Christians...

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Regret
I am not considered a "Christian" by most "Christians". This is due to my beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.

What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement?

Shakyamunison
Regret you know that I am not a Christian, but I used to be one of those Christians. This is my answer: Fear and ignorance with a good portion of arrogance.

FeceMan
Originally posted by Regret
I am not considered a "Christian" by most "Christians". This is due to my beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.

What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement?
When you deny core teachings of Christianity, you are no longer a Christian.

supdude
Originally posted by Regret
I am not considered a "Christian" by most "Christians". This is due to my beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.

What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement?

to answer your question my friend..i think we need to look at what bible tells us...

***Do not despise the Lord's discipline and do not resent His rebuke, because the Lord disciplines those He loves, as a father the son he delights in. (Proverbs 3:11-12.)

**Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult; whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse. Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you; rebuke a wise man and he will love you. (Proverbs 9:7-8)

**He who heeds discipline shows the way to life, but whoever ignores correction leads others astray. (Proverbs 10:17 NIV)

**He who listens to a life-giving rebuke will be at home among the wise. He who ignores discipline despises himself, but whoever heeds correction gains understanding. (Proverbs 15:31-32 NIV)

you seem like an intelligent dude..so please dont take offense to what ive said...as im just referencing scriptures from the word of god.

so to answer your question my friend..if your brother correctly informs you that your conduct, doctrine, or beleif system that you follow is not a christian one..and you earnestly want to find truth..then you will appreciate any form of correction your brother gives you..

still...as others have posted on this board, god is more concerned about us being loving people..as opposed to having all of the facts perfectly presented or layed out. so it is quite possible..that an individual who has never had knowledge of the scriptures or christ..would still be a christian, based on the type of life that they lived or as paul so graciously put it...

Romans 13:8-10

**Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For this, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love does no wrong to a neighbor; love therefore is the fulfillment of the law.

so if an individual has lived a loving life without ever knowing of christ or the scriptures..as love is defined by the the bible. then ofcourse..they are a christian.

so its not all just about knowing the scriptures..its also about being loving..wink

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by FeceMan
When you deny core teachings of Christianity, you are no longer a Christian.

I thought Mormons added to the teachings of Christainity rather then ignoring everything but the Book of Mormon.

lord xyz
Originally posted by Regret
I am not considered a "Christian" by most "Christians". This is due to my beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.

What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement? You are a christian, but one of the best there is, for you are very smart and knowledgeable, unlike others. I am surprised you are mormon.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Regret
I am not considered a "Christian" by most "Christians". This is due to my beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.

What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement?

"of, pertaining to, or derived from Jesus Christ or His teachings"

You are Christian to me, buddy.

BobbyD
Originally posted by Regret
I am not considered a "Christian" by most "Christians". This is due to my beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.

What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement?

I am Catholic. I am pretty sure that we don't consider you a Christian.

However, just because I'm Catholic doesn't necessarily mean I think you are not one.

I really don't know if you're a Christian or not. I have 1 good reason: ignorance about your faith.

Regret
Originally posted by FeceMan
When you deny core teachings of Christianity, you are no longer a Christian. "Core teachings" - Mormons believe entirely in the "core teachings" of Christ, so that argument can't be a valid rationale. Or, are you referring to "core" interpretations? Because we do deny the validity of most interpretation accepted by mainstream Christian religions.

Thundar
Originally posted by supdude
Romans 13:8-10

**Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For this, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love does no wrong to a neighbor; love therefore is the fulfillment of the law.

so if an individual has lived a loving life without ever knowing of christ or the scriptures..as love is defined by the the bible. then ofcourse..they are a christian.

so its not all just about knowing the scriptures..its also about being loving..wink

This is true. But remember, the scriptures are important too. Adding to the scriptures, or prostlyzing false doctrines, or being prideful with one's knowledge of the scrptures, is definitely not Christ-like either. The bottom line however, is that the decision is really made by Christ, and whether or not he considers the intentions of your heart to be loving.

BobbyD
Originally posted by Regret
"Core teachings" - Mormons believe entirely in the "core teachings" of Christ, so that argument can't be a valid rationale. Or, are you referring to "core" interpretations? Because we do deny the validity of most interpretation accepted by mainstream Christian religions.

Interesting response. I'm guessing that a lot of Christian denominations/sects deny or interpret teachings differently. I don't know for sure, but that's just me.

Regret
Originally posted by supdude
so to answer your question my friend..if your brother correctly informs you that your conduct, doctrine, or beleif system that you follow is not a christian one..and you earnestly want to find truth..then you will appreciate any form of correction your brother gives you..

Ahhh, then I am still a Christian since, given my beliefs, those attempting to inform me have not been correct in their information.

Originally posted by supdude
so its not all just about knowing the scriptures..its also about being loving..wink I believe loving of others is all there is.

If a person is truly loving of others all sin will be beyond them. Sins are the result of characteristics that are in conflict with love of others.
As Christ stated, the greatest commandment is love the Lord thy God, second is love thy neighbor. I believe that proper and complete adherence to the second is resultant in the first being obeyed properly.

Regret
Thanks everyone that provided supportive posts smile

Thundar
Originally posted by Regret
Ahhh, then I am still a Christian since, given my beliefs, those attempting to inform me have not been correct in their information.

I believe loving of others is all there is.

If a person is truly loving of others all sin will be beyond them. Sins are the result of characteristics that are in conflict with love of others.
As Christ stated, the greatest commandment is love the Lord thy God, second is love thy neighbor. I believe that proper and complete adherence to the second is resultant in the first being obeyed properly.

You are correct somewhat. It is important to note that we are to be "loving", but we are to strictly follow being "loving", as it is defined by God's word - not by the world. It is up to Jesus to decide if an individual has possessed this type of Godly love within their lives.

Regret
Originally posted by BobbyD
I am Catholic. I am pretty sure that we don't consider you a Christian.

However, just because I'm Catholic doesn't necessarily mean I think you are not one.

I really don't know if you're a Christian or not. I have 1 good reason: ignorance about your faith. No, Catholicism does not accept Mormons as Christian. The reason is our differing view of the Godhead, we believe God the Father, Christ and the Holy Ghost are entirely separate, being one in purpose and intent not one in substance.

Thank you for the response.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Thundar
You are correct somewhat. It is important to note that we are to be "loving", but we are to strictly follow being "loving", as it is defined by God's word - not by the world. It is up to Jesus to decide if an individual has possessed this type of Godly love within their lives.

The problem is, no one can agree on what "God's word" means. The separation between "God's word" and "the world" is all in your head, so, that is way there are so many different types of Christian denominations.

Regret
Originally posted by Thundar
This is true. But remember, the scriptures are important too. Adding to the scriptures, or prostlyzing false doctrines, or being prideful with one's knowledge of the scrptures, is definitely not Christ-like either. The bottom line however, is that the decision is really made by Christ, and whether or not he considers the intentions of your heart to be loving. The "adding to" argument is slightly invalid, as the Bible itself contradicts the typical interpretation of the verse in the Revelation of John the Beloved if one applies the same interpretation to Deuteronomy 4:2 -



If the adding interpretation is correct, everything following this verse is invalid by the same token.

