviously they can't all be true. Is there a true church out there? It is claimed there is, now it's your job to earnestly search for it. Best of wishes to you, and I'm sure there are many here who can help answer sincere questions.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

It's ok, I would never make a good Mormon anyway...I'm too "fiercly independant". I did find something new to explore though--Pratt's ideas about particles. And for what it's worth, it's probably a blessing you guys had Pratt in the formative years--seriously without his grounding of methodical thinking the whole thing would have flown apart from jealousy.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

ha, okay, I just gotta say this--if you're a physics geek check out Orson Pratt's ideas about particles. He was simply way ahead of his time, or he is inspiring theoretical physics now, or both. As well as a lot of stuff with the Gaia theory if ya wanna go there. Very very cool.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

postroad said:


> Raised conservative Anabaptist. Not married to the concept of no higher power so not Atheist.
> 
> Realised from young that there was somethng not computing if Christianity was the new covenant.
> 
> ...


Or searching unbeliever?


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

jaredI said:


> Not one single person will ever "convert" you, to any faith let along the LDS faith. Conversion comes from within. The bible says one must sincerely want to know, then ask, and they will find out.
> I say, grab a copy of the Book of Mormon (they are free, or at least were) read some of it, and if you truly want to know, ask in prayer. You wouldn't even need to BOM, the bible is sufficient.
> There are vastly different idea's about religion. Thus all the churches, obviously they can't all be true. Is there a true church out there? It is claimed there is, now it's your job to earnestly search for it. Best of wishes to you, and I'm sure there are many here who can help answer sincere questions.



Alright from a diferent angle then. Correct this statement. 

God chose Joseph Smith to reestablsh Christ's Church on earth. This was neccesary because the Church established by Jesus had fallen into apostacy shortly after the Apostles had died.

This apostacy was the result of the Devil setting up a counterfit church which drew away all members of the true Church without exception and compromised the true Gosple.

As all persons with the name Christian were now following a compromised doctrine, scripture,etc, God withdrew all authority bestowed upon the original Church and this was the state of all sects until 1830.

In 1830 God restableshed Christs Church and restored his authority to the LDS.

In these latter day God's authority rests soley with the LDS which is the Spiritual succesor to the first Church of Jesus Christ.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

VA Susan said:


> Or searching unbeliever?



Maybe OCD.

Do inconsistances jump from the texts of the Bible and demand hundreds of hours of further study and countless hours of mental ruminations attempting plausable reconciliations for everyone.?

Or was it just me...?


----------



## jaredI (Aug 6, 2011)

postroad said:


> Alright from a diferent angle then. Correct this statement.
> 
> God chose Joseph Smith to reestablsh Christ's Church on earth. This was neccesary because the Church established by Jesus had fallen into apostacy shortly after the Apostles had died.
> 
> ...


 No thank you, I will not attempt to correct anything. It appears you are fairly well versed in the beliefs of the LDS religion, and are looking for ways to discredit it. Good luck with that, you won't succeed.
I was excommunicated from the LDS religion. I made some horrible mistakes and as such I deserved it. Now the nearest church is 2 hours away, so needless to say, I don't go to church. I don't practice the religion, yet *I know for a fact it is the one and only true church on earth*. I was raised LDS, but my conversion truly didn't occur till I was in my mid 20's. I would suggest you find a missionary and discuss it with them, they have the spirit of the lord with them, and as such are not apt to misinform or confuse you, whereas, I might because I do not have that gift with me.
Most church's out there do teach some (even a lot of) truth, and as a general rule it is better for people to attend a church of their choice and learn some good, then it is for them to not go to church at all. There are many good people out there, in fact many great people. A church doesn't make a person great, belief in Christ and attempting to the best of your ability to follow his teachings are what truly make a person great.
When, or if, your mind is ever open to accepting truth, then you will find it, but never until you are ready. Best of luck in your endeavors, but I refuse to be trolled.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

thequeensblessing said:


