Changes to John 3:16

[prisonchaplain]

What evangelicals sense in these discussions (and may here will balk at this) is that LDS teaching results in "outcome based salvation." We earn our salvation through performance. What we ideally strive for is a love relationship with God, through Christ's atonement. While we agree good works will flow from this relationship, our focus is not on garnering an acceptable work rating, but on our partnership with God. Further, any good works we do, we see as giving glory to God, not assuring that we make it into God's kingdom.

We know we have to behave, but, per 1 Cor. 13, when we mature, doesn't our focus change? Kids often try to figure out how to satisfy their parents. But, by late adolescence the relationship changes. Parents become life coaches, rather than drill instructors. Shouldn't our growth with God be likewise?

[Vort]

What evangelicals sense in these discussions (and may here will balk at this) is that LDS teaching results in "outcome based salvation." We earn our salvation through performance.

I don't like this way of looking at it, since I think it emphasizes the wrong things. But if you (not specifically you, PC) want to look at it in these terms, it's no different with larger traditional (or Evangelical) Christianity. You still have to "accept Christ" to gain the blessings of the atonement; ergo, you have to earn it, since you still have to do something.

At this point, it becomes a word game. I am fully aware that philosophy itself is really just a discussion of word definitions. Nevertheless, when some condemn Latter-day Saints for believing in "earning salvation", it's downright disingenuous for those same people then to hold that one must "affirmatively accept Christ", yet claim that they and they alone are preaching the true ideal of salvation without works. In other words, if following the commandments constitutes "works", then so does "affirmatively accepting Christ".

[Traveler]

What evangelicals sense in these discussions (and may here will balk at this) is that LDS teaching results in "outcome based salvation." We earn our salvation through performance. What we ideally strive for is a love relationship with God, through Christ's atonement. While we agree good works will flow from this relationship, our focus is not on garnering an acceptable work rating, but on our partnership with God. Further, any good works we do, we see as giving glory to God, not assuring that we make it into God's kingdom.

We know we have to behave, but, per 1 Cor. 13, when we mature, doesn't our focus change? Kids often try to figure out how to satisfy their parents. But, by late adolescence the relationship changes. Parents become life coaches, rather than drill instructors. Shouldn't our growth with God be likewise?

The question is – is there any eternal consequence for a “believer” doing or not doing the will of G-d. Specifically is there any consequence, ever, should a “believer” not keep the commandments? My initial reaction is “Dah” of course there is. How is it possible for someone to know the Christ and not realize that there are indeed consequences, especially for a believer to be obedient to G-d?

How can someone even think they want to live in heaven with G-d, if keeping the commandments is not a “necessary” priority for them, if for nothing else to really believe that the will of G-d is actually a desirable thing for them?

But let us take a specific example. Can we agree that salvation requires redemption of sin? Can a person not be forgiven of their sins by G-d and still have salvation? Does G-d require that a person forgive others of trespasses before G-d will forgive them? (Mark 11:26) Therefore, with such consideration, do we earn salvation in any part by forgiving others their trespasses? Are there eternal consequences for not forgiving others? Of course there are.

Continuing with this thought – let us ask ourselves this question. Is it possible to believe in Christ, that Christ did pay (die) for all sins and so believing how can we not forgive others of their sins? If a person is not able to forgive others of their sins is it not true that they could not possibly believe that Christ had paid for those sins. Therefore we know that not only are we free of our sins in Christ but of the sins of others that affect us but are never-the-less, overcome for us through Christ and our believing in Christ?

Now, should we think we understand that Christ paid for sins we are a liar if we do not keep the commandment to forgive others their trespasses. Do we earn forgiveness by forgiving or by believing in Christ? Such a question has no choice in an answer because it is not a between the two but an understanding that both are one in the same; believing in Christ is doing the works of forgiveness as he has commanded us. And so it is with all the commandments. Believing in Christ is keeping the commandments.

