Christian thought

[Seminarysnoozer]

While there may be degrees of reward in heaven, it's all still one kingdom. Salvation is a beginning, not the end.

How does God determine those "degrees of reward" then?

[Hemidakota]

________________________________________

This statement from another thread seems to define a lot of Christian beliefs. I have met many that seek to "save" you by telling you that Christ died for your sins and all you have to do is believe.

I also believe that Christ died for me.......but that doesn't even begin to explain what Christ did for each of us. It seems like the suffering at Gethsemane, that could ONLY be endured by God, is either overlooked, misunderstood or simply ignored. The true meaning, the details of the Gospel plan of Salvation that encompass the Creation, the Fall and the Atonement seem to be completely distorted without modern revelation and the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price.

How thankful I am for these revealed truths and for the Holy Ghost that testifies of these Eternal verities. Families can and are meant to be together forever! Unlike the statement above, I understand that there are requirements to receive these great blessings.....but what small requirements in light of such infinite blessings.

Most of the earth families will be with their loves ones if one looked at it from the aspect of many will not inherit the Celestial Kingdom. :) In a sense, there is flavor of truth given by this remark. But I do understand your point when truths or GOD’s servants speak people do not bother to listen.

We do know the highest order in achieving without the required ordinance is the Terrestrial Kingdom. Still for me, being outside of the presence of the beloved Parents would be hellish life.

Even among the Saints, what is missed with the meaning of the precious event in the Garden of Gethsemane is an infinite one for our creation. It is for us only and not for all within the confines of this little universe. It will be with us for eternality and help those to achieve post mortal desires when repentance is finally met.

[Traveler]

Max, Protestant Christian understanding openly admits that most (or at least a majority) of the world's people will not make heaven. The way is narrow and hard. The road to destruction is wide and easy. It's our understanding of God's word, and yes it's hard.

BUT...the LDS understanding of eternal families, though taught as something for most, ends up being reserved for a small minority of Jesus' followers. So, it's not a matter of heaven and hell, but of what happens AMONGST God's people. My question is not meant to discredit the teaching so much as it is a quest for elaboration. How do eternal families end of working, if only a relatively small # in the heavenly kingdoms will enjoy them?

Many times I have expressed the notion that anyone that desire will be given the opportunity. As you have stated – the true path is difficult. It is not really as easy as a “shower” but getting started in the way or journey is that easy. I disagree that the notion of family is reserved for only a small minority. In fact I have yet in my travels to find any individual or society that does not have some respect for family – even the most ardent seekers of personal pleasures and gratifications of orientations will keep a small glimmer of hope in families that endure through generations.

You are correct in understanding the evil opposition to a most important segment of salvation (salvation - meaning the “rescue” of that which is recognized as worth-while by G-d). As I have said I do not know of many that will refuse family as a divine institution dear to G-d and respected by him.

The point of importance is in something that Jesus said. He said that his sheep recognize his voice and will come to him when called (even if it is not popular at the time or if it is difficult). Therefore, our goal as LDS, despite all the opposition, is to make sure that the voice is heard – that it is sounded to every nation, kindred, tongue and people. So that everyone can make the choice according to that voice they recognize. The fact that G-d is our Father and that we are part of his family being so universally recognized is no accident. That is because the call is not a sectarian doctrine but the voice of his Son.

The question is not about intellectual doctrine but of individual choice and commitment in relationship to what-ever is offered as distraction to that voice.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

How does God determine those "degrees of reward" then?

There are so many parables...the sower of the seed is probably the biggest. Some fail altogother (no true conversion...or a loss of salvation), others earn a 30-fold harvest, others 60, others 100. Then there's the widow who gave two coines, and it was counted more heavily than the excess 1000s from the wealthy. Jesus Great Commission was that we go, make disciples, baptize them, and teach them to obey Christ's commands. So, there's the practical side. On the other hand, our willingness to allow the Spirit to direct and empower us, and to embrace and exercise faith are what drives the harvest up. So, faith, submission to the Spirit, and following Christ's lead (commands).

[Seminarysnoozer]

It doesn't seem that LDS beliefs differ too much from yours. That the rewards are based on the works done here, at least in part. The other part being the "willingness to allow the spirit to direct and empower" you. I believe that too.