> This very question goes to show how little you truly know about the LDS faith. Let me give you a quick primer on how we view this thing you call salvation. We call it eternal life. It is a gift of the Savior. It is what he died for, that all men might gain eternal life. Some will be resurrected to eternal life, others to ----ation. You don't have to be baptized into any church to be given the gift of eternal life. Atheists will be granted eternal life. Jim Jones, and Charlie Manson will have eternal life.
> We then believe in exaltation, or being given a place in the highest degree of glory. Not all people will gain exaltation. Not all Mormons will gain exaltation. Not everyone who is baptized and goes to the temple will gain exaltation. *Much depends on the individual's worthiness, (their heart, their faith, their works, and their knowledge)*. Not every dead person who is baptized posthumously will be granted exaltation.
> So you see, in the LDS view of things, Salvation is a free gift of the Savior to all mankind. The ability to repent and be redeemed are likewise gifts of the savior. *Exaltation is not a free, or automatic gift. It is predicated upon our own faith, our own worthiness. Although that worthiness might include baptism (and it doesn't always as there are people who will never be baptized who will achieve exaltation), it includes much more that that.* But this is a sufficient explanation for now.


Hi Queen's blessing,
Christ, the God-Man is the only one who has been exalted to the highest place. Man even when glorified will always be a creature and never "a god". Your quote contrasted with Arthur Pink's quote shows some huge differences in our belief systems. 



> From _The Attributes of God_ by Arthur Pink
> 
> ... God placed His elect upon a different footing from Adam or Israel. He placed them upon an unconditional footing. In the Everlasting Covenant Jesus Christ was appointed their Head, took their responsibilities upon Himself, and wrought out a righteousness for them which is perfect, indefeasible, eternal. Christ was placed upon a conditional footing, for He was "made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law," only with this infinite difference: the others failed, He did not and could not. And who placed Christ upon that conditional footing? The Triune God. It was sovereign will that appointed Him, sovereign love that sent Him, sovereign authority that assigned Him His work. Certain conditions were set before the Mediator. He was to be made in the likeness of sins flesh; He was to magnify the law and make it honorable; He was to bear all the sins of all God's people in His own body on the tree; He was to make full, atonement for them; He was to endure the outpoured wrath of God; He was to die and be buried. On the fulfillment of those conditions He was promised a reward: Isaiah 53:10-12. He was to be the Firstborn among many brethren; He was to have a people who should share His glory. Blessed be His name forever, He fulfilled those conditions, and because He did so, the Father stands pledged, on solemn oath, to preserve through time and bless throughout eternity every one of those for whom His incarnate Son mediated. Because He took their place, they now share His. His righteousness is theirs, His standing before God is theirs, His life is theirs. *There is not a single condition for them to meet, not a single responsibility for them to discharge in order to attain their eternal bliss.* "By one offering He hath perfected forever them that are set apart" (Heb. 10:14). Here then is the sovereignty of God openly displayed before all, displayed in the different ways in which He has dealt with His creatures. Part of the angels, Adam, Israel, were placed upon a conditional footing, continuance in blessing being made dependent upon their obedience and fidelity to God. But in sharp contrast from them, the "little flock" (Luke 12:32), have been given an unconditional, an immutable standing in Gods covenant, God's counsels, God's Son; their blessing being made dependent upon what Christ did for them. "The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal: The Lord knoweth them that are His" (2 Tim. 1:19). The foundation on which God's elect stand is a perfect one: nothing can be added to it, nor anything taken from it (Eccl. 3:14). Here, then, is the highest and grandest display of the absolute sovereignty of God. Verily, He has "mercy on whom He will have mercy, and, whom He will He hardeneth" (Rom. 9:18).


"On Christ the solid rock I stand. All other ground is sinking sand." God will glorify all His children and will complete the work He started in them. He won't leave anyone half finished.





> Romans 8: 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, âAbba, Father.â 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirsâheirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.
> ...28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. 29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.





> Philippians 1: 3 I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, 4 always in every prayer of mine making request for you all with joy, 5 for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now, 6 being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ; 7 just as it is right for me to think this of you all, because I have you in my heart, inasmuch as both in my chains and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all are partakers with me of grace.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

For those Mormons here posting, would you even want to be called Christians?


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

jaredI said:


> No thank you, I will not attempt to correct anything. It appears you are fairly well versed in the beliefs of the LDS religion, and are looking for ways to discredit it. Good luck with that, you won't succeed.
> I was excommunicated from the LDS religion. I made some horrible mistakes and as such I deserved it. Now the nearest church is 2 hours away, so needless to say, I don't go to church. I don't practice the religion, yet *I know for a fact it is the one and only true church on earth*. I was raised LDS, but my conversion truly didn't occur till I was in my mid 20's. I would suggest you find a missionary and discuss it with them, they have the spirit of the lord with them, and as such are not apt to misinform or confuse you, whereas, I might because I do not have that gift with me.
> Most church's out there do teach some (even a lot of) truth, and as a general rule it is better for people to attend a church of their choice and learn some good, then it is for them to not go to church at all. There are many good people out there, in fact many great people. A church doesn't make a person great, belief in Christ and attempting to the best of your ability to follow his teachings are what truly make a person great.
> When, or if, your mind is ever open to accepting truth, then you will find it, but never until you are ready. Best of luck in your endeavors, but I refuse to be trolled.




