thews

Can you elaborate so that I might understand this logic, because it makes no sense to me whatsoever.

To be honest with you, evil has a purpose in the earth domain. If I'm right, and there is no hell or evil in the afterlife, then the concept of hell had a purpose. In the scale of intelligence, a person in the upper 10% can understand many things. In the lowest 10%, maybe all they can really understand is do bad things and go to hell? I'm not mocking the bible or its content, as I believe it has a purpose, but we can't know what it is until we're dead. The whole concept of hell is based on fear. Choose correctly and you get rewarded in heaven. Choose incorrectly and it's damnation. Let me ask you something... do you as an LDS member, think that a person who was born and raised a Buddhist, and dies a Buddhist, and did have the chance to listen to Christian doctrine (we'll leave it at that) but rejected it, deserve hell?

It's not that cut and dry to me. Having had a near death experience (I didn't see anything except myself dead), I know what it's like to stand and wait to be judged. The only thing that mattered was the absolute truth. I was completely alone, and as I started to rationalize who I was and why, nothing but absolute truth mattered, as there was nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. The concept of religion varies depending on what we were brought up with. If you were born Jewish, you'd probably be Jewish now. If you were raised in China, you probably wouldn't be Christian. I guess my opinion is based on what I believe is the purpose of this life, and that would be to teach the soul emotion and what it's like to live without God. We really don't have to book of rules, which is why I don't believe in hell. Once we do have those rules, we'll be held accountable. Religions that judge are ones I disagree with, which is why I consider myself a non-denominational Christian. I sincerely believe Jesus Christ was God, but I don't discount that God could have had other influences in other parts of the world. I don't necessarily believe it, but I don't discount it. In the end what I believe is the truth... I do believe this. I am not ruled by fear of what happens if I choose incorrectly. If it was what I believed, that's what mattered. If I'm wrong, then it was due to the fact I didn't know the rules. In the end I don't fear death. I don't look forward to it, but I do not fear it. The truth is what matters... whatever it is, it has to be based on truth. JMHO.

I owned a Datsun 1600 roadster years ago (I've had more cars than I can count) but I sold this one before the engine was running. I really dig the older Triumphs and considered buying one, but the bodies were too torn up to make it worth it. The main thing about these old cars is the body. If it's rusted, you'll have $10K worth of bodywork and many hours of labor to get it worthy of paint. I currently have a 66 Mustang that I'll be selling in a few months. It's got a 200 straight 6, 4 lugs, manual brakes and steering. It's a pretty car though and was a black plate California car, so it has zero rust. Owned by a granpa, white with a blue interior it's all original. I'm not a Ford guy and this car was too good of a deal to pass up, but it's sat on the side of my house for the last 8 years. The older cars with manula brakes and steering are outdated for a kids car, plus the seatbelts don't have shoulder straps.

I'm not understanding you. I'm talking about Jesus Christ coming to earth, leaving doctrine, waiting 1830 years and then giving more doctrine... it never made sense to me why his people from 1 to 1830 were denied. Where Christianity spread and when is moot when it comes to intentionally waiting 1830 years to "restore" the doctrine.

No propbem... I realize what I believe is different. I think the concept of hell is something we need to know what evil is. If the knowledge of good and evil is the objective, we can't "know" God exists or we'd all do what we were told. I don't believe evil exists on the other side, and it really doesn't make sense to me why God wouldn't just get rid of Satan right now, rather than let him burn in his pit. I believe Jesus Christ was God, and the basis for that is the bible. That many people compiling that many stories in one book is amazing. Think about how hard that would be today with computers and all of them in the same building. The words have stood the test of time and tell us basically how to live life... Jesus Christ never played the God card and asked to be worshiped because he was God, but rather taught us how to love. I think it's all a big tie. There is no right or wrong religion (as long as it's based on what you believe is the absolute truth), and the purpose of life is to find the meaning of truth. We will all learn different lessons, and any evil we do we will carry with us as we journey onward in whatever the afterlife holds for us all. An atheist won't know God in the earth domain, but he/she will in the afterlife... that would suck IMO ...waking up after death and having to acknowledge you were wrong, but what is a just punishment? Buring forever? I just trust my gut, and what I believe is what I believe and that's the truth... my decision and I'm good with it. I know it's not generic "Christian," but I just don't think that choosing correctly and being obident is the objective of teaching the soul emotion. Can I ask you something about Mormonism... why do you suppose Jesus Christ would come, leave his word, and then add more 1800+ years later? What about the people that lived from 1AD to 1830? Why would he deny them his true word?

