Does LDS doctrine clash with the Bible?

[Islander]

Hi, Rockwoodchev.

Agreed. With the rampant inconsistencies between different parts of the Bible, you can't not cherry-pick, so there's no use pretending that we don't.

The only difference between any two Christian churches is which scriptural quotations they feel are more important than others.

-----

I'm confused: what exactly is being bent or taken out of context?

Nothing is being misrepresented: the lesson is simply not mentioning the other five angels.

There could be any number of reasons why they weren't mentioned:

• Maybe we don't know who the other five angels are.
• Maybe the other five angels haven't come yet.
• Maybe the other five angels are like Heavenly Mother: their names need to be protected for some reason
• Maybe their duties aren't as relevant to the intended topic of the lesson.
• Maybe the Church had to choose only one to mention because of time issues (as a teacher, you should know that 45 minutes isn't very long for a lesson ).
• Maybe the Church doesn't want teachers to get into the confusing details in Sunday School, so they only mention the simplest and most familiar stuff, like Moroni.
• Maybe the Church only wants to present the information that is most relevant to the class's testimony in the LDS Church.

I personally don't think this scripture has been bent, cherry-picked, taken out of context or inappropriately cropped at all.

I think you should consider very carefully and prayerfully any and all scripture, especially the teachings of the prophets before you offer a blanket statement as the one above. You should consider your choice of words better next time.

Moroni was called of God to announce and revealed that the fullness of the Gospel shall be returned in this later days. It was thru the revelation to the prophet Joseph that this messenger brought that the new dispensation was open, that the work of the gathering of Israel commenced, that the news that God lives, that the Father and the Son remain fully engaged in the affairs of the world was announced. It was Moroni that pointed and shed light onto the ancient record, that foretold of the work to be done across the whole earth and thus announced, heralded to the WHOLE world that the work, the hand of the Lord, His blessings, judgments and justice was about to come forth.

Beyond that, if a prophet of the Lord declares that prophesy has been fulfilled in that aspect, I am inclined to consider that, even if it is an opinion, to be of greater value than yours.

I humbly suggest you ponder about this situation.

Edited June 10, 2009 by Islander

[bytebear]

As I have mentioned, If one is not born again, baptism means nothing. Jesus said go into all the world and baptize in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit, He didn't say put your faith in baptism or any works. The outward show of baptism means nothing if there isn't an inward change. That is the whole point. It is like one saying their marriage vows with no commitment with no inward change or intent to live in Christ. The focus shouldn't be on baptism (works) it should be on faith in Christ. That is what Paul contends as well. Baptism comes after one believes and accepts the Lord by faith, but teaching people to trust in baptism as the means to a correct relationship with God have grossly missed the mark and don’t really understand the gospel.

How is this different than LDS beliefs? The implication is that we emphasize works over faith, but in fact the Fourth Article of Faith states that faith and repentance must come before baptism.

[aj4u]

If there wasn't a profound inward change no one would get baptized , for us it is the next step..... You got to belive have faith to be baptized....

I agree with that

[bytebear]

Again, how is this different than LDS belief?

[aj4u]

Again, how is this different than LDS belief?

I was hoping you could say

[JohnnyRudick]

I think you should consider very carefully and prayerfully any and all scripture, especially the teachings of the prophets before you offer a blanket statement as the one above. You should consider your choice of words better next time.

Moroni was called of God to announce and revealed that the fullness of the Gospel shall be returned in this later days. It was thru the revelation to the prophet Joseph that this messenger brought that the new dispensation was open, that the work of the gathering of Israel commenced, that the news that God lives, that the Father and the Son remain fully engaged in the affairs of the world was announced. It was Moroni that pointed and shed light onto the ancient record, that foretold of the work to be done across the whole earth and thus announced, heralded to the WHOLE world that the work, the hand of the Lord, His blessings, judgments and justice was about to come forth.

Beyond that, if a prophet of the Lord declares that prophesy has been fulfilled in that aspect, I am inclined to consider that, even if it is an opinion, to be of greater value than yours.