Thundar
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The problem is, no one can agree on what "God's word" means.

People can agree. But the world and the devil, have brought a spirit of confusion to many, specifically those who earnestly desire to know the truth of God's word. This is exactly why Jesus makes the decision in the end for each individual. It cuts through all of the confusion, and gets to the heart of the matter.

Thundar
Originally posted by Regret
The "adding to" argument is slightly invalid, as the Bible itself contradicts the typical interpretation of the verse in the Revelation of John the Beloved if one applies the same interpretation to Deuteronomy 4:2 -



If the adding interpretation is correct, everything following this verse is invalid by the same token.


Not invalid, just further extrapolated upon. Its okay for God to add to his word of course, since he is the word. But it's not okay for others to add to it. That's what was meant in scripture. So if you practically and logically interpret the verse, then its quite easy to understand what is meant.

Regret
Originally posted by Thundar
You are correct somewhat. It is important to note that we are to be "loving", but we are to strictly follow being "loving", as it is defined by God's word - not by the world. It is up to Jesus to decide if an individual has possessed this type of Godly love within their lives. Provide an example where love of others in any way conflicts with Biblical teachings. If loving others conflicts with an interpretation of the Bible, that interpretation is very obviously in error. And physiological sexual relations is not love, it is a separate item, and is only a possible means of showing intimate love, it is not the love.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Thundar
People can agree. But the world and the devil, have brought a spirit of confusion to many, specifically those who earnestly desire to know the truth of God's word. This is exactly why Jesus makes the decision in the end for each individual. It cuts through all of the confusion, and gets to the heart of the matter.


laughing IMO There is no such thing as the devil. The reason there are so many different type of Christianity is because humans have a hard time agreeing on anything. All human organizations like religion divide and diversify.

Regret
Originally posted by Thundar
Not invalid, just further extrapolated upon. Its okay for God to add to his word of course, since he is the word. But it's not okay for others to add to it. That's what was meant in scripture. So if you practically and logically interpret the verse, then its quite easy to understand what is meant. That is good, as many attack Mormons based in that verse due to the fact that God has given us scripture, and continues communication with our prophets.

Regret
Biblical use of the term "world" and being separate from it is referencing sin, not people, Peter's experience eating unclean foods is a clarification of this misinterpretation.

BobbyD
Originally posted by Regret
No, Catholicism does not accept Mormons as Christian. The reason is our differing view of the Godhead, we believe God the Father, Christ and the Holy Ghost are entirely separate, being one in purpose and intent not one in substance.

Thank you for the response.

No problem. And, for the record, just because I'm Catholic, doesn't mean I think you are not a Christian, though my faith says otherwise.

That is for a higher power to decide. And secondly, (I mean this as nicely as it can possibly sound) I (personally) could care less if you are considered one by my faith or not. wink

Thundar
Originally posted by Regret
Provide an example where love of others in any way conflicts with Biblical teachings. If loving others conflicts with an interpretation of the Bible, that interpretation is very obviously in error. And physiological sexual relations is not love, it is a separate item, and is only a possible means of showing intimate love, it is not the love.


The first part of your inquiry is fallicious, as it already makes the assumption that worldly love, is comparable to the love that Jesus represents. With that being stated, let us now distinguish between Worldly love and Godly love by giving definitions of both below.

Godly love: Love is long suffering, kind, not boast, not inflated.
not discourteous, not selfish, not irritable, not enumerate the evil.
It does not rejoice over the wrong, but rejoices in the truth. It covers all things, it has faith for all things, it hopes in all things, it endures in all things. Love never falls in ruins;

Wordly love: boasts, proud, inflated, based on condition, will lie if it has to in order to get ahead, is only enduring if it thinks it will receive something. Basically it is the opposite of everything Godly love represents above.

An individual is a Christian, even if they have no knowledge of the scriptures or Christ, if they have willfully attempted to follow this Godly love within their lives. Each individual is instilled with an awareness of this love at birth, so no individual has an excuse about not ever knowing it existed.

Thundar
Originally posted by Regret
That is good, as many attack Mormons based in that verse due to the fact that God has given us scripture, and continues communication with our prophets.


Well I do agree that others shouldn't attack or condemn you. But they should correct you about certain aspects of your doctrine being wrong. Denying the diety of Christ is a big problem with Mormon doctrine, and greatly contradicts the scriptures..as does the belief that Morman themselves will at some point be "gods."

Regret
Originally posted by BobbyD
No problem. And, for the record, just because I'm Catholic, doesn't mean I think you are not a Christian, though my faith says otherwise.

That is for a higher power to decide. And secondly, (I mean this as nicely as it can possibly sound) I (personally) could care less if you are considered one by my faith or not. wink I'm not insulted, this thread is mainly in place to discuss the rationale of those denying that someone else is a Christian, currently I am the only one that is on the receiving end of this discussing it, but there are other Bible (New and Old Testament) religions that are treated similarly. This thread is for all who have had this experience, on either end of the position described. I appreciate your input, and am thankful for your view. I explained the Catholic stance so you would know, everyone should fully understand what and why they believe as they do. Interestingly enough, it was only in the last decade that Catholics decided we were no longer to be considered "Christian".

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Thundar
The first part of your inquiry is fallicious, as it already makes the assumption that worldly love, is comparable to the love that Jesus represents. With that being stated, let us now distinguish between Worldly love and Godly love by giving definitions of both below.

Godly love: Love is long suffering, kind, not boast, not inflated.
not discourteous, not selfish, not irritable, not enumerate the evil.
It does not rejoice over the wrong, but rejoices in the truth. It covers all things, it has faith for all things, it hopes in all things, it endures in all things. Love never falls in ruins;

Wordly love: boasts, proud, inflated, based on condition, will lie if it has to in order to get ahead, is only enduring if it thinks it will receive something. Basically it is the opposite of everything Godly love represents above.

An individual is a Christian, even if they have no knowledge of the scriptures or Christ, if they have willfully attempted to follow this Godly love within their lives. Each individual is instilled with an awareness of this love at birth, so no individual has an excuse about not ever knowing it existed.

Do you believe that only Christians can show Love that is long suffering, kind, not boastful, not inflated, not discourteous, not selfish, not irritable, not enumerate the evil? If you think that, you need to learn more about history. There have been people in the world like Ghandi who have given all for others even to their own death.

Regret
Originally posted by Thundar
Well I do agree that others shouldn't attack or condemn you. But they should correct you about certain aspects of your doctrine being wrong. Denying the diety of Christ is a big problem with Mormon doctrine, and greatly contradicts the scriptures..as does the belief that Morman themselves will at some point be "gods." We do not deny the divinity of Christ. Christ is and was God. We conflict only in that we do not believe Christ is God the Father, we believe Christ is the Son of God. We believe that Christ was not lying or misleading when he spoke of being the Son of God.