Now the question is – are we “perfect” in keeping the commandments? Yes we are – we are just as perfect in believing in Christ as we are in keeping his commandments. The two are inseparably connected. Should we ever desire to enlarge our belief in Christ or to increase his spirit in us that we learn more of him; we do so through learning and keeping his commandments. This is the “good news” of Christ. That all can come unto him, learn of him by keeping his commandments. We can only know Christ by keeping his word which can only be accomplished by keeping his commandments. It is impossible to focus on one and not the other.

The truth is that keeping the commandments is necessary and has eternal consequence.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

I don't like this way of looking at it, since I think it emphasizes the wrong things. But if you (not specifically you, PC) want to look at it in these terms, it's no different with larger traditional (or Evangelical) Christianity. You still have to "accept Christ" to gain the blessings of the atonement; ergo, you have to earn it, since you still have to do something.

Yes, that's true. And, we guess, millions, if not billions, will refuse to do so. But, what are we doing? Nothing and everything. Accepting a gift is hardly earning it. That just seems silly. On the other hand, accepting the gift means submitting to God, and allowing him to change everything.

We do not speak of lottery winners as people who earned their money. They had to receive it. They may even have traveled to pick the money up. And, they must accept the consequences. Their lives change forever. Nevertheless, we say they won the lottery--not that they earned their millions. How much more for believers in Christ, who didn't even buy lucky tickets?

At this point, it becomes a word game. I am fully aware that philosophy itself is really just a discussion of word definitions. Nevertheless, when some condemn Latter-day Saints for believing in "earning salvation", it's downright disingenuous for those same people then to hold that one must "affirmatively accept Christ", yet claim that they and they alone are preaching the true ideal of salvation without works. In other words, if following the commandments constitutes "works", then so does "affirmatively accepting Christ".

And I know that in practice, most active Saints would speak joyfully of their relationship with God. Heavenly Father leads, guides, encourages, protects, etc. Yet, in these grace/works conversations, there is this reversion to the performance-for-favor motif.

[Misshalfway]

Can God save us without our consent? Can he save us without our obedience? In my mind, receiving the gift is obedience or repentance. Disobedience or sin in chucking the gift out the window or at least deciding to live on our own without the grace of Christ.

[Misshalfway]

The gift of the Atonement can only be realized thru the partnership of grace and faith. It's a two way meeting of the minds. Can Christ save us or change us or clean us without our consent? Without our participation in the process? No. And is our entire nature changed just because we are converted? No. We are made clean and new as if we were literally born again. Then we learn to live a new life his way. It is our will that we exchange thru faith for His will and his will includes the obeying of commandments. Yes there is grace. Infinite grace. But it is not thru grace alone. Grace alone would require nothing of us. It is grace thru faith and that in and of itself is obedience. Why draw a line where obedience should end? As if only a portion of obedience is necessary. Christ will cleanse us and make us his IF we commit to do it his way.....not our own and if we give our whole hearts and lives to Him. I think it is important too that Christ changes us thru obedience. He helps us develop the divine nature thru obedience. And it is going the distance inside that covenant relationship that makes all the difference in the world in terms of exhaltation or living with God again after this life. It isn't about earning at all. Its about covenants and the exchanging our will for the gift. It is the required sacrifice to obtain the gift. It's not the firstlings of our flocks anymore...but the breaking of our hearts and wills that is required. That is faith. That is committment. That is the essence of making a covenant with God.

Edited October 26, 2009 by Misshalfway

[Traveler]

Good points - I submit that it is possible and only possible through the grace of Christ that fallen man is allowed to even know of the commandments and that without a belief in Christ and his spirit there is no keeping his commandments.

Therefore any belief that keeping the commandments of Christ is not necessary must be disconnected with a real and enduring belief in Christ which connects us with his grace. Those that see faith and works as separate issues are disconnected from the truth that in Christ there is not one without the other. But the most important that should come out of this decision is that keeping the Commandments has eternal consequences. Those that disconnect keeping the commandments from salvation are disconnected as to what salvation is and what determines our “Treasures in Heaven”.