I humbly suggest you ponder about this situation.

I could be missing something again here:confused:

I did not get the impression that Bluejay had anything of the kind in mind disrespectful of the mission of the Angel Moroni.

But I do have to take exception to his apparent disrespect for the Bible.

I have no problem having to "Cherry Pick" the Bible to come in line with what else the Lord has revealed.

We have to understand Context and Dispensations in Time and constant study.

In time a picture of it will come into mind in most cases what is going on.

I Love all the Standard works of the Church and would not trade in any of them for anything.

Bro. Rudick

[JohnnyRudick]

I was hoping you could say

There is no difference as far as it goes but if you would go back and reread these posts I and several others have gone into great detail explaining Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ and Baptism and giving appropriate Bible Verses as well as other Scripture.

Bro. Rudick

[aj4u]

There is no difference as far as it goes but if you would go back and reread these posts I and several others have gone into great detail explaining Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ and Baptism and giving appropriate Bible Verses as well as other Scripture.

Bro. Rudick

You might consider this beating a dead horse, but I don't because I don't really understand the same way as Mormons from the terms you use, and the way you see Scripture is different than that of traditional Christianity; Moreover, it turns into a different maze when you appear to say things that any traditional Christian would agree with on the surface, but really mean something else. The biggest issue with me is how you and I see Jesus. We are seeing two different persons. For instance, your Jesus is your elder brother, but my Jesus is my Lord and God. There is an irreconcilable difference. Don’t you think so? I think the difference is a question of life and death.

[bytebear]

For instance, your Jesus is your elder brother, but my Jesus is my Lord and God. There is an irreconcilable difference. Don’t you think so? I think the difference is a question of life and death.

I don't think it any more or less reconcilable to understand that Jesus is both God and the Son of God. I do not believe in the post Biblical explanation of the Godhead (more commonly called the Trinity). It is simply illogical. The simple truth is that Jesus is the Son of God, and I am also a son of God, and therefore, He is my brother. It really is simple logic.

[Carl62]

You might consider this beating a dead horse, but I don't because I don't really understand the same way as Mormons from the terms you use, and the way you see Scripture is different than that of traditional Christianity; Moreover, it turns into a different maze when you appear to say things that any traditional Christian would agree with on the surface, but really mean something else. The biggest issue with me is how you and I see Jesus. We are seeing two different persons. For instance, your Jesus is your elder brother, but my Jesus is my Lord and God. There is an irreconcilable difference. Don’t you think so? I think the difference is a question of life and death.

You make it sound as if Mormons belittle what our belief is of Jesus. We believe in the Jesus who preached the Sermon on the Mount, who taught great and mystical parables, who cleansed the lepers and raised the dead, who died on the cross for our sins, and who arose again on the third day. Yes, through our belief in our having a pre-existence, we do believe that Jesus was our elder brother, but does this diminish in any way, shape or form his mission and what he did for us? No. Does this put him at any less of a stature to us as being a member of the Godhead like he is? No. When you refer to him as just our elder brother and nothing else, you almost make it sound as if he's just somebody we'd go to a baseball game with and slap 'high five's' whenever there's a home run. (Oh well, maybe Jesus would enjoy a good ball game if he was here, who knows.:)) I can ASSURE you that we do NOT think any less of our Great Lord and Savior than any other devout Christian that is out there does. For us LDS, he is THEE ABSOLUTE definition of life!:)

[Snow]

You might consider this beating a dead horse, but I don't because I don't really understand the same way as Mormons from the terms you use, and the way you see Scripture is different than that of traditional Christianity; Moreover, it turns into a different maze when you appear to say things that any traditional Christian would agree with on the surface, but really mean something else. The biggest issue with me is how you and I see Jesus. We are seeing two different persons. For instance, your Jesus is your elder brother, but my Jesus is my Lord and God. There is an irreconcilable difference. Don’t you think so? I think the difference is a question of life and death.

