thews
-
Posts
156 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by thews
-
-
Fair enough, but I'll tell you what I think. Adam and Eve listened to the serpent and wondered what God was hiding from them. The lesson they learned from eating the apple was the knowledge of good and evil.I believe that God is a loving and just Creator, who has created an eternal hell where rebellious souls will suffer and where "the worm dieth not." If I were forced to attempt to explain why God created such a place, I'd first say it was for the Devil and his minions, and secondly that those who would rebel against God commit an eternal rejection. They would destroy the heavenly kingdom with their sin. Such blatant rebellion against the Creator, whether by a mass murdering atheist like Stalin, or a self-righteous Pharisee who would cheer the Son of God's crucifixion, such is worthy of eternal death.
LDS theology on this matter is certainly "kinder and gentler." It seems fairer. But, if it's not accurate, if it does not correctly reflect God's plan of salvation, than the teaching could lull sinners into a false sense of security. So, I opt for the teaching that I find in my Bible, rather than the one I find more attractive.
Assume you are a soul and God tells you what love is... would you understand? If he told you what pain was, would you understand? You could probably understand the premis, but you wouldn't really know what these emotions were. Conversely, while we are human we find out first-hand what these emotions are.
Now to the concept of hell. Assume the spectrum of intellect spans ten segments of 10% in each. The capacity for understanding in the top 10% is far greater than the botton 10%. A person of greath depth my read the bible and understand the nuances, while a person in the bottom can pretty much only understand do bad things and go to hell. This is one book and it has to encompass the entire spectrum.
Using this analogy, then the "meek" would be held to a lower standard when compared to the upper 10%. Is that fair? Life isn't fair, judgment is the Lord's and all we have is our own opinion and beliefs.
IMO, in the end we will have learned many things, but unless God showed himself to us and proved it, what we believe is built on faith. That faith is built on truth, our truth, as it forms the opinion known only to us. When we stand before God (again IMO), we will be held accountable for what we decided was the truth.
What I believe to be true is that this earth domain is the perfect paradox. We have people that don't believe in God, and those that do, and a bunch of other things in many ways based on culture for the most part. We will know what life is like without God, where evil exists. If evil doesn't exit in the afterlife, then we will never betray God, for we have knowledge of what it's like to live without him.
This is just my opinion and it's why I don't believe in hell, but what I reaaaaly don't believe in is judgment other than the Lord's judgment. What I believe is the truth to me, and it has to be based on absolute truth. JMHO.
-
Honest questions? Sure, if you have any.
But if you think you've got some inalienable right to make nonsensical posts and have them go unrefuted or (in egregious cases) unmocked, you've got another thing coming.
And this:
is nonsensical as written. Egregiously so.
You are obviously attacking me for asking a question that threatens you. Can you please stop the attack and leave me alone? I just had a simple question.
-
Actually no, but I'm not allowed to voice that opinion.So you admit that Mormons ARE Christians?
I'd love to answer you, but I can't, because it's outside the board rules.I don't think anyone claimed they are the SAME. Are Catholics the same as Protestants? Are born agains the same as Baptists? But are they all fall under the heading Christian.
I find answering questions with questions just leads away from the topic being discussed. If you want to open up the scope of what defines a word, then it depends on the question asked. Again I'd love to answer this, but I can't.Rather like, in my previous point, are all bears the same as dogs? Are cats related to mice? Yet they all fall under the definition of mammal, even if they aren't all the same, nor even eat the same food or have the same habitats.
I never claimed they didn't, but questions just who Jesus Christ was to each religion.The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believes in and has faith in Christ.
Please take the following comment in the spirit in which it is intended. Not angry. Maybe a bit teasing, a tad flabbergasted, but I'm striving for lovingly too (as I feel like I've gotten to know you the last several days, and hold no ire against you, but wish to treat you as a brother under God):
As for comparing dictionary definitions with a preference in ice cream... It seems obvious a dictionary definition is the correct one. When taking a test in high school, if you had an incorrect answer, did you take it to the teacher and say "Based on my opinion, this really is the correct answer"?