There are eternal consequences because of the grace of G-d and there are eternal consequences should we keep or not keep the commandments of G-d. If there is another view concerning the commandments please explain to me how being disobedient to the commandments is not “Turning” against G-d and why or the logic behind the idea that keeping the commandments has no eternal consequence.

My understanding is that the LDS teach and hold that the keeping the commandments has eternal value and consequence.

If keeping the commandments is not necessary – then what value or purpose are they?

The Traveler

[cleanvisit]

Wow, this has also been a pretty complex discussion. The answer to this question, once again, in my humble opinion, is very simple. Ask God. Pray to Him and ask Him. Come prepared with exactly what you want to know and then "work" out the answer for yourself.

I have done this. I know it works. And when I see discussions of "faith vs. works" my immediate reaction is to jump in on the debate/discussion/sometimes an argument and "prove my point" by quoting scriptures, using analogies, etc.

Now, however, I have a more tempered reaction. I realize that this question is more simply understood when it is asked to Heavenly Father.

I know, my answers are sometimes too simple; however, I strongly believe that this is how God wants us to understand His doctrines and teachings.

Try praying and asking God yourself. Expect an answer. Do not let personal predispositions or bias interfere and you will be surprised at the inspiration, insight, and spiritual clarity The Holy Ghost will provide.

[lattelady]

Traveler,

Issues of forgiveness and and salvation--as I understand scripture, I receive both of those through confession. 1) Forgiveness "If we confess our sin, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sin, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9 2)salvation "If we CONFESS with our mouths Jesus is Lord, and BELIEVE in our hearts that God raised Him from the dead, we will be saved. For it is with our hearts that we believe and are justified, and it is with our mouths that we confess and our saved." Rom. 10:9&10

I read your response to my last post and sought to understand it. I especially sought to understand your thoughts and views on "born-again" beliefs--that "salvation to them is 100% selfish." I confess that I don't understand where you're coming from in this regard, and your views seem to generalize people ("born-agains") as "extremely self-centered", "selfish" and unChristlike. I suppose I see how it's easy to predetermine things about others through posts on the internet.

It is true that fanatics and people who are judgemental, proud, holier-than-thou, etc. exist in every religious institution. But whatever your thoughts are on the "B-A's" (born-agains) :) , I hope you can hear me out for who I am, and what my beliefs are.

My salvation is not 100% selfish (because of my beliefs about salvation, there isn't even a percentage with which to rate it), because it's not AT ALL about what Lattelady can do--it's all about what God chose to do for me when I was helpless and in need of a savior. My relationship with God is Christ-centered--it's focused on what HE did for me (for the whole world)- my praise, my worship is directed solely to Jesus, for who He is and what He has done. I don't think that's selfishness; I owe Him my life! How am I going to boast in that? What did I do to deserve that? What praise or glory could I steal for what only a perfect and Holy One could do? I do believe that in place of my shame, Jesus gave me His righteousness when I trusted in Him. But again, that's a work of GOD in my life, not anything I could get for myself. No praise or glory for Lattelady there either! In the words of one of my favorite songs: "You are my strength when I am weak, You are the treasure that I seek, You are my All in All. Seeking You as a precious jewel, Lord to give up I'd be a fool, You are my All in All. Jesus, Lamb of God, worthy is your Name. Taking my sin, my cross, my shame, rising again I bless Your name, You are my All in All; and when I fall down you pick me up, when I am dry You fill my cup, You are my All in All."

He is my EVERYTHING--and I gladly serve Him with my life! I find everything I need IN HIM--but tell me, how is that selfish?

Edited October 26, 2009 by lattelady

[Misshalfway]

Latte....none of us can get salvation ourselves. The idea that LDS people believe in earning salvation is erroneous.

Do you understand what I am talking about with regards to covenants? It seems that you do understand this in part. His part is the gift of rebirth, and our part is the faith. When you say that you will serve him with your life...that is what all of us feel. How do we serve him? We keep his commandments.