Jeremiah 31:31-34

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)



31 &#8220;The time is coming,&#8221; declares the Lord,
&#8220;when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to[a] them,*&#8221;
declares the Lord.
33 &#8220;This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time,&#8221; declares the Lord.
&#8220;I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
34 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, &#8216;Know the Lord,&#8217;
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,&#8221;
declares the Lord.
&#8220;For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.&#8221;*


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Romans 8: 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die;* but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.* 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, &#8220;Abba, Father.&#8221; 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs&#8212;heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.
...28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. 29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.



Hebrews 10:26-27

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

VA Susan said:


> For those Mormons here posting, would you even want to be called Christians?


I know they dont realy like to be called Mormons


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Pratt is still among us ha! 

Subatomic particles have free will | COSMOS magazine
SYDNEY: If humans have free will, then so do subatomic particles such as electrons, say U.S. mathematicians.

"If experimenters have a certain freedom, then particles have exactly the same kind of freedom," wrote mathematicians John Conway and Simon Kochen, of Princeton University in New Jersey, in a recent paper published in Notices of the American Mathematical Society.

"Indeed, it is natural to suppose that this latter freedom is the ultimate explanation of our own," they said.

Comments are interesting ha! But interesting to see Pratts ideas still around. Good for him.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

wyld thang said:


> Go Pratt! Go Pratt! seriously, this kind of stuff rocks  Like I said, dude was ahead of his time, seriously.
> 
> Subatomic particles have free will | COSMOS magazine
> SYDNEY: If humans have free will, then so do subatomic particles such as electrons, say U.S. mathematicians.
> ...


See I got OCD


Romans 9:10-24

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


10 Not only that, but Rebekah&#8217;s children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad&#8212;in order that God&#8217;s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls&#8212;she was told, &#8220;The older will serve the younger.&#8221;[a] 13 Just as it is written: &#8220;Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.&#8221;*

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,


&#8220;I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.&#8221;[c]

16 It does not, therefore, depend on man&#8217;s desire or effort, but on God&#8217;s mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: &#8220;I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.&#8221;[d] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19 One of you will say to me: &#8220;Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?&#8221; 20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? &#8220;Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, &#8216;Why did you make me like this?&#8217;&#8221;[e] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath&#8212;prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory&#8212; 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?*


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

ha! I am uppity like Jacob, I demanded a blessing from the Angel of the Lord. It's been a wild ride...but I can say you pay to play. You will learn amazing things, but you WILL be lamed. I am so off the reservation...


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

ah, predestination, calvin...


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

wyld thang said:


> ha! I am uppity like Jacob, I demanded a blessing from the Angel of the Lord. It's been a wild ride...but I can say you pay to play. You will learn amazing things, but you WILL be lamed. I am so off the reservation...


Acts 2:17
&#8220;&#8216;In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams.?

Irefutable proof of universal salvation?


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

"last days" is debatable--interpretationally of course!

I dont' know---I would sure hate to start a big war thinking we're fighting the antichrist and find out it was mistaken intepretation.


----------



## wally (Oct 9, 2007)

You can call me whatever you want. I know what is in my heart and where my relationship is at with heavenly father. I did not responed to many of the post on here as each person has their own agency and must deceide if they are making the correct decision. I will not argue with what you deciede but will offer my councel if you sincerly want to know. it is clear that some of the posts are looking for a fight and I wont play that game.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

VA Susan said:


> For those Mormons here posting, would you even want to be called Christians?


What makes you assume otherwise? We would find anything else insulting.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

jaredI said:


> Not one single person will ever "convert" you, to any faith let along the LDS faith. Conversion comes from within. The bible says one must sincerely want to know, then ask, and they will find out.
> I say, grab a copy of the Book of Mormon (they are free, or at least were) read some of it, and if you truly want to know, ask in prayer. You wouldn't even need to BOM, the bible is sufficient.
> There are vastly different idea's about religion. Thus all the churches, obviously they can't all be true. *Is there a true church out there?* It is claimed there is, now it's your job to earnestly search for it. Best of wishes to you, and I'm sure there are many here who can help answer sincere questions.