Also, it only conflicts your, and many other's, interpretations of scripture.

Regret
Originally posted by Thundar
The first part of your inquiry is fallicious, as it already makes the assumption that worldly love, is comparable to the love that Jesus represents. With that being stated, let us now distinguish between Worldly love and Godly love by giving definitions of both below.

Godly love: Love is long suffering, kind, not boast, not inflated.
not discourteous, not selfish, not irritable, not enumerate the evil.
It does not rejoice over the wrong, but rejoices in the truth. It covers all things, it has faith for all things, it hopes in all things, it endures in all things. Love never falls in ruins;

Wordly love: boasts, proud, inflated, based on condition, will lie if it has to in order to get ahead, is only enduring if it thinks it will receive something. Basically it is the opposite of everything Godly love represents above.

An individual is a Christian, even if they have no knowledge of the scriptures or Christ, if they have willfully attempted to follow this Godly love within their lives. Each individual is instilled with an awareness of this love at birth, so no individual has an excuse about not ever knowing it existed. You are in error, the love of which I speak is the love you describe. Your "worldly love" doesn't fit a proper definition of love. You insult me with your statement, but I will not hold it against you as you clearly do not know me or my beliefs. I agree with everything but the insult.

Thundar
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Do you believe that only Christians can show Love that is long suffering, kind, not boastful, not inflated, not discourteous, not selfish, not irritable, not enumerate the evil? If you think that, you need to learn more about history. There have been people in the world like Ghandi who have given all for others even to their own death.

I believe that everyone who sincerely demonstrates the Godly love as defined by the bible, and has the right intentions when demonstrating this type of love - is a Christian. It's up to Jesus to determine if an individual's intentions are sincere.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Thundar
I believe that everyone who sincerely demonstrates the Godly love as defined by the bible, and has the right intentions when demonstrating this type of love - is a Christian. It's up to Jesus to determine if an individual's intentions are sincere.

Then you should consider my good friend Regret as a Christian. He is a lot more Jesus like then most the other so called Christians on this forum.

Thundar
Originally posted by Regret
We do not deny the divinity of Christ. Christ is and was God. We conflict only in that we do not believe Christ is God the Father, we believe Christ is the Son of God. We believe that Christ was not lying or misleading when he spoke of being the Son of God.


We are commanded to worship only one god, not two..meaning that Christ is undoubtly one with the father. I do not understand God completely, so I cannot explain to you why he chooses to represent himself in this way.

But I can testify to you that if one denies Christ as being one with the father, as well as denies him of possessing the same amount of authority as the father, then they are denying the divinity of Christ.

Originally posted by Regret
You are in error, the love of which I speak is the love you describe. Your "worldly love" doesn't fit a proper definition of love. You insult me with your statement, but I will not hold it against you as you clearly do not know me or my beliefs. I agree with everything but the insult.


I apologize if my tone came across as insulting or condescending. As that was not my purpose. My purpose was to inform you that any "love of others" that you see present within this world, should not be equated or looked for in Christ. As Christians, we should look for Christ's love in those of this world and teach this love to others who cannot see it, not the other way around.

Thundar
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then you should consider my good friend Regret as a Christian. He is a lot more Jesus like then most the other so called Christians on this forum.

He may be, or he may not be..again that's up to Jesus to decide for all of us, not you or I. Both of you should take note though, that not everyone who is out there supporting your beliefs, is truly demonstrating love. Particularly when those beliefs contradict what is written within the scriptures.

Regret
Originally posted by Thundar
We are commanded to worship only one god, not two..meaning that Christ is undoubtly one with the father. I do not understand God completely, so I cannot explain to you why he chooses to represent himself in this way.

But I can testify to you that if one denies Christ as being one with the father, as well as denies him of possessing the same amount of authority as the father, then they are denying the divinity of Christ. We worship the Father. Christ stated that any worship/devotion to him was worshipping the Father. There is no conflict unless Christ was a liar, I do not believe he was. If Christ is the Father, he is a liar or deceiver at the point he accepts the address of "Son of God", there is no means of reconciling that.



Originally posted by Thundar
I apologize if my tone came across as insulting or condescending. As that was not my purpose. My purpose was to inform you that any "love of others" that you see present within this world, should not be equated or looked for in Christ. As Christians, we should look for Christ's love in those of this world and teach this love to others who cannot see it, not the other way around. All love no matter where, when, how it occurs is of God, if it does not, it is not love.

Regret
Originally posted by Thundar
He may be, or he may not be..again that's up to Jesus to decide for all of us, not you or I. Both of you should take note though, that not everyone who is out there supporting your beliefs, is truly demonstrating love. Particularly when those beliefs contradict what is written within the scriptures. Shaky's a Buddhist, and one of the most Christian individuals I know.

BobbyD
Originally posted by Regret
Interestingly enough, it was only in the last decade that Catholics decided we were no longer to be considered "Christian".

So in essence, at one time Catholics did consider Mormons to be Christians?
confused

That's what I'm hearing here.

BobbyD
Originally posted by Regret
Shaky's a Buddhist, and one of the most Christian individuals I know.


Pfft. eek!

Shaky's not even human.









stick out tongue

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by BobbyD
So in essence, at one time Catholics did consider Mormons to be Christians?
confused

That's what I'm hearing here.

It may have been that they were silent before. wink

BobbyD
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It may have been that they were silent before. wink

Really? What did they say?


shifty

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by BobbyD
Really? What did they say?


shifty

I don't know, I was just pointing out the other possibility. wink

Regret
Originally posted by BobbyD
So in essence, at one time Catholics did consider Mormons to be Christians?
confused

That's what I'm hearing here. I would assume so. Catholics accepted Mormon baptisms as valid and Mormon converts did not need re-baptizing, that to me would indicate that they accepted Mormons as Christian. They decided our baptisms were invalid and that Mormon converts must be re-baptized (in the last decade), since then there have been official statements by the Holy See leading to a belief that we are not considered such, previously such was not present.

BobbyD
Originally posted by Regret
I would assume so. Catholics accepted Mormon baptisms as valid, that to me would indicate that they accepted Mormons as Christian. The decided our baptisms were invalid and that Mormon converts must be re-baptized (in the last decade), since then there have been official statements by the Holy See leading to a belief that we are not considered such, previously such was not present.

...makes for interesting get-togethers at the Regret household, I take it, huh?

And your knowledge of other religions, in particular, that of Catholic history is impressive.

Regret
Originally posted by BobbyD
...makes for interesting get-togethers at the Regret household, I take it, huh?

And your knowledge of other religions, in particular, that of Catholic history is impressive. Very interesting: Catholics, Baptists, Wiccan, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Fundamentalist LDS (reorganized, not accepted by the LDS church), Born Again, and one Scientologist, also a few I am unsure of in their beliefs wink

Thank you.

FeceMan
Originally posted by Regret
"Core teachings" - Mormons believe entirely in the "core teachings" of Christ, so that argument can't be a valid rationale. Or, are you referring to "core" interpretations? Because we do deny the validity of most interpretation accepted by mainstream Christian religions.
I was speaking in general.