No kidding... prolly cause they weigh 2 tons... but they sound so pretty. One of the cool things about Pontiacs is the interiors IMO. I love red interiors. Chevy has some, but Mopars were pretty bland IMO. The Trans Am's that were built from 74 to 81 were wild with color... I love them. Nothing like a screaming chicken on the hood and a shaker popping through it.

No I don't... but I don't believe in hell either, so I'm sorta different.

What I believe is baptism is basically something one does to state to the world that they have accepted Christ as their savior. I also don't think if one doesn't get baptized, they're damned. It's a personal thing, so how it's done is of little relevance.

Just curious since I'm new... any other hot rod fans in here? My love of Pontiacs goes way back into the 70's, and while gas prices makes them dinosaurs, I still love to tinker. I have a few project cars and my baby, which is a 1969 Firebird Convert. Neat car that came with a green top from the factory. Any other gearheads working on anything cool?

With Gates on 2 Fantasy teams, V. Jackson on 1, and Sprolls on another, I send good vibes the SD way.

Ok, I'll answer your question first. When you say "varrying doctrines," I use the KJV version of the bible. The bible is intended to reach all levels of intelligence, and to do that with one book, it has to encompass many things. If you're reffering to different translations, I don't put much stock in that. The way I see it, it's God's word, and what God wanted to convey in the bible he would. The fact that there's different versions of the translations, I see these as minor and up to the person to pick which one suits them. Did that answer the question?

If you mean the bible as "my" doctrine, then I would answer yes. A church that simply uses the bible (not the JST) as the basis for its doctrine would be a "Christian" church IMO. Well if the doctrine they base their faith on is the bible (again not the JST), then yes. Fo rthe record I am a non-denominational Christian. It's not a target, but attempting to re-define what being a "Mormon" is IMO. Again, this about doctrine. "Mormons" are the only (different variants like RLDS excepted) that use the Mormon doctrine. No other "Christian" church uses the doctrine of Joseph Smith, which is why they're defined differently by the word. The one thing generic "Christian" churches have in common is the doctrine they use. I'm not telling you it's wrong, what I am saying is the fundamental difference in the definition of the words is in the definition of "Mormon," which means to place faith in Joseph Smith as a prophet of God and accept the Mormon doctrine. It doesn't mean Mormons don't also use the Christian bible, what it does mean is that they do use the Book of Mormon. None taken... I like discussing this rationally and i thank you for your input... but I don't want to break the forum rules, so tell me if I'm out of line please. :)

My point, if I can make it, is if "Christian" includes Mormon doctrine, then ALL Christians accept the doctrine of Joseph Smith, or belief Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. Joseph Smith said that the reason God gave him this new doctrine was because all other "Christian" churches were wrong (correct me if I'm wrong please). This is a two way street for you and a one way street for me, as I don't believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and I am a Christian. Not really. This makes sense, but the definition of the word is what I'm talking about. Jesus Christ is literal son of God in the Mormon faith (correct me if I'm wrong), and God in man in the Christian faith. This very definition of who Jesus Christ was defines mono vs. henotheistm. I'm not saying Mormons don't believe in Jesus Christ, but as part of a Godhead vs. the one and only God concept is vastly different. What then is a "Mormon"?