Tsk, tsk, tsk... making stuff up is not nice.

If you don't know, you ought to ask. If you do know but make false assertions anyway, it is dishonest.

Jesus, for members of the Church of Jesus Christ, is Christ, the Savior. He is Son of God and and one of the three members of the Godhead. He is The Lord or God. He if man's bother only in that he is the begotten Son of God and we too are the creation of God and hence his children.

Please do better.

[Snow]

ajru,

I am going to ask you a question. I hope that you answer it.

Assuming you believe in the "Trinity," why - since it is not in the Bible? Do you believe in revelation outside the Bible? If so, what source of revelation do you rely upon to support your non-biblical view of God?

[aj4u]

ajru,

I am going to ask you a question. I hope that you answer it.

Assuming you believe in the "Trinity," why - since it is not in the Bible? Do you believe in revelation outside the Bible? If so, what source of revelation do you rely upon to support your non-biblical view of God?

You are asking me questions based on your assumptions and expecting me to respond as if I have a non-Biblical view of God as you imply I make dishonest statements. I do not attack anyone’s sincerity, but that doesn’t mean someone can’t be sincerely wrong. I believe that there are things being revealed to God's people on a daily basis, but it is never outside of God’s word. His word has been established forever. Men inspired by the Holy Spirit have written the Bible. There is no need for any restoring to God’s word and or the gospel of Jesus Christ as written two thousand years ago. That doesn’t mean, however, translations of the Holy Scriptures cannot be improved on, but any new revelation had not dare go against God’s already established word or as Paul says “let it be accursed.” We are commanded to search the Scripture to test the spirit of the new things we hear. I simply obey this Scripture and test the spirit of what I hear. I do not believe that God can be figured out through simple logic as one mentioned. We are all God’s creation but we are not all God’s children. The Devil has his children (like Jesus said of the religious rulers “Ye are of your father the devil”). According to the Bible, Jesus is God. He is of the same exact substance as God and yet He is distinct in person. I think it is foolish to believe that can be understood through simple logic. Jesus claims He is the First and the Last and so does God. Are there two First and Lasts? By the way, I like your avatar. Edited June 11, 2009 by aj4u

[aj4u]

The voice of truth tells me a different story!

[pam]

One thing I continually find irritating is the phrases "Your Jesus" or "My Jesus" as if we are having a contest over who has the better one. We're not. He is one and the same. How we interpret his relationship with us and how we develop that relationship with Him is what is important.

aj4u you claim not to be disrespectful to our beliefs..but I find you getting extremely close to crossing that line if not already. When you say "Your Jesus" you are insinuating that perhaps we are wrong in how we think of him. You may disagree with me but that is my opinion on the matter.

[Snow]

You are asking me questions based on your assumptions and expecting me to respond as if I have a non-Biblical view of God as you imply I make dishonest statements. I do not attack anyone’s sincerity, but that doesn’t mean someone can’t be sincerely wrong. I believe that there are things being revealed to God's people on a daily basis, but it is never outside of God’s word. His word has been established forever. Men inspired by the Holy Spirit have written the Bible. There is no need for any restoring to God’s word and or the gospel of Jesus Christ as written two thousand years ago. That doesn’t mean, however, translations of the Holy Scriptures cannot be improved on, but any new revelation had not dare go against God’s already established word or as Paul says “let it be accursed.” We are commanded to search the Scripture to test the spirit of the new things we hear. I simply obey this Scripture and test the spirit of what I hear. I do not believe that God can be figured out through simple logic as one mentioned. We are all God’s creation but we are not all God’s children. The Devil has his children (like Jesus said of the religious rulers “Ye are of your father the devil”). According to the Bible, Jesus is God. He is of the same exact substance as God and yet He is distinct in person. I think it is foolish to believe that can be understood through simple logic. Jesus claims He is the First and the Last and so does God. Are there two First and Lasts? By the way, I like your avatar.

I am left wondering why you avoided answering the question... do you not know the answer? Are you embarrassed to say?