Regret
Originally posted by FeceMan
I was speaking in general. Then, do you accept Mormons as Christian? Or, are your referencing the generally held view of Bible interpretation, and that Mormons do not fit this interpretation, thus they are not Christian? No offense meant here, just clarifying your statements so I am capable of an accurate perspective of your views.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Thundar
He may be, or he may not be..again that's up to Jesus to decide for all of us, not you or I. Both of you should take note though, that not everyone who is out there supporting your beliefs, is truly demonstrating love. Particularly when those beliefs contradict what is written within the scriptures.

Only Jesus know what the bible means in the first place. The bible has been reconstructed so radically that no one but Jesus knows what he was talking about.

debbiejo
And can Jesus only speak through the words of the Bible?? If all can be born with the knowledge of what love is and practice it and never heard of the word Jesus...Then this is still from god whether one would admit it or not? And our word god is inept as we don't really know what god is.

Thundar
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Only Jesus know what the bible means in the first place. The bible has been reconstructed so radically that no one but Jesus knows what he was talking about.


No one completely understands the will of God. But God does share much of what he knows with those who love him. The bible is only difficult to understand for those who possess this love. Loving Jesus simply means obeying his commands, and spreading his word to those with no knowledge of it. Christ does not force anyone to obey him, and all those who follow him do so by choice, because they believe him to be their friend.

FeceMan
Originally posted by Regret
Then, do you accept Mormons as Christian? Or, are your referencing the generally held view of Bible interpretation, and that Mormons do not fit this interpretation, thus they are not Christian? No offense meant here, just clarifying your statements so I am capable of an accurate perspective of your views.
My post was basically "I'm too tired to do this right now."

So give me a bit.

Shakyamunison

Thundar

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Thundar

We are all sinners and not worthy of God's forgiveness; however, God is merciful and forgives us anyway, so long as we accept Christ's sacrifice.


What if you met a nonChristian in heaven? Would you question God's choice then?

Thundar
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
What if you met a nonChristian in heaven? Would you question God's choice then?

laughing

Everyone in heaven will be a Christian, either by believing in Christ's sacrifice, or by lovingly fulfilling the law if they never knew or heard of him.

Taken from supdude once again..

WRONGS!!

BAD TRY!!

thumb down

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Thundar
laughing

Everyone in heaven will be a Christian, either by believing in Christ's sacrifice, or by lovingly fulfilling the law if they never knew or heard of him.

Taken from supdude once again..

WRONGS!!

BAD TRY!!

thumb down

thats called dodging the question

What if you met me in heaven?

Thundar
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
thats called dodging the question


The above is called being obstinate and proceeding to post a response, when one has already had they're question answered..or in other words, it's called being..OWNED..wink

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
What if you met me in heaven?


Well it's really not my choice to be in heaven with Christ, but I have faith in his promise to allow me to be with him, if I believe in his sacrifice. So anyway, if he does allow both of us to be in heaven, then I'll be the first one to greet you.

Oh and once again..the below was taken from sup dude.

BAD TRY

thumb down

laughing

So that his question will be answered, and I will no longer be forced to respond to tautological arguments.

For additional clarification.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Thundar
The above is called being obstinate and proceeding to post a response, when one has already had they're question answered..or in other words, it's called being..OWNED..wink

What the f**k?

you didn't answer my question though that makes the statement valid

OWNED wink

Originally posted by Thundar

Well it's really not my choice to be in heaven with Christ, but I have faith in his promise to allow me to be with him, if I believe in his sacrifice. So if he does allow both of us to be in heaven, then I'll be the first one to greet you.

So that his question will be answered, and I will no longer be forced to respond to tautological arguments.

So you would accpet me in heaven? OK thats an answer

You use tautology just as much as everyone else on the boards

Thundar
Just in case anyone noticed, I used the wrong form of "their" in the previous quote above. As you can see, I corrected my mistake. I feel much better now that this quote has been corrected. Phew..credibility saved.


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
What the f**k?

you didn't answer my question though that makes the statement valid

OWNED wink



So you would accpet me in heaven? OK thats an answer

You use tautology just as much as everyone else on the boards

The acceptance isn't mine to make. I will however greet you, if Christ decides that both of us are to be saved. If we both have true faith in him, then there shouldn't be much for either of us to worry about our salvation. Still even with faith in him, both of our lives should be demonstrative of this faith, by producing good works for him.

Removed a bold marker...phew credibility saved again..wink

Nellinator
Originally posted by Thundar
Removed a bold marker...phew credibility saved again..wink laughing But dude, this isn't a real sentence. Credibility lost. Please remove yourself from the forums immediately.

Symmetric Chaos
He is a little OCD about announcing his edits

Mindship
Originally posted by Regret
I am not considered a "Christian" by most "Christians". This is due to my beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.
What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement?

As a nonChristian, it always seemed rather straightforward to me: if you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, you are Christian. Period. The rest is detail and commentary.

Then again, never underestimate the human propensity to divide people into "us" and "them."

Thundar
Originally posted by Mindship
As a nonChristian, it always seemed rather straightforward to me: if you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, you are Christian. Period. The rest is detail and commentary.

Then again, never underestimate the human propensity to divide people into "us" and "them."

True. But acceptance of Christ means accepting everything about him. One can't just take the bits and pieces that they like. It's all or nothing, either/or...one either chooses God, or they choose this world according to the scriptures.

James 4:4

You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Thundar
True. But acceptance of Christ means accepting everything about him. One can't just take the bits and pieces that they like. It's all or nothing, either/or...one either chooses God, or they choose this world according to the scriptures.

James 4:4

You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.

Everyone takes bits and pieces, even you. I would bet that there are parts of the writing about Jesus that you reject.

debbiejo
But he didn't even quote Jesus, he quoted James. And there are other writings of James that are much different then the ones in the bible.

Regret
Originally posted by Mindship
Then again, never underestimate the human propensity to divide people into "us" and "them." Agreed. "Us and them", perhaps the most universally applied human concept. Man is a sad being that always seems to segregate based on something or other.

Adam_PoE
Originally posted by Regret
I am not considered a "Christian" by most "Christians". This is due to my beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.

What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement?

Who Is a Christian?

peejayd
Originally posted by debbiejo
But he didn't even quote Jesus, he quoted James. And there are other writings of James that are much different then the ones in the bible.

* whoa, wait... you reject Saint Paul's epistles, and Saint Peter's... now, Saint James'? what other books/letters in the Bible do you reject? and how come you always stick in the Old Testament? that's only for all Israel, my friend... wink

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by peejayd
* whoa, wait... you reject Saint Paul's epistles, and Saint Peter's... now, Saint James'? what other books/letters in the Bible do you reject? and how come you always stick in the Old Testament? that's only for all Israel, my friend... wink

She rejects everyone. wink

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd
* whoa, wait... you reject Saint Paul's epistles, and Saint Peter's... now, Saint James'? what other books/letters in the Bible do you reject? and how come you always stick in the Old Testament? that's only for all Israel, my friend... wink

OT is only for Jews?

then what prophecy did Jesus fufill?
whos god was he talking to?
what religion did he grow up with?
why mention Jesus was "of the house and lineage of David"?