Catholic doctrine uses the bible. The "doctrine" may include differences in priests, rosary beads etc., but the doctrine does not include a completely different set of doctrine but only uses the bible. Again, if I can ask this, what is a "Mormon"? By definition, it's someone who accepts the doctrine of Joseph Smith. This is not universally accepted by "Christians," but exclusive to Mormons only. A Jew is someone who rejects the New Testament, which warrants a different name (definition) than someone who accepts both the old and new Testament, because the definition of the doctrine each uses is different. A "Jew-Christian" would imply that Jews accept the New Testament which they don't. The differences in monotheism vs. henothesim are vast, and IMO is the basis for who Jesus Christ was, which is God in man, or one God in Christian faiths.

The books the LDS keeps to keep track of its members. If I fail to have my name removed, I'll be lised as "LDS" by the LDS church. This is not a contradiction. You keep saying the same thing and judging me. I already stated why I didn't submit the letter and I know my intent. You again are attempting to somehow find a way to discredit me by your judgment, and you are wrong for doing so IMO. I have not said anything to make anyone believe I am some sort of "seeker" looking for truth in Mormon doctrine, as I have made up my mind. I have some valid questions I wanted LDS people to answer, and some very kind people did, which helped me. My beliefs obviously threaten you, which is why you keep saying the same thing over and over and judging me. Tell you what... you can have the last word OK? Say the same thing again and I just won't respond.

Thanks for your input. I agree that we disagree, but I'm not sure that you understand why I have an issuse. Consider this: Person looking for a church: What religion are you? Mormon: Christian. Would you like to come over for bible study? Person looking for a church: Sure. In this scenario, there is no mention of Joseph Smith or Mormon doctrine. It isn't about teritory and who gets to be called by what name, but a "Mormon" by definition is someone that places belief in Joseph Smith as a prophet of God and accepts the Mormon doctrine. To imply "Christian" accepts Joseph Smith as a prophet of God is what you believe, but it's not what I believe, and I am a Christian. I do appreciate the input regarding the questions I've asked and appreciate you letting me ask them.

How can I be a troll when I've said I am a Christian looking to have my name removed from the LDS books? My objective was to get your combined LDS perspective in doing this and what to tell my family... that was the objective. Paint the picture you wish if you want, but I didn't misrepresent who I am of what I believe. By the way, I do know a lot about LDS history and have researched it extensively. Pretending to be what? I'm a non-LDS Christian in the "Non-LDS Christian" section asking a question. Saying the same thing a 100 times to force what you want isn't going to make it come true. Again you claim the same tired untrue argument. I didn't know what LDS thinks of people that leave and become Christian. According the BY, I am doomed. I asked a valid question which led to LDS members telling me it qwas ok because Mormonism and Christianity are the same thing. I disagreed without knowing I couldn't have that opinion in here. Nothing is a ruse OK... I am not a Mormon, and have not pretended to be a Mormon. I am a Christian that has some questions regarding Mormonism... period.

Thanks for this... I'll try it out.

Please explain how DNA evidence of people in America would disprove the bible? FWIW - I completely disagree with you.

I beg to differ. I believe I know a lot more about LDS history than you do. Because I know what I know, and I can't pretend I don't. Really? Who do I claim to be? I know people on this board that have crossed paths with me before, so I really don't get this claim that I'm pretending to be anything I'm not. This question is a perfect example... I just wanted to know what the LDS believe so I can better understand you. I apologize if I've offended any of you ...it was not my intent, nor was it to be deceptive.

You gave me an actual answer.

You're being very judgmental. You can keep attacking me for asking LDS members a question I didn't know, which is sort of par for the course when it comes to asking Mormon questions IMO, but as a Mod here aren't you supposed to be sort of unbiased, or is it ok to attack if you feel it's warranted?

Ok if that's what you believe, but I believe Jesus Christ is God and the only God, and Joseph Smith was a man and not a God, nor anything but a man. You guys can keep the pile on going if it suits you... I just asked a simple question.

Who is the one fighting?