An opinion is one person's view of something. Using ice cream as an analogy, an opinion cannot be wrong, because it's just a matter of preference. An opinion based on factual information can be argued if the facts are in disagreement. Regarding definitions and how they differ, I can't state my opinion here. I do appreciate the respect you have shown me and I hope it's been recriprocated:).
-
Thews, nice dodge. I'm still waiting for your answers to my questions. Or is that a one-way street?
I'll answer whatever you wish, as your questions don't threaten me in the least. If you meanrt this one:
I already answered this many times, but I will again. I am not a soon-to-be member of the LDS church, as I've been inactive for a long time. The reason I asked the question, is because I want to take my name off the books of the LDS church, but fear it may have an adverse effect on my family. What I was looking for in an answer was a somewhat "official" (if you want to call it that) response so i can calm the fears of my family members regarding my place in the afterlife, as I am Christian.As a (soon to be former) LDS you honestly don't know? Tell us again, why are you leaving the church? Because you don't believe, or because you have no clue what we teach?
To answer your question, yes I do not believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and no I don't know what you teach, which is why I asked the question.
-
This is your opinion and not mine.You received your answers long ago and then you started in on this notion of LDS not being Christian. These things lead me to believe that if you ever were LDS, you certainly didn't attend enough to know anything about what LDS believe. But here you are anyway denigrating us. Why?
I just wanted to know the LDS perspective of what they feel happens to a Mormon who rejects Joseph Smith but remains a Christian, and you claimed they were the same. By your logic, you can disagree with me but I can't disagree with you. It really didn't answer the question, but some people gave me great information to formulatye a response to my family.
Were you ever LDS? If, as you believe, we are wrong, what do you care about where we believe you will go for rejecting LDS Christianity? If we're wrong, it doesn't matter what we believe.
I've alreadt stated what I believe. The question isn't an attack on what you believe, but that's what you're attempting to turn it into... something other that what was asked.
-
you posted this...You honestly don't know the difference between being accused of being dumb and being accused of playing dumb?
Really?
and didn't answer my question. Am I not allowed to ask an honest question in the "Christian other beliefs" section without you attacking me?Holy flip.
-
as you wishThanks, I'll even give you credit for it.
No, but we do feel we have a responsibility to correct those who come to an LDS-centric message board and try to tell us how we believe. Especially when they obviously have no idea what we believe.
So now you're telling me I have no idea what you believe, and it's I who is asking the question in order to figure out what you believe. This "responsibility" to "correct" me is deemed worthy by you, when I would counter with the fact that I'm asking you all the question and being attacked for not subscribing to what you accept. My question is justified in its intent. I simply wanted to know what the LDS view of what they think happens to a person who leaves the LDS church and becomes a Christian while rejecting the doctrine of Joseph Smith. I thank those that offered an answer and didn't chose to attack me for asking the question.
-
As a (soon to be former) LDS you honestly don't know? Tell us again, why are you leaving the church? Because you don't believe, or because you have no clue what we teach?
I have a clue, but don't understand the label of how "Christian" is being used and what it encompasses in defining "Christian" doctrine. I don't wish to offend you, but without going into the entire Godhead perspective from an LDS view, would you agree with the following, and if not I'd like to know why:
Christian (monotheistic) - One God and Jesus Christ is God in man, just as he is God in heaven.
Mormon theology (henothestic) - Jesus Christ is a God, but a separate entity from God the father and the Holy Ghost.
-
That's a great line, can I use it in my signature?
Sure. If you want to argue which tastes better, chocolate or vanilla, you would assume one is correct which is my point. If it's not based on factual information, everyon ehas a right to their opinion or belief. Do Mormons in here always attack people that have differing opinions?
-
Keep playing dumb, Thews. Maybe someone will buy it eventually.
So now you're calling me "dumb"?
-
Holy flip.
What does this mean? Is it a disgused was to curse using "holy"? I was told my opinmion was "wrong" and I don't believe my opinion is wrong, just different than yours. Please expalin.