If you ignore the OT you ignore half the bible (its like the backstory of God)

debbiejo
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
She rejects everyone. wink Thank you my friend..........


Oh and why can't we take all words of James............want me to post them?

Nellinator
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
OT is only for Jews?

then what prophecy did Jesus fufill?
whos god was he talking to?
what religion did he grow up with?
why mention Jesus was "of the house and lineage of David"?

If you ignore the OT you ignore half the bible (its like the backstory of God) You are right and peejayd is mistaken. The Bible makes it clear that foreigners that bound themselves to the Law were under the same grace as the Jewish people. The Law was for whoever decided to follow God.

peejayd
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
OT is only for Jews?

then what prophecy did Jesus fufill?
whos god was he talking to?
what religion did he grow up with?
why mention Jesus was "of the house and lineage of David"?

If you ignore the OT you ignore half the bible (its like the backstory of God)

* i did not tell anyone to ignore the Old Testament... what i meant was, the laws in the Old Testament, particularly those of Moses... those are for all Israel... wink

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd
* i did not tell anyone to ignore the Old Testament... what i meant was, the laws in the Old Testament, particularly those of Moses... those are for all Israel... wink

you said they are ONLY for all Israel (was it a typo?)

Marxman
Originally posted by Thundar
True. But acceptance of Christ means accepting everything about him. One can't just take the bits and pieces that they like. It's all or nothing, either/or...one either chooses God, or they choose this world according to the scriptures.

James 4:4

You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. That's what every Protestant religion has done. What makes the bits and pieces your religion has chosen any better?

Symmetric Chaos
Nothing Suzumiya-san mere enjoys the conflict created by multiple religions and beliefs.

peejayd
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
you said they are ONLY for all Israel (was it a typo?)

* yes, my bad... i stood corrected, i reiterated the laws, and not entire Old Testament... the law of Moses are for all Israel... but there are laws from Moses which were changed, amended amd perfected by Jesus... and those laws of Christ are the ones that should be obeyed in our time... i accented on this part because of ms.debbiejo's rejection of the New Testament... wink

Thundar
Originally posted by Regret
All love no matter where, when, how it occurs is of God, if it does not, it is not love.


All love, as described and defined within the bible, comes from God.

Regret
Originally posted by Thundar
All love, as described and defined within the bible, comes from God. You keep qualifying my statements. If something termed "love" does not fit the definition, it is not love, and has been labeled improperly. My definition of love is a wholly selfless feeling, it is what I would term the "pure love of Christ." If love is in any manner selfish, it is not wholly love.

Thundar
Originally posted by Regret
You keep qualifying my statements. If something termed "love" does not fit the definition, it is not love, and has been labeled improperly. My definition of love is a wholly selfless feeling, it is what I would term the "pure love of Christ." If love is in any manner selfish, it is not wholly love.



Which again, would be "love" as defined within the bible(1 Corinthians 13: 1-13). I'm not trying to be purposely nitpicky, I just believe that as a Christian, it is important to make this distincition when discussing the concept of "love" with non-Christians. Most non-Christians will give worldly definitions of love when engaging in debate or discussion, and this can really confuse things.

I've read arguments in other threads like the following:

"I love my boyfriend and I'm gay, so even though I'm gay and not going to change my sexual behavior, I still know Christ because I know love."

If one doesn't make the distinction between God's love and the World's love right away, they'll end up engaging others in convoluted arguments like the one referenced above.

So instead of giving my own definition, I always feel it's easier(and more accurate) to give God's. It cuts to the heart of the matter, making it a lot easier to discern who truly is your loving friend, and who truly is your hateful foe.

peejayd
* and Jesus also commanded His followers to love their enemies... so, is it correct for me to say that any religious organization that kills people is not of God? wink

Lord Urizen
Catholics and Protestants alike have killed people.....that must mean niether of your organizations are of God

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd
* and Jesus also commanded His followers to love their enemies... so, is it correct for me to say that any religious organization that kills people is not of God? wink

not quite

A christian organization that promotes and practices violence does go against teachings in the bible. This does not mean that they don't think they're doing God's work however.

Secondly not all religious organizations are Christian and a few religions can be interpereted to condone violence.

peejayd
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
A christian organization that promotes and practices violence does go against teachings in the bible. This does not mean that they don't think they're doing God's work however.

* whoa... care to expound this matter? violence esp. killings and murders are transgression in Old and moreso in the New Testament... i doubt that an organization that promotes and practices violence can do God's work... dontgetit

debbiejo
Originally posted by peejayd
* whoa, wait... you reject Saint Paul's epistles, and Saint Peter's... now, Saint James'? what other books/letters in the Bible do you reject? and how come you always stick in the Old Testament? that's only for all Israel, my friend... wink I regect them all except for the parables............other things were tell fourth of others and ya know.......lies..........

Answer me this...If you make all creation and if came from you, right, then if some of your liveing creation didn't please you...you torment it?

OK,........If my body were to produce all of my cells and limbs and one thing got sick, would I cut it off and torment it ....??

debbiejo
Originally posted by debbiejo
I regect them all except for the parables............other things were told fourth of others and ya know.......lies..........

Answer me this...If you make all creation and if came from you, right, then if some of your living creation didn't please you...you torment it?

OK,........If my body were to produce all of my cells and limbs and one thing got sick, would I cut it off and torment it ....??

Would you?

Sorry the screwed up edit.......... sad

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd
* whoa... care to expound this matter? violence esp. killings and murders are transgression in Old and moreso in the New Testament... i doubt that an organization that promotes and practices violence can do God's work... dontgetit

I didn't say they were really doing God's work I meant they might be of that belief

Not to bash but Charles Manson was convinced he was doing God's work just as much as many great peace loving religious leaders have been

peejayd
Originally posted by debbiejo
I regect them all except for the parables............other things were tell fourth of others and ya know.......lies..........

* why except the parables? if all those parables are in the context of the Four Gospels you seemed to reject?

Originally posted by debbiejo
Answer me this...If you make all creation and if came from you, right, then if some of your liveing creation didn't please you...you torment it?

* if i am a creator, yes... i can create a new one... this is what you failed to understand, my friend... if you are a creator, you want your creatures to serve you, but how would you feel if one despises and curses you instead? and one serves, praises and give thanks to you?

Originally posted by debbiejo
OK,........If my body were to produce all of my cells and limbs and one thing got sick, would I cut it off and torment it ....??

* a house lizard in trouble was willing to sacrifice a cut-off tail because it will regrow later... God created the heavens and the earth, but these will eventually end... and God will create a new heaven and new earth... wink

peejayd
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I didn't say they were really doing God's work I meant they might be of that belief

* their belief... but what do you think is the basis of Christian doctrine? question

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd

* if i am a creator, yes... i can create a new one... this is what you failed to understand, my friend... if you are a creator, you want your creatures to serve you, but how would you feel if one despises and curses you instead? and one serves, praises and give thanks to you?