I think the only real difference in our belief systems is that we not only believe but we commit to believe thru covenant. We believe that his way is better than our way and that we will live our lives his way in exchange for his grace filled redemption. This expression of faith is basically a commitment to obedience.

It seems to me that most of traditional Christianity perhaps misunderstood the Lord when he fulfilled the law of Moses. He didn't do away with covenants. He only raised them to a higher law.

Edited October 26, 2009 by Misshalfway

[lattelady]

Misshalfway, the issue of covenants is where we will disagree--understand though, I'm not condeming you! Your beliefs are yours, and my beliefs are mine--both of us believe very strongly, and hold to our faiths, and live a certain way because of our faith.

I ABSOLUTELY believe that when Christ came and died He fulfilled the Law and that we are NO LONGER UNDER THE LAW. I believe I am no longer under the law. I don't believe Jesus raised the old covenants to a higher law. I believe that He IS the New Covenant--His blood that was shed for me and you and the whole world holds out the potential for a New Covenant for anyone who accepts it--ETERNAL LIFE. And does that mean that since the Law is abolished that we should just live however we want since we're no longer under the Law? If you read Romans 6, that's what the whole chapter is about! It says, "May it never be!"

[Justice]

both of us believe very strongly, and hold to our faiths, and live a certain way because of our faith.

Could you claim to believe very strongly if you did not "live a certain way?"

Could you claim to have faith if you did not "live a certain way?"

We really are saying the same things, Lattelady. :)

C'mon... you can say it... "I have to keep His commandments if I truly love Him."

"If I don't keep His commandments then I don't love Him."

C'mon, you can do it!

If you make those 2 statements you'll be quoting scripture!

:)

This is what it means to believe (accept) that Jesus Christ is the Son of God... that you know and love Him. If you do not at least believe you have to keep His commandments then how can you say you believe He is God?

I think it's a mater of semantics. You must believe you have to keep His words if you believe He is God. Anything else just doesn't make sense.

[Misshalfway]

Misshalfway, the issue of covenants is where we will disagree--understand though, I'm not condeming you! Your beliefs are yours, and my beliefs are mine--both of us believe very strongly, and hold to our faiths, and live a certain way because of our faith.

I ABSOLUTELY believe that when Christ came and died He fulfilled the Law and that we are NO LONGER UNDER THE LAW. I believe I am no longer under the law. I don't believe Jesus raised the old covenants to a higher law. I believe that He IS the New Covenant--His blood that was shed for me and you and the whole world holds out the potential for a New Covenant for anyone who accepts it--ETERNAL LIFE. And does that mean that since the Law is abolished that we should just live however we want since we're no longer under the Law? If you read Romans 6, that's what the whole chapter is about! It says, "May it never be!"

Do you understand then, that LDS people do not believe that we "earn" salvation? Can you, in your respect for our beliefs, understand what we are saying when we say it?

And does that mean that since the Law is abolished that we should just live however we want since we're no longer under the Law?

It seems you are agreeing with me without agreeing with me. :) It seems even in this statement you are saying that there is more than belief that is required. That we have an important participation inside the saving process.

Edited October 26, 2009 by Misshalfway

[Misshalfway]

Could you claim to believe very strongly if you did not "live a certain way?"

Could you claim to have faith if you did not "live a certain way?"

We really are saying the same things, Lattelady. :)

C'mon... you can say it... "I have to keep His commandments if I truly love Him."

"If I don't keep His commandments then I don't love Him."

C'mon, you can do it!

If you make those 2 statements you'll be quoting scripture!

:)

This is what it means to believe (accept) that Jesus Christ is the Son of God... that you know and love Him. If you do not at least believe you have to keep His commandments then how can you say you believe He is God?

I think it's a mater of semantics. You must believe you have to keep His words if you believe He is God. Anything else just doesn't make sense.

While I absolutely appreciate the point you are making, I think it is more than semantics. I think there are fundamental doctrinal differences between two platforms of thought. It seems to me that both platforms are often misunderstood by the other.