[martybess]

PC,

I think the difference or distinction of what is to come is LDS members believe all will have salvation accept the sons of perdition but God's greatest gift to us (other then agency) is the ability through Christ to become as he is. To reach Godhood in it's fullest. We would not give keys to a child with a suspended drivers license though we do not love them less then our other children. Those who earn it will receive those keys. This gift is offered to all God's children it is up to us to not get suspended. If one does not find the keys in this life by no fault of their own they will in the next.

[prisonchaplain]

It doesn't seem that LDS beliefs differ too much from yours. That the rewards are based on the works done here, at least in part. The other part being the "willingness to allow the spirit to direct and empower" you. I believe that too.

Usually the key disagreement is whether works are required as a condition of salvation. Evangelicals say no, it's all grace through faith. BUT, we speak of conversion, not sanctification. We would further argue that good works are not the price of admission into God's kingdom, but are the product of our membership. I gain my citizenship AT conversion, not death.

In many ways LDS do believe the same. But, imho, Joseph Smith reacted very negatively to the apparent contradiction between folk who claimed to be eternally secure, and yet who appeared to be living very much for the Devil. I'll not defend the doctrine of eternal security, because I don't believe in it. On the other hand, I much prefer to see the people of God motivated by a deeper love relationship with their Creator, than by a fear that if they don't do enough good stuff they might miss out on God's best rewards. And, in that regard, the way really is narrow and difficult.

[Traveler]

Usually the key disagreement is whether works are required as a condition of salvation. Evangelicals say no, it's all grace through faith. BUT, we speak of conversion, not sanctification. We would further argue that good works are not the price of admission into God's kingdom, but are the product of our membership. I gain my citizenship AT conversion, not death.

In many ways LDS do believe the same. But, imho, Joseph Smith reacted very negatively to the apparent contradiction between folk who claimed to be eternally secure, and yet who appeared to be living very much for the Devil. I'll not defend the doctrine of eternal security, because I don't believe in it. On the other hand, I much prefer to see the people of God motivated by a deeper love relationship with their Creator, than by a fear that if they don't do enough good stuff they might miss out on God's best rewards. And, in that regard, the way really is narrow and difficult.

I believe the real key to disagreement is the understanding of mutual terms. In this case, I see differences in understanding the key terms of “salvation” and works.

I prefer the LDS concept of salvation because I believe it is clearer and better defined. Because the root meaning of salvation is the same as salvage – I understand salvation to be the rescue of all things desirable to G-d. It is not just the cleaning away of sins but much more the glorifying of all things in a person that is desirable to G-d.

Sometimes I get the impression that Evangelicals do not believe that G-d can find anything desirable to him present in anybody – especially if they are not Evangelicals.

The second problem is the concept of works. I really do not understand what Evangelicals cauterize as works. To LDS it is a very simple concept. What G-d does is his works including his grace – what man does is man’s works. So when Evangelicals say we are saved only by the grace of G-d and all we have to do is accept his grace there is a sudden contradiction. As LDS understand works; as soon as there is that word “do” (or anything like that which assumes something required for man) in accepting grace we have defined a work. We could call it the work of accepting his free gift of grace. So to LDS Evangelicals are at conflict with their doctrine and we do not know how to approach Evangelicals to come to any understanding.

It is like works, whatever they are; are something G-d does not find desirable to rescue or salvage. That just does not make any sense at all when we consider and try to agree on what a just and loving G-d of mercy does about such things in other beings. There is so much about this concept that contradicts what I believe to be good – in G-d and my fellow men.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

Prisonchaplain, thanks for your responses.

Fear is the beginning of wisdom, but the understanding comes only after doing his commandments. (Psalms 111) I agree with you that it is better to act in love than in fear, but it is also better to act in fear than not act at all. So, again, we agree. The thing that is left out is, "I much prefer to see the people of God motivated by a deeper love relationship with their Creator ..." .... but motivated to do what? Or is the motivation, by itself, enough?