If I created a universe I would want it populated with interesting people not a mob of people going pray constantly

If one of my creations got pissed at me I'd be the bigger man and ignore it because I'M FKING GOD.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd
* their belief... but what do you think is the basis of Christian doctrine? question

Faith in the lord of the heavens and earth

And acceptance that salvation come through his son Jesus Christ

aren't you the one thats been posting about how we should so what God wants us to do anyway? Manson and my psycotics think they are doing just that (I think they're wrong)

Lord Urizen
The fact that God EVER condoned violence, whether recently or thousands of years ago, says a lot about this "unchanging" God...

I refuse to worship this kind of being, so sorry

peejayd
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
If I created a universe I would want it populated with interesting people not a mob of people going pray constantly

* i can't picture the followers of Christ doing that, i mean constantly... true Christians in the Bible are interesting people...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
If one of my creations got pissed at me I'd be the bigger man and ignore it because I'M FKING GOD.

* but there is an afterlife... where would you put those who loved you, and those who despises you?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Faith in the lord of the heavens and earth

And acceptance that salvation come through his son Jesus Christ

aren't you the one thats been posting about how we should so what God wants us to do anyway? Manson and my psycotics think they are doing just that (I think they're wrong)

* i believe the basis of Christian doctrine is the Bible, esp. the New Testament...

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
The fact that God EVER condoned violence, whether recently or thousands of years ago, says a lot about this "unchanging" God...

I refuse to worship this kind of being, so sorry

* both Old and New Testament tells us that killing is a transgression against God... wink

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by peejayd
* i can't picture the followers of Christ doing that, i mean constantly

Never been to a catholic church then, have you?

But, I guess they're not "true" christians....just the ones who invented it.

peejayd
* i meant constantly... catholics go to church every Sunday, and others only on their birthday and Christmas... wink

Adam_PoE
Originally posted by peejayd
* both Old and New Testament tells us that killing is a transgression against God... wink

Except when He condones it:

Lord Urizen
Oh, wow Moses is SUCH a role model Peejayd !


God, he must be the most Loving and Forgiving being ordering the deaths of thousands of men roll eyes (sarcastic)

FeceMan
War != murder.

Lord Urizen
Originally posted by FeceMan
War != murder.


The Lord cannot be a man of War AND Peace...it's either one or the other


And i would hardly call God flooding the entire Earth, killing young Egyptian men in effort to hurt every family, sending plagues, and burning down two cities a "war"


It's more like a slaughter

peejayd
* all in the Old Testament... and even if God commanded those things in the Old Testament, God is giver of life and He can take it whenever He wants to...

"See now that I, even I, am he, And there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal; And there is none that can deliver out of my hand."
Deuteronomy 32:39

* that is the power/authority of the God Almighty...

* and as i have said, all in the Old Testament... what's more important is the New... killings are trangression against God...

"Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
But I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire."
Matthew 5:21-22

"Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."
Galatians 5:19-21

* now the commandment is more strict... wink

Adam_PoE
Originally posted by peejayd
* all in the Old Testament... and even if God commanded those things in the Old Testament, God is giver of life and He can take it whenever He wants to...

"See now that I, even I, am he, And there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal; And there is none that can deliver out of my hand."
Deuteronomy 32:39

* that is the power/authority of the God Almighty...

* and as i have said, all in the Old Testament... what's more important is the New... killings are trangression against God...

"Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
But I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire."
Matthew 5:21-22

"Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."
Galatians 5:19-21

* now the commandment is more strict... wink

Whether or not murder is wrong is not arbitrary to the will of God. Murder is either a transgression against God or it is not.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by FeceMan
War != murder.

Did god murder in the OT?

Regret
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Did god murder in the OT? Given that murder is the unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice, one cannot justly claim that God committed murder. No.

debbiejo
God killed Jesus and Jesus did nothing...He didn't break any laws for it to be unlawful.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Regret
Given that murder is the unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice, one cannot justly claim that God committed murder. No.

I was not using that standard, just that war is murder.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Did god murder in the OT?

well no

but he did tell the hebrews to slaughter a lot of people

debbiejo
But they were instruments of god....If they didn't obey, then they would be cut off themselves. Typical tyrant thinking.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
well no

but he did tell the hebrews to slaughter a lot of people

If murder is wrong, doesn't that make the OT god wrong?

debbiejo
Proof that god is a women, she changed her mind.....moody moody god...... miffed

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If murder is wrong, doesn't that make the OT god wrong?

Depends on how you look at it


By God's laws yes, that would make God morally wrong

But be have had people here who say that if God does something it's OK no matter what.

FeceMan
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Did god murder in the OT?
War != murder.

peejayd
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Whether or not murder is wrong is not arbitrary to the will of God. Murder is either a transgression against God or it is not.

Originally posted by debbiejo
God killed Jesus and Jesus did nothing...He didn't break any laws for it to be unlawful.

Originally posted by debbiejo
But they were instruments of god....If they didn't obey, then they would be cut off themselves. Typical tyrant thinking.

* God is not bound by His own laws... He is the Creator, the giver of life... and if the Creator took that life away, that is not murder/killing... wink

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd
* God is not bound by His own laws... He is the Creator, the giver of life... and if the Creator took that life away, that is not murder/killing... wink

like I've said before what a fkn asshōle

Adam_PoE
Originally posted by peejayd
* God is not bound by His own laws... He is the Creator, the giver of life... and if the Creator took that life away, that is not murder/killing... wink

So it is a case of "do as I say, and not as I do?" Congratulations, your god is a hypocrite.

debbiejo
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
So it is a case of "do as I say, and not as I do?" Congratulations, your god is a hypocrite. Now I know why the churchs are full of hypocrites!!

It's follow the leader.. eek!

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by debbiejo
Now I know why the churchs are full of hypocrites!!

It's follow the leader.. eek!

now Debb its God that comes off as a hypocrite not chruch goers

Adam_PoE
Originally posted by debbiejo
Now I know why the churchs are full of hypocrites!!

It's follow the leader.. eek!

laughing

Nellinator
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
So it is a case of "do as I say, and not as I do?" Congratulations, your god is a hypocrite.
Well actually, since he is omnipotent he is the only one capable of making decisions of life and death. Therefore, he gave us laws so that we don't screw up. But, then people broke the laws and the world is all screwed up. Of course, God is going to be above his laws, he is not mortal, he is not weakened by flesh, he is omnipotent and omniscient. He is capable of making the best decision possible, whereas we cannot. Laws prevent us from being idiots and that is a fact of human existence.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Nellinator
Well actually, since he is omnipotent he is the only one capable of making decisions of life and death. Therefore, he gave us laws so that we don't screw up. But, then people broke the laws and the world is all screwed up. Of course, God is going to be above his laws, he is not mortal, he is not weakened by flesh, he is omnipotent and omniscient. He is capable of making the best decision possible, whereas we cannot. Laws prevent us from being idiots and that is a fact of human existence.