Edited October 26, 2009 by Misshalfway

[prisonchaplain]

Help me out. Salvation, in the broad sense is already done by Christ. So, in this sense, salvation, in LDS teaching is "not earned." However, entry into the heavenly kingdoms is earned. Especially for the CK, but in some sense, even the others require some level of discipline and control.

In Protestantism, salvation means entry to heaven vs. hell, and is garnered by grace through faith, not works. In the end though, the redeemed Protestant would be expected to live christlike.

Have I summarized correctly?

[Misshalfway]

No. because you are still using the word "earned". If you think that any of us can merit anything of ourselves then you misunderstand LDS doctrine. But to think that God gives gifts and doesn't require anything is faulty too. It's about qualifying for blessings. It's about commitments to God in exchange for blessings. Grace is woven into every part of the process, even in helping us meet the requirements.

[Kawazu]

Help me out. Salvation, in the broad sense is already done by Christ. So, in this sense, salvation, in LDS teaching is "not earned." However, entry into the heavenly kingdoms is earned. Especially for the CK, but in some sense, even the others require some level of discipline and control.

In Protestantism, salvation means entry to heaven vs. hell, and is garnered by grace through faith, not works. In the end though, the redeemed Protestant would be expected to live christlike.

Have I summarized correctly?

Without Christ, there would be no kingdoms for us to enter. Christ opens the door to our Heavenly afterlife; we just have to walk through it.

[prisonchaplain]

No. because you are still using the word "earned". If you think that any of us can merit anything of ourselves then you misunderstand LDS doctrine.

This is very encouraging. And yet, I believe I've misunderstood because other posters here are insisting that salvation must be earned--even to the extreme of saying, "accepting salvation" is earning it--because we have to do something.

But to think that God gives gifts and doesn't require anything is faulty too. It's about qualifying for blessings. It's about commitments to God in exchange for blessings. Grace is woven into every part of the process, even in helping us meet the requirements.

This section is less encouraging to me. I don't "earn," but I am "required" to peform. I don't "earn," but I "commit" as "exchange for blessings." I don't "earn," but I "meet the requirements." Quite frankly all that sounds a lot like I'm earning something.

`.

.0

[Vort]

And yet, I believe I've misunderstood because other posters here are insisting that salvation must be earned--even to the extreme of saying, "accepting salvation" is earning it--because we have to do something.

Yes, PC, I agree, I do think you've misunderstood me. Let me try to clarify. My point was as follows:

If you [who believe such things -- not you personally, PC] are going to accuse Latter-day Saints of preaching 'earned salvation', then you yourself must plead guilty to the same charge. If the Latter-day Saint (and Biblical) doctrine of the necessity of obedience to the Lord's commandments constitutes 'salvation by works', then so does the necessity of making 'an affirmative confession of Christ.' It's not a matter of type, only of degree.

[Justice]

Help me out. Salvation, in the broad sense is already done by Christ. So, in this sense, salvation, in LDS teaching is "not earned." However, entry into the heavenly kingdoms is earned. Especially for the CK, but in some sense, even the others require some level of discipline and control.

In Protestantism, salvation means entry to heaven vs. hell, and is garnered by grace through faith, not works. In the end though, the redeemed Protestant would be expected to live christlike.

Have I summarized correctly?

If salvation is already "done by Christ" (meaning eternal life) then all men are saved. Logic will plainly tell us that this is not what Christ's works accomplished because not all will have eternal life. Therefore "saved" in this sense cannot mean eternal life.

If salvation is already "done by Christ" (meaning overcoming physical and spiritual death) then all will stand before God (be brought back into God's presence) and be judged according to their works. If they repented while on earth and sought to live a Christ like life (overcome the natural man--no longer desire the things of the flesh or sin) then they can remain in God's presence.

This means all are brought back into God's presence (something they cannot do on their own... something that was done for them by Christ). So, all are saved from death and hell by Christ. The problem is that if a person did not exercise faith in Christ and keep His commandments, they will be cast out and not inherit eternal life. Yes, they were saved by Christ's works... ALL were saved by Christ's works. But, some will be cast out of God's presence... not because of anything Christ did or didn't do, but because they were not valiant in their testimony of Christ. Only those who belong to Christ will gain eternal life.

