Denominations?

[Islander]

Unlike some christian denominations, my own faith, as understood from Bible study, would indicate that those holding the keys were the chosen founders/teachers/spreaders of the faith. The term was unique to the chosen and not for this age. They wrote the New Testament as so moved by the HOLY SPIRIT and founded the CHURCH on CHRIST as HE charged them. The CHURCH at large would seem to be entirely in the hands of GOD at present.

The Pharisees and Sadducee set forth the exact same argument. "We need no more prophets or teachers. We have the Law of Moses" They put John the Baptist to the sword and killed and persecuted the Apostles. The argument was the same, Jesus was as sinner and agitator. They failed to see the teachings, the doctrine, the authority and the majesty of His presence. To this day, Jews do not believe the miracles performed. No amount of evidence would ever be enough to demonstrate to them the Jesus is the Christ , the Son of God and the Redeemer of ALL mankind. But one day, it will come to pass that: "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends."

I can read your posts and see where your convictions lay. We read the same bible and treasure the same scriptures. Now, I wonder if there can be room in your position to explore the unexpected? Can you allow for the possibility that God can manifest what seems to this day for you an impossibility?

[LittleNipper]

The Pharisees and Sadducee set forth the exact same argument. "We need no more prophets or teachers. We have the Law of Moses" They put John the Baptist to the sword and killed and persecuted the Apostles. The argument was the same, Jesus was as sinner and agitator. They failed to see the teachings, the doctrine, the authority and the majesty of His presence. To this day, Jews do not believe the miracles performed. No amount of evidence would ever be enough to demonstrate to them the Jesus is the Christ , the Son of God and the Redeemer of ALL mankind. But one day, it will come to pass that: "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends."

I can read your posts and see where your convictions lay. We read the same bible and treasure the same scriptures. Now, I wonder if there can be room in your position to explore the unexpected? Can you allow for the possibility that God can manifest what seems to this day for you an impossibility?

But there was a difference that might be overlooked. The Pharisees & Sadducees were reinterpreting the LAW to suit their agenda (to remain top dogs and control the masses). They refused to see the prophetic messages throughout the scripture which pointed to the need of and coming MESSIAH because such seemed to them to spell the end of their reign. They looked to keeping the LAW and being of the chosen people as their salvation. And when there seemed to be an impossible commandment, they simply interpreted it to cover their sin.

Edited February 11, 2009 by LittleNipper

[Islander]

But there was a difference that might be overlooked. The Pharisees & Sadducees were reinterpreting the LAW to suit their agenda (to remain top dogs and control the masses). They refused to see the prophetic messages throughout the scripture which pointed to the need of and coming MESSIAH because such seemed to them to spell the end of their reign. They looked to keeping the LAW and being of the chosen people as their salvation. And when there seemed to be an impossible commandment, they simply interpreted it to cover their sin.

Isn't that what you may be doing? Are you not accepting and internalizing somebody else' interpretation of the bible and justifying your position with a circular argument. There are dozens of prophetic statements in the bible that speaks to prophets in the latter days, to a re-birth of Israel thru and by the hand of the gentiles, to the building of the Lord's House atop of the mountains; a Temple and for ALL God's children (Jew and Gentile) to receive therein a new covenant, a hand and a name better than of the original sons and daughters.

Now, you can rationalize how that does not ring true to you. It is only because you chose to deny the possibility and ignore the prophesies. Because you will not accept that God can speak again and reveal to His servants His will. And that my friend is truly your choice.

[LittleNipper]

Isn't that what you may be doing? Are you not accepting and internalizing somebody else' interpretation of the bible and justifying your position with a circular argument. There are dozens of prophetic statements in the bible that speaks to prophets in the latter days, to a re-birth of Israel thru and by the hand of the gentiles, to the building of the Lord's House atop of the mountains; a Temple and for ALL God's children (Jew and Gentile) to receive therein a new covenant, a hand and a name better than of the original sons and daughters.

Now, you can rationalize how that does not ring true to you. It is only because you chose to deny the possibility and ignore the prophesies. Because you will not accept that God can speak again and reveal to His servants His will. And that my friend is truly your choice.

Secularly speaking, it is possible to consider anyone's "religious" views and Biblical interpretations as so much hogwash...

I hold to a strict interpretation of scripture, seeing it as historic, prophetic, and with both specific & general profoundly good advice. Now a "prophet" can be a divinely inspired individual who applies his biblical understanding to warn of the dire circumstances surrounding various forms of behavior.

A prophet doesn't need to be some individual adding to "scripture" nor making predictions of future events that have not been already revealed. One might be considered a prophet when speaking against abortion & the recognition of homosexual marriage as anything other than sin.

One does't need additional "scripture" to preach such. One needs only to be presenting the treachings regarding such as already found throughout the Bible.

As for Israel being re-established, I do already hold to that biblical insight. The 144,000; for example, are virgins from the 12 tribes of Israel. They are none other without reading into what GOD already inspired to be written.