Its just that some people think that is just a little bit too much of a loophole for God

Others have pointed out that some of the laws seem a bit . . . odd.

Nellinator
Some of the odd ones have a definite purpose though. God was setting Israel apart from its surrounding countries, therefore, the law had to go against the norm and make the people of Israel think and feel as though they were God's people.

peejayd
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
like I've said before what a fkn asshōle

* yes, IF (a big IF) it's human... but a big NO because He is God, the giver of life... God kills, no sin committed (Deuteronomy 32:39)... human kills, sin committed... we don't have to treat God like a human... wink

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd
* yes, IF (a big IF) it's human... but a big NO because He is God, the giver of life... God kills, no sin committed (Deuteronomy 32:39)... human kills, sin committed... we don't have to treat God like a human... wink

Deuteronomy 32:39 reads: See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand.

that says that God has done lots of awful things (and one good thing) not that he is immune to the amorality of such actions

peejayd
* it only means that God has power/authority over human lives... wink

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by peejayd
* it only means that God has power/authority over human lives... wink

OK but I stand by my insult of God. (Absolute power corrupts absolutely and all that)

FeceMan
That's...really more of a statement, not an insult.

Lord Urizen
I refuse to worship someone who condones violence and hypocrisy....end of story.

FeceMan
Now, to answer Regret's question at the beginning of the thread: Why aren't Mormon considered "true" Christians? (Please correct me if any of this is incorrect.)

1. The Book of Mormon is not part of the Bible.

2. There is historical evidence suggesting that Smith and his early followers had involvements with things generally deemed "occultic."

3. Smith's ability to translate the text was based on his use of a "seer stone" placed into a hat, which he then put to his face--which is occultic in nature.

4. Smith lied to his followers about receiving the Book of Mormon from an angel--at least, he may have. Letters unearthed from one of his early disciples claim that he obtained it from a "magical white salamander" that transformed itself into a spirit. (Now, this is a bit of a tangent, and I have not thought upon it thoroughly, but a salamander and a serpent are not so different, especially if they both speak.)

5. It is taught that men and women can become gods/goddesses and will be worshiped by others if they achieve this status.

6. It is taught that Yahweh was once a man who became God.

7. It is taught that the Holy Spirit is a spirit in the form of a man.

8. Baptism for the dead is practiced (a misinterpretation of Paul's writing in 1 Corinthians).

9. "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may be."

Lord Urizen
Originally posted by FeceMan
1. The Book of Mormon is not part of the Bible.


True that Dog yes




Originally posted by FeceMan
2. There is historical evidence suggesting that Smith and his early followers had involvements with things generally deemed "occultic."



As if the Bible is not of the occult ? erm





Originally posted by FeceMan
3. Smith's ability to translate the text was based on his use of a "seer stone" placed into a hat, which he then put to his face--which is occultic in nature.


And raising a glass of wine and a host of bread, isn't ? erm


Lighting of candles in front of Mary and Jesus is somehow not occultic as well ?


Kneeling and putting your hands together isn't occultic either ?



What about speaking in tongues ? confused





Originally posted by FeceMan
4. Smith lied to his followers about receiving the Book of Mormon from an angel--at least, he may have. Letters unearthed from one of his early disciples claim that he obtained it from a "magical white salamander" that transformed itself into a spirit. (Now, this is a bit of a tangent, and I have not thought upon it thoroughly, but a salamander and a serpent are not so different, especially if they both speak.)




1) Anyone who claims they have interacted with an Angel is lying


2) Salamanders and Serpants do not speak, period.







Originally posted by FeceMan
5. It is taught that men and women can become gods/goddesses and will be worshiped by others if they achieve this status.



I wondor where that idea originated....





Originally posted by FeceMan
6. It is taught that Yahweh was once a man who became God.


That is False...


Yahweh was an idea who became a symbol.....





Originally posted by FeceMan
7. It is taught that Yahweh had intercourse with Mary.




That is what we of the Orgasmism beleive as well yes





Originally posted by FeceMan
8. It is taught that the Holy Spirit is a spirit in the form of a man.


You know what the Holy Spirit is in my religion...but for the sake of not getting banned, I will not say.....





Originally posted by FeceMan
9. Baptism for the dead is practiced (a misinterpretation of Paul's writing in 1 Corinthians).




That's gross...almost Necrophiliac in nature sick



Originally posted by FeceMan
10. "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may be."



Sounds Buddhist....

FeceMan
Would someone who counts like to respond?

Nellinator
Originally posted by FeceMan
Would someone who counts like to respond?
How do you interpret the baptism for the dead verse. That is one that has always puzzled me. It's so vague that it is hard to take anything from it.

peejayd
* is this the verse?

"Else what shall they do that are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?"
American Standard Version
I Corinthians 15:29

* it was written as those that are baptized for the dead... it is not the dead who is baptized... but the living person being baptized for the dead... in a revised version:

"Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?"
Revised Standard Version

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
OK but I stand by my insult of God. (Absolute power corrupts absolutely and all that)

* okay, that's your opinion... but do you agree now that God is not bound by His own laws? like the example i gave? that God is the giver of life, so He also has the power to take it, and not committing sin by doing so? wink

Adam_PoE
Originally posted by peejayd
* okay, that's your opinion... but do you agree now that God is not bound by His own laws? like the example i gave? that God is the giver of life, so He also has the power to take it, and not committing sin by doing so? wink

No.

Storm
Isn' t it most important to adhere to your own rules? If God expects them to be important to others, it behooves God to see to it that they are important to itself as well.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by FeceMan
That's...really more of a statement, not an insult.

I was refering to my satement that God is an asshōle

the absolute power thing is merely a defense of that statement

Originally posted by peejayd

* okay, that's your opinion... but do you agree now that God is not bound by His own laws? like the example i gave? that God is the giver of life, so He also has the power to take it, and not committing sin by doing so? wink

I understand that the bible states that God may circumvent his own rules but I maintain the position that it is extremely immoral

FeceMan
Originally posted by Nellinator
How do you interpret the baptism for the dead verse. That is one that has always puzzled me. It's so vague that it is hard to take anything from it.
I dunno. I'd have to read the whole chapte--kinda like the one where Paul allegedly is anti-marriage--before saying anything about it, and I'm not up to that right now.

debbiejo
Baptizing of the dead is more pagan than ever, and I think the Mormon church does this......not sure though.

FeceMan
Originally posted by debbiejo
Baptizing of the dead is more pagan than ever, and I think the Mormon church does this......not sure though.
Kinda...kinda like I said...

debbiejo
Oh, ok.........I didn't read every thing..... embarrasment

Ok, carry on......you have your ducks in a row... big grin

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by debbiejo
Oh, ok.........I didn't read every thing..... embarrasment

Ok, carry on......you have your ducks in a row... big grin


gun_bandana Duck hunting.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
gun_bandana Duck hunting.

You are the worst Buddist I've ever met. (you should hunt ducks with a shotgun btw)

fini
how bout the nintendo game?