-
My personal belief is that Joseph Smith introduced the practice in a spiritual form before it took on a tangible form through Brigham Young. There is no proof that Smith has sex with any of his wives, and recently, some of the supposed children of Smith were proven not to be his. So, just as with many other aspects of God's plan, God sends a preparatory period prior to the full blessings of the principle.
FARMs admits Joseph Smith did have sex with at least 8 of his wives.
FARMS Confirms Joseph Smith Had Sex with Nine Wives
FARMS reviewer Gregory L. Smith admits, 71 pages into his 86-page review of George D. Smith's new book, Nauvoo Polygamy: "…but we called it celestial marriage" ("George D. Smith's Nauvoo Polygamy," FARMS Review 20:2, 2008), that Joseph Smith had "conjugal relations" with at least eight women in addition to his first wife, Emma.
-
Things right now in my life seem to be a crazy mess. I am so stressed that I can hardly sleep at night...............................so I am wondering if anyone has any funny stories to tell that might cheer me and everyone else up? In desperate need of some laughter...............oh and please keep it clean!
Watch some Brian Regan stand up DVD's... he's squeaky clean and a riot.
-
I am not an atheist but neither am I LDS. There are many individuals on this forum that I respect wholeheartedly that are very intelligent.
I would like to know what you all think of this video.
Once again these are not my beliefs I just thought this video was...interesting.
Look foreword to reading what you all have to say.
The video is quite biased IMO and states things that support an atheist’s perspective as sound logic vs. flawed logic. The paradox of the burden of proof is not held to the scientific method as some atheists assert. The scientific method's boundary conditions are defined within “the existing universe.” Using this platform to argue flawed vs. sound logic, then everything existing can be tested, which forces the atheist’s argument out of an empirical paradox and removes the source of the evidence being tested as a variable.
Again with my argument to speed this up: If I concede the universe started with a big bang from one atom and all life and matter happened/ sprouted from that single atom, the atheist’s foundation is based on the properties of that atom, but does not answer where it came from. If time is infinite, then the question that cannot be answered is what existed 100 billion years before that atom, and at what point did the atom begin to exist?
The “I think therefore I am” argument holds true to me attempting to paint the existence of God as logical. I exist, so I had to come from somewhere/something. If I accept I am finite in my thought process, and time is infinite, as is the origin of matter (something cannot come from nothing), then the burden of proof and either side (theist vs. atheist) has reached a stalemate and neither can be conclusively argued. In that vein, claiming “flawed logic” in this video is assumes an atheist’s logic is not flawed because everything an atheist believes is based on what can be proven, or finite, which limits the boundary conditions to exclude infinite concepts in an attempt to force a theists perspective as flawed.
-
ANd we have been showing where your opinion is wrong.
An opinion can't be wrong if it's not based on facts.
-
Some Christians reject Joseph Smith as a false prophet of God. Others, mainly members of the LDS Church, accept Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. To claim that LDS are not Christian when it is obvious that we teach, preach, and believe in Christ as the head of our religion is a very un-Christ-like thing to do. While you may not espouse the same beliefs or definitions that we do, we are very Christian in our beliefs and works. Yet some Christians propose to speak for Christ and tell us who is or is not a Christian. Not very Christ-like if you ask me.
Edited to add: If you are really a former LDS you of all people should know that we are Christian. Unless you're just saying that to get a reaction from us.
I think you're misunderstanding me and i don't appreciate you telling me I am being "Not being very Christ-like" by asking a question and stating an opinion about the definition of a word. My point was based on what Mormons believe encompasses Jesus Christ. If Jesus Christ is part of the Godhead in Mormonism (henotheism), and Christians believe that Jesus was God (monotheism), then that's (along with the different doctrine) where I based my opinion.
Can you explain to me who Jesus Christ is WRT to God and Joseph Smith in the Mormon
Godhead?