Yes, but what confuses many is they are looking for the true "religion or denomination". I believe the "true" church is made up of people from various denominations. It's not a building or denomination, it's made up of those who have accepted Jesus as their Savior.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

VA Susan said:


> For those Mormons here posting, would you even want to be called Christians?


Yes, we follow Christ, thus we ARE Christians. 'Mormon' is just a nickname given to us by our enemies back in the mid-1800's although we now use it ourselves.
We are Latter Day Saints in the sense that Paul used 'Saint' in his letters (modern versions have changed that word, but go to the KJV and similar Bibles to see what I mean)


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

postroad said:


> I know they dont realy like to be called Mormons


It's odd that they call their book the "Book of Mormon" then. Why not call it the 
Book of Latter Day Saints?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

VA Susan said:


> It's odd that they call their book the "Book of Mormon" then. Why not call it the
> Book of Latter Day Saints?


Mormon was the name of the Prophet who compiled the various books that make up what we call 'The Book of Mormon'. Similar to the Bible, the Book of Mormon contains different books written by different Prophets. Mormon complied them into one volume

That's where the enemies of the Church in the mid 1800's got the nickname from; because of the title of the book the LDS members carried.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

mnn2501 said:


> Mormon was the name of the Prophet who compiled the various books that make up what we call 'The Book of Mormon'. Similar to the Bible, the Book of Mormon contains different books written by different Prophets. Mormon complied them into one volume
> 
> That's where the enemies of the Church in the mid 1800's got the nickname from; because of the title of the book the LDS members carried.


Thanks for the explanation, Mnn.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

jaredI said:


> No thank you, I will not attempt to correct anything. It appears you are fairly well versed in the beliefs of the LDS religion,


If what was quoted is how the LDS really believe, then it is a cult. I will change my vote from not judging to saying outright it is a cult.
I do believe that the LDS takes the time to gather as a "family" of believers and teach each other and help to nourish each other better than any denomination of Christianity I have seen. But IF the quoted part in that post is true, then it is a cult. And you know what? that doesn't mean there are no real believers in the church itself. It means that they have been deceived. Lots of people on earth get off on a "tangent" of untruth, but still committed their life to Christ at some point. And they still are really trying to follow Christ, but just got messed up at some point. You know those pentacostal snake handlers are a cult too. But many of them really started out just wanted to follow Jesus. And on the same thread of thought, the whole rapture thing is a "new revelation" type road that is really off too. But that doesn't' mean that everyone who believes that is a horrible person. They just learned something wrong and followed a false teaching somewhere.


----------



## lamoncha lover (Mar 1, 2009)

I want to thank those of you that are LDS for taking the time to attempt to explain your faith and beliefs. I guess I am conidered Southern Baptist..but to me that label means nothing. I think my grandmother had it right. We went for lunch one day shortly before she died. Over a glass of wine we started talking about religion. 
I don't know why everyone makes such a fuss" she told me "it isn't about which church, it is about loving and following Jesus" 
rip peace wise grand ma


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> You know those pentacostal snake handlers are a cult too. But many of them really started out just wanted to follow Jesus.


Are they really? Because Mark 16 sounds like Orders from Headquarters to me.



> 15 He [Jesus] said to them, âGo into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.â


It sounds like the snake-handlers are just following instructions. Eh?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

lamoncha lover said:


> I want to thank those of you that are LDS for taking the time to attempt to explain your faith and beliefs. I guess I am conidered Southern Baptist..but to me that label means nothing. I think my grandmother had it right. We went for lunch one day shortly before she died. Over a glass of wine we started talking about religion.
> I don't know why everyone makes such a fuss" she told me "it isn't about which church, it is about loving and following Jesus"
> rip peace wise grand ma


I've also noticed how politely they have been answering, even though it's obvious some on here just want to stir the pot.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

willow_girl said:


> Are they really? Because Mark 16 sounds like Orders from Headquarters to me.
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds like the snake-handlers are just following instructions. Eh?