I'll ask again: Assuming you believe in the "Trinity," why - since it is not in the Bible? Do you believe in revelation outside the Bible? If so, what source of revelation do you rely upon to support your non-biblical view of God?

[aj4u]

I am left wondering why you avoided answering the question... do you not know the answer? Are you embarrassed to say?

I'll ask again: Assuming you believe in the "Trinity," why - since it is not in the Bible? Do you believe in revelation outside the Bible? If so, what source of revelation do you rely upon to support your non-biblical view of God?

I thought I had answered your questions. Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible, and I have never pushed the term, but the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned. I believe that The Father is God, The Son is God and The Holy Spirit is God as the Bible states. There is nothing to be embarrassed about. I am, however, a little reluctant to answer what I consider to be leading questions.

By the way, you didn't answer my question either: Are there two Firsts and Lasts?

[JohnnyRudick]

I thought I had answered your questions. Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible, and I have never pushed the term, but the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned. I believe that The Father is God, The Son is God and The Holy Spirit is God as the Bible states. There is nothing to be embarrassed about. I am, however, a little reluctant to answer what I consider to be leading questions.

By the way, you didn't answer my question either: Are there two Firsts and Lasts?

First and Last of what?

Revelation 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead.

And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I

am the first and the last:

Revelation 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold,

I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of

death.

If this is the case.

No.

Bro. Rudick

[aj4u]

One thing I continually find irritating is the phrases "Your Jesus" or "My Jesus" as if we are having a contest over who has the better one. We're not. He is one and the same. How we interpret his relationship with us and how we develop that relationship with Him is what is important.

aj4u you claim not to be disrespectful to our beliefs..but I find you getting extremely close to crossing that line if not already. When you say "Your Jesus" you are insinuating that perhaps we are wrong in how we think of him. You may disagree with me but that is my opinion on the matter.

I claim not to be disrespectful to any one individual and I try not to be disrespectful to any's beliefs. It is, however, a very difficult task because there are differences. Now, you are right Jesus is Jesus and that will never change. He is the same yesterday, today and forever just as God is God. On the other hand, there are those who believe God is the sun or part of creation. There are those that worship the creation rather than the creator. This doesn't change who God really is, but the sun god is not the god I serve. Jehovah Witnesses respect Jesus as being Michael the archangel. I do not belief that Jesus is an angel. I believe the Scripture teaches He is God. Muslims respect Jesus as a great prophet, but not as God or the Son of God (God the Son). I believe it is important to know who Jesus is. To know Him is to have eternal life. I believe, for instance, that He is not my elder brother who is cut from the same pre-existing spiritual cloth as I. There is no Biblical support for these views of JWs, muslims and many other groups. Is there? If there were, that would be a different story for me as it is for you. If Jesus is your spiritual brother and Jesus is not mine, what is it that you find irritating or disrespectful about what I share sincerely from my understanding of the Bible? Edited June 11, 2009 by aj4u

[aj4u]

First and Last of what?

Revelation 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead.

And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I

am the first and the last:

Revelation 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold,

I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of

death.

If this is the case.

No.

Bro. Rudick

I don't understand what your saying "NO" to and why you ask the question above.

[JohnnyRudick]

I don't understand what your saying "NO" to and why you ask the question above.

I guess in thirty Five Pages it is hard to keep track of your questions.

"Are there two Firsts and Lasts?"

Bro. Rudick

[JohnnyRudick]

. . . There is no Biblical support for these views of JWs, muslims and many other groups. Is there? If there were, that would be a different story for me as it is for you. If Jesus is your spiritual brother and Jesus is not mine, what is it that you find irritating or disrespectful about what I share sincerely from my understanding of the Bible?

No Biblical Support?

None?

Zerro?

OK, here is One.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate

to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the

firstborn among many brethren.