-
Mormons believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God who restored the teachings of Jesus Christ. Other churches are simply reformers or protesters of the catholic church. Starting with Martin Luther in the 1500’s, to spin offs of his teaching by Martin Luther and John Calvin. Are you a follower of Luther, or Calvin? Were they prophets or just some guys with good ideas? How does your spin off from catholic teaching make you more right, or more Christian than mine?
I am not more right and that's not what I'm implying. My point was what each word, by definition encompassed. I'm apologize if I offended anyone, I was meerly stating my opinion.
-
Thanks... this is what I wanted to know. When I tell my family that because I am Christian, though I had my name removed, they should assume I won't be damned for doing it. I really appreciate this.I don't recall anyone bringing this up in the thread, so I'll address it here. If someone has brought it up, I apologize.
Basically, you would have to be what is called a "Son of Perdition" to spend eterminity in "hell," or what is called "outer darkness." (I get different definitions of what this is, but it is the Mormon version of hell.) Everyone else will be assigned to one of the kingdoms.
I do know that people who have left the Church as a mortal, or who were never taught the gospel in the first place, will be sent to the Spirit Prison (not as bad as it sounds), and will be taught the gospel by persons living in Paradise.We will be given a chance to reject or accept the gospel at that time.
So, unless you are truly a Son of Perdition, (which is, IIRC a difficult thing to become), you will reside in at least the telestial kingdom.
Elphaba
PS: I think a number of people in my family find comfort in this doctrine.
Where I get confused is the part where BY says Joseph Smith is the one who decides who goes where in heaven, and not God or Jesus Christ. Again thanks for this.
-
As long as we're playing semantics...LDS say that their teaching is the restored gospel. Often our Pentecostal churches are called FULL gospel. So, which is better:
1. Having the full gospel, but being unrestored...or...
2. Having only part of the gospel, but being restored?
Actually...I don't like this semantics game much. Can we play something else???
I wouldn't call it a game. Especially when Mormons believe Jesus is not God, but separate from God. Would you agree that Christians believe that Jesus is God in man?
-
Mormons accept the New Testament.
Christians reject Joseph Smith as a false prophet of God.
Mormons accept Joseph Smith as a prophet of God and the Mormon doctrine.
-
Thews,
Is a bear a mammal?
So are all mammals bears?
This wordplay isn't proving anything. Jews are not Christians, because they do not accept the New Testamant. Would you agree?
-
No I don't. This wordplay is attempting to define what "Christian" encompasses. If I, as a Christian, were to call myself a "Christian-Jew," it would be forcing Jews to accept doctrine they don't believe in. I'm not denying that Mormonism has roots in Christianity, but a "Mormon" is someone who believes Joseph Smith was in fact a prophet of God and accepts the "Mormon" doctrine. This "multiple labels" is watering down what it is to be Mormon IMO and what it encompasses.Yes and if you believe in the divinity and teachings of Jesus Christ you are Christian. Ergo, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are Mormon Christians. This concept that multiple labels can apply to something seems to be giving you difficulty. A Fuji apple is both a Fuji, an apple, a fruit and food, see how that works?
Mormon = Belief in Joseph Smith
Christian = Belief that Joseph Smith was not a prophet of God
Again, it's less about what a "Christian" is, and more about what defines one's belief as "Mormon" and what doctrine that encompasses.
Ok. Mormons aren't mainstream Christians IMO... they're Mormon. Nothing wrong with either, but the are different enough to define using different words. There is no other "Christian" church that accepts Mormon doctrine... or they would be defines as Mormon.Aside: What is with the quotes around Christian? If you are trying to imply mainstream Christian by using them just say so, actually if you'd just said Mormon's aren't mainstream Christians this conversation never would have happened.