Actually, and I will stress that this is my own take on this verse, it means that God will protect us to the point we COULD do that, but then again scripture tells us we aren't to tempt the Lord.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

postroad said:


> Maybe OCD.
> 
> Do inconsistances jump from the texts of the Bible and demand hundreds of hours of further study and countless hours of mental ruminations attempting plausable reconciliations for everyone.?
> 
> Or was it just me...?


Post,
Maybe your attitude is the problem when you read your Bible. It seems to me that you approach the text difficulties as a judge looking for faults so you can throw it away and not heed it's warnings and commands to you. I don't know you so can't say for sure but I have a son who does that very thing. The Bible is the word of Life and you need to approach it reverently. Some translations are better than others so sometimes inconsistencies are resolved if can you get more information about the translation and words in the original language. 

God put the desire in my heart as a 20 year old to read His word. Right after that time my Father-in-Law gave me a Bible! I knew I had to read it which I did from cover to cover. I did put some question marks in the margin of my Bible when things did not seem to make sense. Still, enough of it made sense so that I knew the Bible was God's word and that it was the truth. I knew myself to be a sinner as the Bible said. God showed me through His word that I needed to repent or else I would perish and that His Son Jesus Christ is the only One who could take away my sin. 

You are responsible for what you do with the truth you have heard and learned. You will only find peace when you flee to Christ. He's gracious and merciful and will turn no sinner away who comes to Him in faith seeking His mercy. He accepted me, a child of the 60's and a rebel and He made me His child forever. So there's hope for you too!


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Sonshine said:


> Actually, and I will stress that this is my own take on this verse, it means that God will protect us to the point we COULD do that, but then again scripture tells us we aren't to tempt the Lord.


But ,,,



> And these signs will accompany those who believe:


Well, then, what does the _absence_ of those signs indicate? :teehee:


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

willow_girl said:


> But ,,,
> 
> 
> 
> Well, then, what does the _absence_ of those signs indicate? :teehee:


I have actually seen some of those signs.


----------



## Marshloft (Mar 24, 2008)

VA Susan said:


> He accepted me, a child of the 60's and a rebel and He made me His child forever. So there's hope for you too!


 Awe,, another Rebel, saved by grace. :cowboy:


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

VA Susan said:


> Post,
> Maybe your attitude is the problem when you read your Bible. It seems to me that you approach the text difficulties as a judge looking for faults so you can throw it away and not heed it's warnings and commands to you. I don't know you so can't say for sure but I have a son who does that very thing. The Bible is the word of Life and you need to approach it reverently. Some translations are better than others so sometimes inconsistencies are resolved if can you get more information about the translation and words in the original language.
> 
> God put the desire in my heart as a 20 year old to read His word. Right after that time my Father-in-Law gave me a Bible! I knew I had to read it which I did from cover to cover. I did put some question marks in the margin of my Bible when things did not seem to make sense. Still, enough of it made sense so that I knew the Bible was God's word and that it was the truth. I knew myself to be a sinner as the Bible said. God showed me through His word that I needed to repent or else I would perish and that His Son Jesus Christ is the only One who could take away my sin.
> ...


Did you stop sinning after you accepted Christ?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

mekasmom said:


> If what was quoted is how the LDS really believe, then it is a cult.


Its not, its carefully culled statements, taken out of context, and ignoring everything else the same person said on the same subject, in some cases even to the point of putting ellipsis (...) in indicating that it is skipping text. I looked up one of those statements once a couple years back that the ellipsis skipped 13 pages of the talk given by the speaker seemingly connecting two different statements into one that supported the website owners point of view.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

postroad said:


> Did you stop sinning after you accepted Christ?


None of us are arrogant enough to think we are sinless because we accepted Christ. Are YOU sinless because you rejected him? My guess is that you're just being deliberately bitter.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Heritagefarm said:


> None of us are arrogant enough to think we are sinless because we accepted Christ. Are YOU sinless because you rejected him? My guess is that you're just being deliberately bitter.


Not at all.

Could the Spirit compel the believer into perfect obediance to God's Law (whatever that means)?


----------



## lamoncha lover (Mar 1, 2009)

I think we all fall short and will continue to our entire lives. Only one walked the earth with out sin.....
we are expected to try, and lovingly accepted when we fail.
just MHO


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Going back to the original question "Are Mormons Real Christians"

It's a doomed question because of "real"--Christians fight among themselves badly enough on this question of "real".