Fear is the hallmark of the gospel to the unbeliever. But to those who are living the gospel it becomes progressively lost. I am working on that, I don't have perfect love, so at times I am thankful for my fear of the Lord and fear of things that will be lost if I don't obey.

New revelation often is presented with an aura of fear first ... just as predicted by Revelations 14: 6 and 7 as to the coming of the everlasting gospel in the latter days.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by; "But, imho, Joseph Smith reacted very negatively to the apparent contradiction between folk who claimed to be eternally secure, and yet who appeared to be living very much for the Devil."

[Moksha]

For Every Christian Yin, there must be a Christian Yang.

Thank goodness we all have Christian thoughts no matter how we express them.

:)

[Hemidakota]

Prisonchaplain, thanks for your responses.

Fear is the beginning of wisdom, but the understanding comes only after doing his commandments. (Psalms 111) I agree with you that it is better to act in love than in fear, but it is also better to act in fear than not act at all. So, again, we agree. The thing that is left out is, "I much prefer to see the people of God motivated by a deeper love relationship with their Creator ..." .... but motivated to do what? Or is the motivation, by itself, enough?

Fear is the hallmark of the gospel to the unbeliever. But to those who are living the gospel it becomes progressively lost. I am working on that, I don't have perfect love, so at times I am thankful for my fear of the Lord and fear of things that will be lost if I don't obey.

New revelation often is presented with an aura of fear first ... just as predicted by Revelations 14: 6 and 7 as to the coming of the everlasting gospel in the latter days.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by; "But, imho, Joseph Smith reacted very negatively to the apparent contradiction between folk who claimed to be eternally secure, and yet who appeared to be living very much for the Devil."

Or that we 'fear and tremble over our salvation'. Didn't the Lord state this?

[prisonchaplain]

Prisonchaplain, thanks for your responses.

Fear is the beginning of wisdom, but the understanding comes only after doing his commandments. (Psalms 111) I agree with you that it is better to act in love than in fear, but it is also better to act in fear than not act at all. So, again, we agree. The thing that is left out is, "I much prefer to see the people of God motivated by a deeper love relationship with their Creator ..." .... but motivated to do what? Or is the motivation, by itself, enough?

Fear is the hallmark of the gospel to the unbeliever. But to those who are living the gospel it becomes progressively lost. I am working on that, I don't have perfect love, so at times I am thankful for my fear of the Lord and fear of things that will be lost if I don't obey.

New revelation often is presented with an aura of fear first ... just as predicted by Revelations 14: 6 and 7 as to the coming of the everlasting gospel in the latter days.

These are some wise and thoughtful reflections. Thank you.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by; "But, imho, Joseph Smith reacted very negatively to the apparent contradiction between folk who claimed to be eternally secure, and yet who appeared to be living very much for the Devil."

In Joseph Smith's day (and today as well) there was a heated on-going debate between those who believed Christians were "eternally secure," and those who believed salvation could be lost. My sense is that he found the former folks to be absurd. How can evil-doers, by simply claiming to have had an experience with God, really believe they'll enter God's kingdom? He came down very strongly against this teaching, urging instead that the Saints be people of consistent good works, enduring to the end, not by some promise, but by actual deed. Whether or not Joseph Smith's perspective was anointed of the Holy Spirit is another debate, but he clearly had strong views on the controversy.

Edited September 29, 2009 by prisonchaplain

[prisonchaplain]

Traveler: The key "grace only" passage is Ephesians 2:8-9, which basically says we are saved by grace and not by works of righteousness. So, the only way that can be true and fit with other verses calling us to obey commands, do good works, and profess Christ, is by understanding salvation as the initial conversion experience. So, I speak of being saved "from sin and TO righteousness."

[Guest]

PC, pardon my ignorance again. How do Evangelicals view baptism? Is it a necessary ordinance for salvation? How about confirmation of the Holy Spirit?

[prisonchaplain]

PC, pardon my ignorance again. How do Evangelicals view baptism? Is it a necessary ordinance for salvation? How about confirmation of the Holy Spirit?

Most evangelicals believe that water baptism is one of the first acts of obedience for a convert. In other words, it's not a prerequisite, but rather an initial rite of the redeemed.