[Snow]

What evangelicals sense in these discussions (and may here will balk at this) is that LDS teaching results in "outcome based salvation." We earn our salvation through performance.

And you don't believe that?

Don't evangelicals have to perform - by some combination of:

-Exercising faith in Christ

-Accepting Christ as their savior

-Repenting

-Not being Mormon

-etc???

[Traveler]

Traveler,

Issues of forgiveness and and salvation--as I understand scripture, I receive both of those through confession. 1) Forgiveness "If we confess our sin, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sin, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9 2)salvation "If we CONFESS with our mouths Jesus is Lord, and BELIEVE in our hearts that God raised Him from the dead, we will be saved. For it is with our hearts that we believe and are justified, and it is with our mouths that we confess and our saved." Rom. 10:9&10

I read your response to my last post and sought to understand it. I especially sought to understand your thoughts and views on "born-again" beliefs--that "salvation to them is 100% selfish." I confess that I don't understand where you're coming from in this regard, and your views seem to generalize people ("born-agains") as "extremely self-centered", "selfish" and unChristlike. I suppose I see how it's easy to predetermine things about others through posts on the internet.

It is true that fanatics and people who are judgemental, proud, holier-than-thou, etc. exist in every religious institution. But whatever your thoughts are on the "B-A's" (born-agains) :) , I hope you can hear me out for who I am, and what my beliefs are.

My salvation is not 100% selfish (because of my beliefs about salvation, there isn't even a percentage with which to rate it), because it's not AT ALL about what Lattelady can do--it's all about what God chose to do for me when I was helpless and in need of a savior. My relationship with God is Christ-centered--it's focused on what HE did for me (for the whole world)- my praise, my worship is directed solely to Jesus, for who He is and what He has done. I don't think that's selfishness; I owe Him my life! How am I going to boast in that? What did I do to deserve that? What praise or glory could I steal for what only a perfect and Holy One could do? I do believe that in place of my shame, Jesus gave me His righteousness when I trusted in Him. But again, that's a work of GOD in my life, not anything I could get for myself. No praise or glory for Lattelady there either! In the words of one of my favorite songs: "You are my strength when I am weak, You are the treasure that I seek, You are my All in All. Seeking You as a precious jewel, Lord to give up I'd be a fool, You are my All in All. Jesus, Lamb of God, worthy is your Name. Taking my sin, my cross, my shame, rising again I bless Your name, You are my All in All; and when I fall down you pick me up, when I am dry You fill my cup, You are my All in All."

He is my EVERYTHING--and I gladly serve Him with my life! I find everything I need IN HIM--but tell me, how is that selfish?

Lattelady: I admit to exaggerations in an effort to make a point that you can understand. The reference to self centered salvation is in expecting to get with no commitment to give. Salvation for many born again’s appears to be all about them and what they get. How is that not self centered? There is no personal sacrifice for others as a necessary ingredient to be Christ like – none. There is no personal commitment to others as a necessary ingredient to be Christ like - none. There is no giving as a necessary ingredient to be Christ like - none. It appears to me that you are saying salvation (becoming Christ like) from everything I see you say over and over again is all about getting – there is no necessity for giving – none??? It appears that to you being Christ like that it is necessary to view or understand that Jesus was about getting and not giving. You cannot understand why I am confused that anyone would imply such a thing? What about Jesus convinces you that giving is not necessary to be like him?

How can you say you are a Christian (Christ like) if you do not think or believe that giving is necessary in order to be Christ like (Christian)? What about this question – I have yet to hear you and what you believe about being a Christian. Let me ask the Question in a more broad fashion. Do you believe that there is any consequence for a Christian that does not keep the commandments? Do you think the L-rd is kidding in that he gives commandments that are not necessary for anything?