Catholics and mainstream Christians use the bible as doctrine. It may differ, but that's the root of the doctrine they subscribe to. Jews reject the New Testament, so just because Christians accept both, it doesn't make a Jew a Christian. Mormon doctrine is exclusive to Joseph Smith, who was a "M<ormon" prophet of God. By claiming Mormons are in fact Christian by definition, it would imply all Christian denominations accept the doctrine of Joseph Smith. This isn't semantics IMO, it's the basic definition of the word.Except they don't, just most of them. Just like most Christian religions reject the Pope, but that doesn't make rejection of the Pope a defining characteristic of being Christian. You argument appears to consist of... I'm not sure if you are begging the question (could be wrong with this, begging the question always gives me troubles): Mormons aren't Christian because rejection of Joseph Smith is a requirement of Christianity because Mormons don't and they aren't Christian, or no true Scotsman: All true Christians reject Joseph Smith. But wait, Mormons don't! Well... Mormons aren't true Christians. Maybe its both.
A Christian believes that Jesus is God in man, and a Mormon believes in a Godhead, where Jesus is not God, be separate from God. Would you agree? The basic definition of who Jesus was is vastly different. These differences are not subtle.As far as the quotes, none of them are teaching that we don't believe in the teachings or divinity of Jesus Christ. None of them even try to touch what the dictionary definition of a Christian is. There is some attempt to segregate between the 'Christian world' (aka mainstream Christianity, notice the use of adjectives here and quotes to indicate non-literal or non-standard definitions?) and themselves but considering the historical context that is understandable, but none of those are doctrinal statements that Mormon's aren't Christians, or that the definition of Christian includes not believing that Joseph Smith was a prophet. If anything a couple of them can be read the other way, that the rest of Christianity aren't 'true' Christians (told you it isn't a new sentiment), though they aren't statements of doctrine. The doctrine of the Church is not that Anglicans (for example) are not Christian.
Joesh Smith himself said all Christian religions were wrong. How then, can you tell me that Mormons are the real Christians? What do you call a Christian who rejects the BOM and Joseph Smith as a false prophet of God?If you are trying to point out that some LDS Leadership has said things that can be taken as offensive themselves, well, I never considered that a point of debate. If nothing else Bruce R. McConkie and Brigham Young themselves seal the deal on that (and Brigham Young liked to offend Mormons as well, as did J. Golden Kimball) without digging any deeper.
We're talking about the only religion to believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God (not counting various brands of LDS like RLDS etc.). You make it seem like this is just a small thing? I'm not debating which is correct, just which encompasses what. A "Christian" does not necessarily believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, but a Mormon does. Wht does a Mormon claim both? What's wrong with being Mormon?Tell me, if a Greek Orthodox tells somebody he is Christian is he ashamed of being, or being called Greek Orthodox? Mormons aren't ashamed to be called Mormons, they just by and large get irked when they are told they don't believe in the teachings and divinity of Jesus Christ which is what you are saying when you say they aren't Christian. Kinda like how I expect most Catholics (or any other Christian denomination) would react if you accused them of not believing in Jesus.
This is more of the same. I reject Joseh Smith as a prophet of God, yet you're trying to tell me what I believe includes belief in Joseph Smith. It's not what I'm telling you how you are defined, it's you telling me how what I believe is defined, and Christianity does not include Joseph Smith's doctrine. That's why there's two different words that mean different things.If you mean why do some people just respond with Christian instead of specifying denomination? Probably for some of the same reasons Christians of other denominations respond with a generic Christian instead of a more specific Anglican, Baptist or Catholic , they may not feel the distinction is germane (both replies are equally true though one does communicate more information than the other) to the topic and moment. They could also be trying to avoid conflict, some people like to argue about religion and some don't, if they don't like to argue about it they'll probably go with the (true and correct) answer that results in less of a chance of arguement.
-
Thews,
Mormons don't believe in traditional hell, so you will not be damned. Depending on how you live, you have a good chance at Telestial. Perhaps your father thought the way you wrote your letter would upset the family, as you have noticed the last several days there are quite a few people here who have gotten annoyed/riled up with the way you have occasionally presented your thoughts and our beliefs. I don't want you to think I am angry, because I am not, but if you approach your family the way you have approached subjects here, there will possibly be some anger. BUT, unless there is something more going on, they are your family and will love you anyway. May think you are lost from Celestial glory, but love you anyway.