As for the confirmation of the Holy Spirit, most of us would say that conversion brings the presence of the Holy Spirit. We pentecostals believe that the baptism in the Holy Ghost is a second work of grace, one that usually occurs subsequent to conversion, and is accompanied by speaking in tongues. Others disagree, but we all agree that the Holy Spirit does journey with converts.

[Traveler]

Traveler: The key "grace only" passage is Ephesians 2:8-9, which basically says we are saved by grace and not by works of righteousness. So, the only way that can be true and fit with other verses calling us to obey commands, do good works, and profess Christ, is by understanding salvation as the initial conversion experience. So, I speak of being saved "from sin and TO righteousness."

I am grateful to have a meaningful conversation – your view is very different. I am trying to understand. So to you (Evangelicals), salvation is the redemption of sin and nothing else? The hard part of this concept is my understanding of salvage and it relates to salvation. Since sin is removed like dross in a refiner’s fire – what is preserved? Everything that you acquire that is not sin? Since salvation is defined as the removal of sin and nothing else then all else remains?

The example I gave in another thread is the example of a farmer. To all the gifts of sun and rain are free. But to the farmer that by his works cultivates and is a steward – the free gifts of sun and rain and all other things the farmer is granted a harvest. To those that labor there is a harvest – to those that labor not there is still the free gifts of sun and rain without which there could be no harvest.

Now to clarify one last thing. Since salvation is a free gift then do Evangelicals believe that all have the same salvation? Since Jesus has paid the price of all sin (suffered for all sin). Is there anything man can do to benefit from the salvation of G-d? If there is then Evangelicals are not honest in their doctrine. I do not say this for argument – but because that appears to me to be that Evangelicals claim is true – so when they imply that they have salvation and someone else does not because of something different in being Christian or an Evangelical – it looks very much to me to be a contradiction and that there is something in salvation other than grace.

BTW the scripture you provided (Ephesians 2:8-9) Verse 8 says that we are saved by faith (in other words our works of faith). So when verse 9 speaks specifically of works to clarify that salvation is not by our works only but the combination that must include G-d’s gift and we cannot boast of his gift.

The Traveler

[Justice]

For Protestants, salvation is like a shower. You don't have to do anything to get ready for the shower. You come, just as you are, without covering...naked, totally exposed, ready to be cleansed. Likewise, we come to Jesus just as we are, without one plea, but that His blood was shed for me. Dare I think anything in my life might have impressed him, might have moved him to be even slightly impressed, then I miss the point.

It's your example, and I do get the relationship you're making. However, I'd like to point out that even in a shower if one does not use some kind of soap and actively rub or scrub they will not become clean, just rinsed.

What really turns me off to the analogy you make, and this brand of Christianity, is that if we do nothing, then those that are saved are chosen by God, and those that He did not choose are damned to eternal hell "for no action of their own." God just chose not to save them.

In this teaching, both groups did nothing... those that are saved and those that aren't.

Not only do I not think it's fair, but it's outlandish to think that a Being with all knowledge and power would make it so.

C'mon, now! God wants all to be saved. It makes no sense otherwise. He gave us agency for some reason. He gave us dominion over His creations for some reason. If all He was going to do was just choose who was saved and who wasn't, this whole existence is pointless.

[prisonchaplain]

It's your example, and I do get the relationship you're making. However, I'd like to point out that even in a shower if one does not use some kind of soap and actively rub or scrub they will not become clean, just rinsed.

Since it's Christ's blood that cleanses, you wouldn't get much credit for rubbing it in.

What really turns me off to the analogy you make, and this brand of Christianity, is that if we do nothing, then those that are saved are chosen by God, and those that He did not choose are damned to eternal hell "for no action of their own." God just chose not to save them.

That's not my brand of Christianity, so I"ll not bother to defend it. "Whosoever will may come." John 3:15- tells us that Jesus did not come to condemn the world, but to save it. If we don't believe in him we stand condemned already. God is just. He'll judge the damned for their sins, not because he simply didn't pick them. He'll redeem the saved because of his Son's blood, not because they managed to perform well.

In this teaching, both groups did nothing... those that are saved and those that aren't.