[Islander]

Secularly speaking, it is possible to consider anyone's "religious" views and Biblical interpretations as so much hogwash...

I hold to a strict interpretation of scripture, seeing it as historic, prophetic, and with both specific & general profoundly good advice. Now a "prophet" can be a divinely inspired individual who applies his biblical understanding to warn of the dire circumstances surrounding various forms of behavior.

A prophet doesn't need to be some individual adding to "scripture" nor making predictions of future events that have not been already revealed. One might be considered a prophet when speaking against abortion & the recognition of homosexual marriage as anything other than sin.

One does't need additional "scripture" to preach such. One needs only to be presenting the treachings regarding such as already found throughout the Bible..

It is obvious you already made up your mind on the subject. You ignored my point about revelation in scriptures about the latter days but that goes to the weakness of your argument.

Just to call you attention to a simple point. If your premise is true, then after the Torah God should have stopped talking to his prophets (I am speaking of prophesy not just warning) and we should not read beyond that point. That was all the scripture Israel needed any how, according to your logic. But God in His love and wisdom continued to provide line upon line of NEW scriptures for our benefit and care thru His prophets.

After the Savior was crucified the Apostles went about spreading the Gospel. So, we'll take the Gospels and Acts and close the NT. No need for new scriptures? Guess what, 30 years later, Christ revealed to Saul he was to become an Apostle and carry on since some of His original disciples were killed. And then you have 13 more books in the bible thanks to that NEW revelation.

Now, YOU made up your mind and decide that God can not speak again to his servants to lead His Church by revelation, to safeguard the doctrine and the teaching and to watch over the ordinances of salvation. At this point you have elevated your assumed insight and intellect above any other consideration, including God's will.

[Maxel]

This seems to be descending into a mud-flinging contest...

It would be more fair if we all admitted that we do not (indeed, cannot) read the Bible solely in a sense of 'strict interpretation', as the very idea of interpretation is to use one's prior knowledge and assumptions to process new data and reach an outcome based on said data. I've come to the conclusion that traditional Christians base their prior knowledge and assumptions in traditional Christianity (which is in turn based on the Creeds), and Mormons base their prior knowledge and assumptions in the ideas of continuing revelation and living Priesthood authority. The idea of a 'strict interpretation' is somewhat perplexing; one can strictly adhere to a previous interpretation, or one can strictly adhere to an interpretation of a certain type (literal, metaphorical, etc.), but one cannot have just a 'strict interpretation' of anything.

Until such (or similar) grounds are reached, any discussion about what the Bible 'really' teaches will be one giant exercise in talking past each other, which inevitably ends in a contentious war of words.

So, I ask you LittleNipper, where do you get your prior assumptions from? Do you hold to the traditional Creeds, another philosophy, do you attempt to reinterpret the Bible according to your own knowledge and power, or do you draw prior assumptions and knowledge from another source?

Out of fairness, I ask you the same thing, Islander, although I think I already know the answer; we're both Mormon after all and we seem to agree that our prior assumptions come from the established doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which includes continuing revelation, etc. I don't pretend to speak for you, however, and open the floor to you and LittleNipper.

Edited February 12, 2009 by Maxel

[Islander]

Max:

I grew up without any religious teaching or training. In fact, for me religion equated to tradition. In my household those traditions were frown upon since my grandma read the bible and what see saw around her did not match her simple and linear interpretation of the bible. For us it was "this is clear in the bible" or "we are not sure what this means."

My acquaintance with the Holy Ghost and the power and reality of the Atonement came at a critical moment in my life on account of my life being in great danger. What I experienced there drove me to search for years to come. I took the time to ponder and study diverse interpretations and philosophical/theological positions. But in my mind the principles of the Gospel were simple. The Scriptures are transparent when it comes to the basics for salvation. The notion that revelation is the means by which God shows to the faithful His will is self evident when one reads the scriptures. Subscribing to a preconceived theological school or other may dissuade you to believe otherwise. That the Gospel was entrusted to those to whom authority was given and the in time that authority faded away as they passed on is also clear in the scriptures. That there cannot be true worship of God without a Holy Place where man is washed away clean and find the stairwell to heaven and God steps onto His footstool and commune with men is also evident. Nobody told me these things. They are there in black and white for all to see that seek diligently.

Nibbler's position that there s no revelation and that is not necessary is not supported in the scriptures. After all, and like I pointed in my previous post, after the Torah God continued to reveal for centuries to His children His will. After the Savior was crucified NEW revelation was recorded. His position is fixed but not supported by scripture but by his own bias and circular reasoning. That was the point I was trying to get across.

[Hemidakota]

I do agree Maxel [lengthy rambling post]....

14-pages later, it is better to ask the Creator what is church and who's church is HIS then to speculate and assumed.

[LittleNipper]

It is obvious you already made up your mind on the subject. You ignored my point about revelation in scriptures about the latter days but that goes to the weakness of your argument.