I appreciate your honest replies and have learned much from you all. I understand we differ on what we believe, but we both have a right to believe it without getting feathers all ruffled. You have helped me a great deal and I do appreciate it.
For the record I don't believe in hell. I just find it hard to believe that a loving God would hold us accountable for the "right" decision, when we weren't given the rules. We can choose many things, one of them being to not believe in God. What would that prove to the soul? IMO it would prove to the soul what life is like without God ...that's hell to me. So, I don't believe atheists go to hell, not people that do horrible things. The "hell" IMO is the knowledge of evil, which exists here, but not on the other side. Evil done with intent is different than evil done because one didn't know enough to avoid it.
I realize this logic is not yours, but it is what I've concluded. My 20 year old daughter died last April. She survived bone cancer at 15, lukemia at 18, and lived to be 20. I got an extra 5 years with her, so my "please God" wish (if you want to call it that, was answered 3 times (she went into remission on 3 different occasions). When she died, I died with her, and I was there when she passed. I was sitting on her hospital bed praying with her about 10:00. She was unconscious and I held her hand and prayed with her. I put her hands back under the covers and just started talking to her. I told her that if the time came, she would decide when to go. I told her I felt she could hear me, and not to be scared. I then told her that if her death experience was anything like my near death experience, she would just know beofre I would, but I'd eventually be there too. He hand moved and I clutched it, and she died seconds later. I brought my baby girl into this world and I also was there when she left. She was and is a beautiful soul. The point of me telling you this s because I had to decide what it was I believed and why. Life is a lesson to the soul and we can't know why right now. The knowledge of good and evil includes both. JMHO
-
You said love was required in a Mormon marriage. Joseph Smith hasd 38 wives. Using what you said, he should be in love with all 38 women. Where is my logic flawed?How did you even extrapolate that from what I said? How does me saying that people don't have to be in love to get married suddenly become me saying that Joseph loved 38 women? Are you making this stuff up as you go along or what?
It referenced the basis for the question. As I understand it, Mormon men marry multiple wives, while only having one earthy "wife." If that is the case, love is not required for Mormon marriage.Again, I don't see what the above quote has to do with the statement I made that you responded to.
I'm being very specific. I understand polygamy/polyandary is a sesitive subject, but the question centers on whether or not love is required for a Mormon marriage if women can expect to share their husbands in the afterlife.Huh? I'm not having trouble understanding anyone but you. Maybe if your responses actually matched the statements you were responding to, but you just go off in totally different directions.
Because I think Joseph Smith was wrong, and polygamy/polyandary are fundamentally wrong. Do you believe polygamy/polyandary are morally justified at any time?You still are not making any sense with this. What does Christ's death have to do with polygamy practiced 1800 years later, as authorized by God?
If that's what you believe, then ok... I don't. Diet changes based on what's healthy because of food storage and adultery are two very vastly different things. You believe polygamy/polyandary was cammanded by God, but I don't.No, it isn't. A commandment of God is a commandment of God.
You believe God's will encompasses polygamy/polyandary and I don't, which is where this supposed analogy is being argued. OK... believe what you do, but I know in my heart polygamy/polyandary is wrong.What God commands, he commands. We don't have any right to decide which commandment is more important than another, or which ones we can follow and which ones we can ignore.
If you believe God doesn't change, then why don't Mormon practice polygamy/polyandry today? I believe you are twisting what I'm saying and not answering the questions asked.Again, you're going off on a tangent. I already said that God does not change. I never said the Bible changed either. Please stop making things up and trying to claim someone else said it. You said yourself, the Bible has not changed. So why are there instances in the Bible where polygamy is sanctioned by God and other instances in the Bible where He forbids it? Hmmm?
Again, do you believe polygamy/polyardry is morally justified for any reason?
The LDS view of ex-Mormons who become Christian
in Christian Beliefs Board
Posted
Thank you. This is the answer I was looking for and it mirrors what someone else said. It will help me formulate a response to my family and I appreciate it.