Not only do I not think it's fair, but it's outlandish to think that a Being with all knowledge and power would make it so.

C'mon, now! God wants all to be saved. It makes no sense otherwise. He gave us agency for some reason. He gave us dominion over His creations for some reason. If all He was going to do was just choose who was saved and who wasn't, this whole existence is pointless.

Your preaching to the choir, brother. You confuse me with someone else. I agree...God would that all would be saved. But those who reject his Son will be judged by their works...and all have sinned...and the wages of sin is death.

IMHO you brought some presuppositions to this string about what you think evangelicals are about. "Once Saved Always Saved" and "Predestination" are not my doctrines--you'll have to save that debate for any Calvinists that stumble upon this site.

[bytor2112]

I didn't realize that Evangelicals didn't believe "once saved, always saved"? All Evangelicals? All of the ones I have met seem to believe that.

I think I have asked you this before......what happens to those who die in this life without hearing of Christ or those who lived before the time of Christ? By what standard will they be judged?

[prisonchaplain]

Bytor, the Assemblies of God is the largest denomination within the National Association of Evangelicals. We do not believe in "once saved always saved." You'll find that a lot amongst Baptists (though not universally), and those of the Reform tradition.

As for those who died without hearing about Christ, there is no consensus. Some insist they are damned. I say God is just, and he'll do right, and when the time comes to see, none of us will complain. In the mean time, knowing God wants all to hear and know and have an opportunity to respond, I'm driven quite radically to evangelisim.

[bytor2112]

Bytor, the Assemblies of God is the largest denomination within the National Association of Evangelicals. We do not believe in "once saved always saved." You'll find that a lot amongst Baptists (though not universally), and those of the Reform tradition.

As for those who died without hearing about Christ, there is no consensus. Some insist they are damned. I say God is just, and he'll do right, and when the time comes to see, none of us will complain. In the mean time, knowing God wants all to hear and know and have an opportunity to respond, I'm driven quite radically to evangelisim.

Thanks PC.....(former Southern Baptist) I have always found that odd. Why would God create man just to damn him for not hearing the Gospel message? That seems so counter to what I believe about HIM...sounds like you too.

How does one repent in the Assemblies of God church. Similar to LDS?

[prisonchaplain]

Bytor, repentence is usally done through a prayer, often at a prayer bench, and usually with a pastor or counselor who helps walk the person through it. Sometimes it is a short and simple time, and other times it can be emotional. After repentance and conversion, there is of course discipleship. New converts learn the ways of holiness, as well as the Christian disciplines of prayer, Bible study, witnessesing, etc. And chances are, within the next few weeks or so, s/he will have an opportunity to follow the Lord in water baptism.

Edited September 30, 2009 by prisonchaplain

[Traveler]

A question PC.

You just learned that you have been accepted into the Harvard Business School. You are pondering the possibilities and you would really like to go to Harvard but there is no way you could pay for the tuition let alone other expenses to go back to school. A friend of yours comes to you and offers to pay all expenses if you will promise to work for him when you finish but there is one other stipulation. The friend ask that you not indulge in pornography. Since you are not involved in pornography you accept his terms.

If there are any terms what-so-ever; can you honestly say that his offer is a “free” gift?

By being loyal to the terms; do you earn your opportunity to go to Harvard? If I were to tell you that you should not brag about not indulging in pornography that in reality the “redemption” of your expenses was really a gift – would I be basically telling the truth? Would I be literally correct?

The Traveler

Edited October 1, 2009 by Traveler

[Justice]

"Saved for the work" simply means God saved me, and now I am empowered to serve Him. It is the cleansing of my sins, and the infilling of the Holy Spirit that enable me to live holy and do righteous.

You got some amens from some Protestant participants.

My question reamins...

If God saved you with no action of your own, and it is totally His work in you, then why aren't you perfect?

God is capable of making man perfect.

But, unless a man chooses it for himself, God will not force anyone to be perfect. So, the man must do something to become perfect or he will not become. God will not force man; He even doesn't when He saves him.

[Justice]

Well, I was commenting on your example of a shower and specifically your comment that we don't have to do anything.

Were you describing someone else's beliefs other than yours?