Are Mormons "Christian"? yes, they are one of many "expressions" of the "tradition" to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ(leaving out "faith" because that is a loaded word--so many "interpretations")

I think for anyone--even the cannibal on the deserted island, can understand "do unto others". Evolutionarily speaking, it is good for us, it is wired in us *at least* chemically, to love one another for the survival of the species.

For myself, thinking of what is a "real Christian"--you have to go to the source, Jesus Christ himsel(and this is why I call myself. You can begin to know from the gospels that have been handed down. Knowing is all about relationship, direct unveiled one on one. Judging "real" is between us and God/Jesus.

If you really want to see a rodeo ask "Is Thomas Merton a real Christian". Mormons got nothin on him ha. 

I'm still way tickled over "sentient particles".


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

lamoncha lover said:


> I think we all fall short and will continue to our entire lives. Only one walked the earth with out sin.....
> we are expected to try, and lovingly accepted when we fail.
> just MHO


I don't know about that?

16.Hebrews 10:26
If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left,

1 John 3:6
No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.

John 3:8
He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devilâs work.

1 John 3:9
No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because Godâs seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

postroad said:


> The unpardonable sin is blasphemy of the Spirit. As the new covenant was prophiced to be the covenant of the Spirit transforming the recipiant into perfect obediance anyone who claims to be a member of the new covenant and continues to sin is in fact blasphemising the Spirit that they claim dwells in them.


You have to disregard the clear truths of 1 John 1: 8-10 to reach your faulty conclusion. 




> 1 John 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
> 
> 8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.


John is speaking to professing Christians here. He is not speaking to unbelievers even though they need to confess their sins too. The warning passages in Hebrews are very sobering. We all need to take heed that we do not regard sin lightly. God disciplines us when we sin. That discipline is a mark that we are God's and that He brings us back to Himself when we stray. 


> Hebrews 12: 4 You have not yet resisted to bloodshed, striving against sin. 5 And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons:
> 
> âMy son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord,
> Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;
> ...


*

Every Christian is being sanctified and being conformed to the image of Christ but this is not a completed work until we are glorified. A Christian is already justified-declared not guilty before God because of Christ taking away our sins. Positionally Christians are already perfect. God sees us in Christ and there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.




Romans 4:4 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?[a] 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? âAbraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.â 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

7 âBlessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.â[c]

Click to expand...

*


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

VA Susan said:


> You have to disregard the clear truths of 1 John 1: 8-10 to reach your faulty conclusion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Are you indicating that the whole premise of believers being able to continue in sin rests on the interpretation of one verse?

That verse in context can easily be interpreted as a condemnation of someone who denies that they have ever sinned and therefore is not in need of salvation.

The text clearly states "8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us." 

Did Christ forgive your sins but forget to cleanse you of all unrighteousness?


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Is this the correct interpretation

1 John 3:6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning(In God's eyes). No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.(except for Christians)

1 John 3:8
He who does what is sinful is of the devil,(exept for Christiians) because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil&#8217;s work.(At some later date)

1 John 3:9
No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God&#8217;s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.(apliable at unspecified future date)


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Postroad, I believe it's considered acceptable just to ignore those inconvenient passages, along with the stuff about turning the other cheek.


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

postroad said:


> Did Christ forgive your sins but forget to cleanse you of all unrighteousness?


Post,
I think it might be a good idea for you to worry about your _own_ sins, not mine! Jesus has already forgiven my sins and has cleansed me of all unrighteousness. There is a battle between the flesh and the spirit in every believer, but by God's grace I'm no longer a slave of sin as I was as an unbeliever. I'm a slave of righteousness and desire to be holy so I strive against sin with God's help. Philippians 1:6 He who has begun a good work in [me] will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ...



> Romans 8: 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.





postroad said:


> Are you indicating that the whole premise of believers being able to continue in sin rests on the interpretation of one verse?
> 
> That verse in context can easily be interpreted as a condemnation of someone who denies that they have ever sinned and therefore is not in need of salvation.
> 
> The text clearly states "8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us."


John does not say it's OK for Christians to sin, only that when they do there is a way back. He's being realistic. We are in a battle here with the world flesh and devil and sometimes we are careless and are not watching and praying as much as we should be. Peter was restored after denying the Lord. God was not through with him.
John is speaking to those who know Christ (v.13), whose sins Christ has made propitiation(v.2), and whose sins are forgiven. (v.12). He writes to urge them _not_ to practice sin, but to live a holy life honoring to God. When they do fail they need to confess their sins and come back to God for forgiveness. 