Bro. Rudick

[Snow]

I thought I had answered your questions. Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible, and I have never pushed the term, but the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are mentioned. I believe that The Father is God, The Son is God and The Holy Spirit is God as the Bible states. There is nothing to be embarrassed about. I am, however, a little reluctant to answer what I consider to be leading questions.

By the way, you didn't answer my question either: Are there two Firsts and Lasts?

Reluctant? You are are doing everything you can to avoid the question. I'll try again.

Do you believe the traditional concept of the Trinity?

If so, why?

Since it is not found in the Bible, where do you believe the concept comes from? Non-biblical revelation? Politics? Somewhere else?

[Snow]

I claim not to be disrespectful to any one individual and I try not to be disrespectful to any's beliefs. It is, however, a very difficult task because there are differences. Now, you are right Jesus is Jesus and that will never change. He is the same yesterday, today and forever just as God is God. On the other hand, there are those who believe God is the sun or part of creation. There are those that worship the creation rather than the creator. This doesn't change who God really is, but the sun god is not the god I serve. Jehovah Witnesses respect Jesus as being Michael the archangel. I do not belief that Jesus is an angel. I believe the Scripture teaches He is God. Muslims respect Jesus as a great prophet, but not as God or the Son of God (God the Son). I believe it is important to know who Jesus is. To know Him is to have eternal life. I believe, for instance, that He is not my elder brother who is cut from the same pre-existing spiritual cloth as I. There is no Biblical support for these views of JWs, muslims and many other groups. Is there? If there were, that would be a different story for me as it is for you. If Jesus is your spiritual brother and Jesus is not mine, what is it that you find irritating or disrespectful about what I share sincerely from my understanding of the Bible?

Then is it correct to characterize your view as holding that salvation as a function of correct doctrine?

Is that a biblical concept?

... and btw, the what we find disrespectful in you is dishonest or lazy inaccuracy in your portrayal of what we believe - and when corrected, you do not apologize. Honesty - try it you'll probably like it.

Edited June 11, 2009 by Snow

[Bluejay]

Hi, Islander.

I think you should consider very carefully and prayerfully any and all scripture, especially the teachings of the prophets before you offer a blanket statement as the one above. You should consider your choice of words better next time.

I assume you're referring to this blanket statement:

Agreed. With the rampant inconsistencies between different parts of the Bible, you can't not cherry-pick, so there's no use pretending that we don't.

The only difference between any two Christian churches is which scriptural quotations they feel are more important than others.

Prove me wrong: show me one religion that believes every word of the Bible literally, and I will gladly take it back.

The simple fact is that everybody who believes in the Bible believes that some of it was not meant to be read literally, or that some of it was translated or interpreted inaccurately, or that some bits are more important than other bits, or that some of it hasn't been fully explained by God yet, or that some of it is missing some important contextual clues, or whatever.

Our religion in particular is very explicit on this matter: unlike the leaders of other churches, our leader actually went and changed what was written in the Bible, because he believed some of it to be in error. Whether or not his actions were condoned by God, the fact remains that our church changed the Bible to suit our doctrines.

This is referred to as "cherry-picking," or, in worse cases, "special pleading," and we do do it. Even if we do it with authorization from God, it's still called "cherry-picking."

-----

Moroni was called of God to announce and revealed that the fullness of the Gospel shall be returned in this later days. It was thru the revelation to the prophet Joseph that this messenger brought that the new dispensation was open, that the work of the gathering of Israel commenced, that the news that God lives, that the Father and the Son remain fully engaged in the affairs of the world was announced. It was Moroni that pointed and shed light onto the ancient record, that foretold of the work to be done across the whole earth and thus announced, heralded to the WHOLE world that the work, the hand of the Lord, His blessings, judgments and justice was about to come forth.

What gave you the impression that I have a problem with this?

My comments only addressed the five angels that were not included in the manual: what does that have to do with the mission of Moroni, or with my testimony of it?

-----

I humbly suggest you ponder about this situation.

I humbly suggest that you consider the possibility that I might have already done so.

That possibility apparently hasn't crossed your mind yet.