Just to call you attention to a simple point. If your premise is true, then after the Torah God should have stopped talking to his prophets (I am speaking of prophesy not just warning) and we should not read beyond that point. That was all the scripture Israel needed any how, according to your logic. But God in His love and wisdom continued to provide line upon line of NEW scriptures for our benefit and care thru His prophets.

After the Savior was crucified the Apostles went about spreading the Gospel. So, we'll take the Gospels and Acts and close the NT. No need for new scriptures? Guess what, 30 years later, Christ revealed to Saul he was to become an Apostle and carry on since some of His original disciples were killed. And then you have 13 more books in the bible thanks to that NEW revelation.

Now, YOU made up your mind and decide that God can not speak again to his servants to lead His Church by revelation, to safeguard the doctrine and the teaching and to watch over the ordinances of salvation. At this point you have elevated your assumed insight and intellect above any other consideration, including God's will.

Certainly , I believe GOD speaks today to HIS children. HE speakes through the Bible. HE answers prayer. I believe CHRIST is the MESSIAH. I believe HE was sent to save those who trust in HIM. I believe HIS HOLY WORD is all about the coming MESSIAH, JESUS the CHRIST and the return of CHRIST to rapture HIS CHURCH and then return to rule with HIS saints over an earthy kingdom for 1000 years, allow satan one final war, followed by the FINAL JUDGMENT and a new heaven and a new earth.

What seems to be missing that glorifies CHRIST and has not been said?

[Islander]

Certainly , I believe GOD speaks today to HIS children. HE speakes through the Bible. HE answers prayer. I believe CHRIST is the MESSIAH. I believe HE was sent to save those who trust in HIM. I believe HIS HOLY WORD is all about the coming MESSIAH, JESUS the CHRIST and the return of CHRIST to rapture HIS CHURCH and then return to rule with HIS saints over an earthy kingdom for 1000 years, allow satan one final war, followed by the FINAL JUDGMENT and a new heaven and a new earth.

What seems to be missing that glorifies CHRIST and has not been said?

It seems impossible to carry an exchange with you since you keep ignoring the points in question. I think we should end it here.

NO church in the last 200 years has proclaimed a stronger, more transparent and profoundly inspired testimony of the truthfulness of the Gospel, that Christ is the Son of God, the Savior and the Redeemer of ALL mankind than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

"For, for this end was the law given; wherefore the law hath become dead unto us, and we are made alive in Christ because of our faith; yet we keep the law because of the commandments.

And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins." 2 Ne 25:25-26 The Book of Mormon.

.

[LittleNipper]

It seems impossible to carry an exchange with you since you keep ignoring the points in question. I think we should end it here.

NO church in the last 200 years has proclaimed a stronger, more transparent and profoundly inspired testimony of the truthfulness of the Gospel, that Christ is the Son of God, the Savior and the Redeemer of ALL mankind than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

"For, for this end was the law given; wherefore the law hath become dead unto us, and we are made alive in Christ because of our faith; yet we keep the law because of the commandments.

And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins." 2 Ne 25:25-26 The Book of Mormon.

.

It is not for me to disagree with you. The truth would seem to be, that if we both, as your statement suggests, are in full agreement about the LORD JESUS CHRIST, then why should I not remain an Evangelical, Fundamentalist, Bible believing, born-again Christian. What is there for me to gain? My proclaimation is just as strong and I keep the commandments because that is my witness to others who are lost and looking for a difference from worldly behavior...

[Islander]

It is not for me to disagree with you. The truth would seem to be, that if we both, as your statement suggests, are in full agreement about the LORD JESUS CHRIST, then why should I not remain an Evangelical, Fundamentalist, Bible believing, born-again Christian. What is there for me to gain? My proclaimation is just as strong and I keep the commandments because that is my witness to others who are lost and looking for a difference from worldly behavior...

My friend, you can remain anything you choose to. The issue in question here was revelation and you kept jumping around and skirting the issue every time I pointed to scripture.

If what you wanted was to bear your witness of Chris, my brother you have done so excellently and we are all convinced that you are a true believer. I welcome you to the forum and hold you to be a strong one and of the faithful that labor to bring to pass the kingdom of God and the Christ on the earth to usher His coming.

[LittleNipper]

My friend, you can remain anything you choose to. The issue in question here was revelation and you kept jumping around and skirting the issue every time I pointed to scripture.

If what you wanted was to bear your witness of Chris, my brother you have done so excellently and we are all convinced that you are a true believer. I welcome you to the forum and hold you to be a strong one and of the faithful that labor to bring to pass the kingdom of God and the Christ on the earth to usher His coming.

Well, I do not wish to appear attacking. The revelation that I accept concerns CHRIST. CHRIST appears everywhere throughout the Bible if one studies it. There are Christophanies, prophecies surrounding the MESSIAH, HIS birth, death, resurrection and even HIS lineage. We are even told why we need HIM. The Bible is a seemingly one author book. One verse hangs on another and one book hinges to another. I see the revelation of CHRIST as complete --- all one needs to now is actually see the SAVIOR face to face. That is the final revelation.

Edited February 13, 2009 by LittleNipper