> 1 John 2:1 My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.





> 12 I write to you, little children,
> Because your sins are forgiven you for His name&#8217;s sake.
> 13 I write to you, fathers,
> Because you have known Him who is from the beginning.
> ...


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

willow_girl said:


> Postroad, I believe it's considered acceptable just to ignore those inconvenient passages, along with the stuff about turning the other cheek.


Shoot never got that memo. I was taught every last text was the inspired word of God.

God guided the hand without the authors having control.

I once asked my Dad why God couldn't control the whole body?

Why didn't God just send the Spirit to everyone instead of just a few to write it down?


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

VA Susan said:


> Post,
> I think it might be a good idea for you to worry about your _own_ sins, not mine! Jesus has already forgiven my sins and has cleansed me of all unrighteousness. There is a battle between the flesh and the spirit in every believer, but by God's grace I'm no longer a slave of sin as I was as an unbeliever. I'm a slave of righteousness and desire to be holy so I strive against sin with God's help. Philippians 1:6 He who has begun a good work in [me] will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ...
> 
> 
> ...


What is the baptism in name and what is the baptism of the Spirit. Does one who has been baptize in name only, know Christ or does that come with the baptism of the Spirit?

John 3:5
Jesus answered, âI tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

Matthew 3:11
âI baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

Acts 8:16
because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

VA Susan said:


> You have to disregard the clear truths of 1 John 1: 8-10 to reach your faulty conclusion.


She's right. The only unpardonable sin is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. But that is not an easy thing to do. People who do that knowingly do it and willingly do it with full understanding of what it means. It's not something that can happen accidentally.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

mekasmom said:


> She's right. The only unpardonable sin is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. But that is not an easy thing to do. People who do that knowingly do it and willingly do it with full understanding of what it means. It's not something that can happen accidentally.


Are you stateing that someone who claims to be a Christian indwelled with the Spirit and deliberatly continues to sin has not blasphemied the Spirit?


----------



## VA Susan (Mar 2, 2010)

postroad said:


> Are you stateing that someone who claims to be a Christian indwelled with the Spirit and deliberatly continues to sin has not blasphemied the Spirit?


Post,
Those who commit this sin are not true children of God and do not have the Holy Spirit living in them. God does _not_ give His Holy Spirit to those who hate him. The Holy Spirit is given to the Christian forever. The apostate in the Hebrews passages you mentioned has tasted some spiritual realities and has been enlightened to some extent but not unto salvation. His heart was never changed. His name was never in the Lamb's book of life. 



> John 14:15 âIf you love Me, keep[d] My commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, *that He may abide with you forever*â 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.


It is impossible for a true child of God to ever be lost. God will discipline them and bring them to repentance. But the Christian is responsible to obey God's warnings and commands to him since there is a real spiritual battle going on in this world. Jesus promised that no one can take us out of His hand if we are His. 



> John 10:24 Then the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, âHow long do You keep us in doubt? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.â
> 
> 25 Jesus answered them, âI told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Fatherâs name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.* 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Fatherâs hand. 30 I and My Father are one.â*


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

If this is about Romney- (and I am no means a Romney supporter)

At least he is following the faith he has followed all his life

I'll go no farther on this


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

VA Susan said:


> Post,
> Those who commit this sin are not true children of God and do not have the Holy Spirit living in them. God does _not_ give His Holy Spirit to those who hate him. The Holy Spirit is given to the Christian forever. The apostate in the Hebrews passages you mentioned has tasted some spiritual realities and has been enlightened to some extent but not unto salvation. His heart was never changed. His name was never in the Lamb's book of life.
> 
> 
> ...


Just ignoring for a moment the impossability of reconciling the texts held in tension regarding the issue of OSAS who decides if a beliver recieves the salvation of Spirit?


John 2:22-24

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


22 After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.

23 Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many people saw the miraculous signs he was doing and believed in his name.[a] 24 But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all men.

The concept that perfection through the Spirit will only happen after death fliies in the face of this text. 


Matthew 7:22-23

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


22 Many will say to me on that day, âLord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?â 23 Then I will tell them plainly, âI never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!â


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Just to bring the thread back to topic.

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j...uoCwBg&usg=AFQjCNEizgvSt96IQOcDs9ip71FmHxUeWA


----------