To your question:

There are issues with ancient scriptures as we have tried to translate those texts into English. Many words do not translate as directly as some wish and even demand. And so we can look at specific text – compare them with other text and determine if our interpretation is worthwhile or not. I submit that how you are interpreting the word “confess” in relationship to confessing sins does not encompass all that Jesus intended that we understand about what is necessary for being forgiven. I point you to Matt 6:12-15 (especially verse 15). I plead with you to be very careful what you may interpret as “confessing” from 1John. It does appear to me something is lost in your understanding of “confess” by your implication that 14 century translation and meaning applied 21st century understanding leaves nothing more to be understood – despite all other scriptures and even words directly from Christ concerning specifically that G-d will not forgive those that do not forgive others. I see your interpretation and intent as un-Christ like.

BTW do you realize that confessing Jesus with your mouth (in public) meant something very different when those words were written 2000 years ago? It was likely to get you killed and yet I see born again types implying that confessing Christ today in a “church” congregation admits cheers and praises demonstrates is the same thing and the same commitment to Christ. Again I think you should be careful not to imply such a thing.

So I end this post with the understanding that as far as you are concerned that you really believe that Jesus taught his followers that it was not necessary to keep the commandments and there was no consequence at all in heaven for being deliberately disobedient to the commandments – all this because you believe the commandments to have no eternal relevance at all – ever. Do his commandments matter in eternity?

The Traveler

Edited October 27, 2009 by Traveler

[Traveler]

Help me out. Salvation, in the broad sense is already done by Christ. So, in this sense, salvation, in LDS teaching is "not earned." However, entry into the heavenly kingdoms is earned. Especially for the CK, but in some sense, even the others require some level of discipline and control.

In Protestantism, salvation means entry to heaven vs. hell, and is garnered by grace through faith, not works. In the end though, the redeemed Protestant would be expected to live christlike.

Have I summarized correctly?

When you say expected - what does expected mean? - is there any consequence if a Protestand not live Christ like? I submit that if there is no consequence then your use of "expected" is not real but that there is in reality no expection and no one in heaven really cares.

It appears to me that it is required to be Christ like in heaven and in truth that is why Satan was kicked out -- Because he insisted that being Christ like is not really necessary.

I submit that the truth is that keeping the commandments is a requirement for those that believe in Christ and "expect" to be in heaven.

The Traveler

Edited October 27, 2009 by Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

And you don't believe that?

Don't evangelicals have to perform - by some combination of:

-Exercising faith in Christ

-Accepting Christ as their savior

-Repenting

-Not being Mormon

-etc???

Snow you are a treasure!

I'll up your ante a bit. I just heard a megachurch evangelical minister in my community say, "If you're a liar you can't be a Christian. You can't go to heaven."

So, yes, we do believe that true conversion results in good performance outcomes. However, we see that as the effects of the relationship, rather than a series of standards we bear out of terror that we might not measure up.

And, of course, many LDS, day to day, are the same. You live your lives, do you best to be your best, out of love for Heavenly Father. But these conversations nearly always end with Protestants saying, "It's all grace, and even the works are by God's strength, and to God's merit." LDS say, "You gotta behave, you can't just say you believe, and think that's the end of it." We accuse LDS of pride, and I suppose we come across as irresponsible, and perhaps guilty of a false and self-righteous humility.

So, here's my own humble opinion, bearing in mind I have no testimony of Joseph Smith's ordination by God as a prophet: Luther over-emphasized the depravity of humanity, offering us little hope of victorious living and meritorious service to our LORD. Joseph Smith, in reaction against the glaring potential for flagrant sin and spiritual laziness that the doctrine of Eternal Security could foster, taught so strongly that works were a necessary component of ultimate glorification, that the result has always sounded like "works salvation" to Protestant ears.

[Snow]

Snow you are a treasure!

I'll up your ante a bit. I just heard a megachurch evangelical minister in my community say, "If you're a liar you can't be a Christian. You can't go to heaven."

Which goes along nicely with what I heard in a Calvary Chapel church in So Cal where the pastor said, during a service I attended: "... and not like those liars, the Mormons..."