Nellinator
Originally posted by peejayd
* is this the verse?

"Else what shall they do that are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?"
American Standard Version
I Corinthians 15:29

* it was written as those that are baptized for the dead... it is not the dead who is baptized... but the living person being baptized for the dead... in a revised version:

"Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?"
Revised Standard Version
Yes, that is the verse. It raises a lot of questions. My biggest one would be, how do you get baptized on the behalf of the dead and what effect would that have?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You are the worst Buddist I've ever met. (you should hunt ducks with a shotgun btw)

You just don't like my bandanna. stick out tongue

runlfrun Watch the girl and be happy.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You just don't like my bandanna. stick out tongue

runlfrun Watch the girl and be happy.

seriously where do you get those?

peejayd
Originally posted by Nellinator
Yes, that is the verse. It raises a lot of questions. My biggest one would be, how do you get baptized on the behalf of the dead and what effect would that have?

* first, we must see the context, albeit, the whole chapter 15 of I Corinthians... it is the mystery of resurrection... and the best example is our Lord Christ Jesus...

"Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?"
I Corinthians 15:29

* who was the one being referred to as "dead" in the verse? it was Jesus... Jesus died... Saint Paul raised an argument here for those who are doubtful of Jesus' resurrection... that's why he asks some doubtful Corinthians the question: "If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?"

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."
Matthew 28:19-20

"And Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."
Acts 2:38

* the members in the Church are baptized after the commandment of Jesus who died... Saint Paul argues the fact that if they are baptized for the dead (Jesus), their baptism is null and void because:

"For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward; but the memory of them is lost."
Ecclesiastes 9:5

* the dead knows nothing... the argument was excellently done by Saint Paul to prove Jesus' resurrection... and also prove the authenticity of the baptism the members of the Church had once received... wink

debbiejo
As I lay in my bed thinking of what god is and trying to be more inept to see this being, I can see the abuse of old old books, old old thought, and non that have studied anthology...

I'm going to bed now, good night.,

Nellinator
Originally posted by peejayd
* first, we must see the context, albeit, the whole chapter 15 of I Corinthians... it is the mystery of resurrection... and the best example is our Lord Christ Jesus...

"Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?"
I Corinthians 15:29

* who was the one being referred to as "dead" in the verse? it was Jesus... Jesus died... Saint Paul raised an argument here for those who are doubtful of Jesus' resurrection... that's why he asks some doubtful Corinthians the question: "If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?"

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."
Matthew 28:19-20

"And Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."
Acts 2:38

* the members in the Church are baptized after the commandment of Jesus who died... Saint Paul argues the fact that if they are baptized for the dead (Jesus), their baptism is null and void because:

"For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward; but the memory of them is lost."
Ecclesiastes 9:5

* the dead knows nothing... the argument was excellently done by Saint Paul to prove Jesus' resurrection... and also prove the authenticity of the baptism the members of the Church had once received... wink
I read it last night and was thinking about it. I have never heard anyone teach on it before, most likely because a lot of people are afraid of it. I sorta figured it was about baptism being pointless if we were not risen from the dead, but I think you might have nailed it.

Regret
Or perhaps it is more simple and is referring to vicarious work for those that have passed away without the opportunity to receive the Gospel, thus allowing them the possibility of accepting Christ, thus proving God as a just being.

Regret
Originally posted by FeceMan
Now, to answer Regret's question at the beginning of the thread: Why aren't Mormon considered "true" Christians? (Please correct me if any of this is incorrect.)

1. The Book of Mormon is not part of the Bible.

2. There is historical evidence suggesting that Smith and his early followers had involvements with things generally deemed "occultic."

3. Smith's ability to translate the text was based on his use of a "seer stone" placed into a hat, which he then put to his face--which is occultic in nature.

4. Smith lied to his followers about receiving the Book of Mormon from an angel--at least, he may have. Letters unearthed from one of his early disciples claim that he obtained it from a "magical white salamander" that transformed itself into a spirit. (Now, this is a bit of a tangent, and I have not thought upon it thoroughly, but a salamander and a serpent are not so different, especially if they both speak.)

5. It is taught that men and women can become gods/goddesses and will be worshiped by others if they achieve this status.

6. It is taught that Yahweh was once a man who became God.

7. It is taught that the Holy Spirit is a spirit in the form of a man.

8. Baptism for the dead is practiced (a misinterpretation of Paul's writing in 1 Corinthians).

9. "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may be." Opening statement of the thread, the question is not why anyone is or is not Christian.

Originally posted by Regret
My question is for anyone that feels themselves capable of denying another individual of classifying themselves as Christian.

What is it that leads you to believe yourself in a position to make such a statement? What gives you the right to decide who is and is not Christian.

Regret
Originally posted by Nellinator
Yes, that is the verse. It raises a lot of questions. My biggest one would be, how do you get baptized on the behalf of the dead and what effect would that have? Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) believe that the Temple is a place where ordinances are performed relative to the complete worship of God, in a Temple necessary ordinances can be performed for and in behalf of those who are dead, if one has performed these ordinances for themselves. These ordinances can then be accepted or rejected by the dead. Thus those who did not have the opportunity to learn of the Gospel and perform the ordinances themselves still have the opportunity to obtain the benefits associated with these ordinances, baptism being one, if they accept Christ. LDS Temples hold a "molten sea" as described in 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles. We believe that this "molten sea" was a baptismal font. The effect is that God remains just. No man will have the ability to say that they, in truth, were not given the opportunity to accept the Gospel and ordinances that pertain to it.

Regret
Originally posted by FeceMan
Now, to answer Regret's question at the beginning of the thread: Why aren't Mormon considered "true" Christians? (Please correct me if any of this is incorrect.)

4. Smith lied to his followers about receiving the Book of Mormon from an angel--at least, he may have. Letters unearthed from one of his early disciples claim that he obtained it from a "magical white salamander" that transformed itself into a spirit. (Now, this is a bit of a tangent, and I have not thought upon it thoroughly, but a salamander and a serpent are not so different, especially if they both speak.)

This is inaccurate, but it is a claim made by detractors of the LDS faith. LDS history does not, and never has, held record of such a statement. Also, Joseph Smith was shown where the Book of Mormon was buried, he was not given them by the angel. The claim of lie as presented can be used against any subjective statement in any religion, including the claims made by the Bible. Atheists often state that claims to Christ's divinity were of the same type of lie.

Originally posted by FeceMan
5. It is taught that men and women can become gods/goddesses and will be worshiped by others if they achieve this status. Men and women will not be worshipped by any being but their "spirit children", the spirits they create and place on a world akin to ours one day. The statement here implies that Man, those that have, will, and do live in this world and any others God created may at some point worship these individuals, such is false and would be considered a sin, as we are commanded to only worship God the Father.

The rest are fairly accurate. Although I do not see why the Book of Mormon not being a part of the Bible would impact one's being Christian, it is not a part of the Bible, it is the word of God recorded by someone other than the Hebrews of the old world.

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>