How True, Trustworthy And Authoritative Is The Bible?

[Ray]

<div class='quotemain'>

Anyone who does not have a testimony of Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, does not know God well enough to know that God authorized Joseph as God’s messenger. Or in other words, by knowing God, and God knowing us, (or by having a personal relationship with God), not only can and do we know things about God from God as we have learned from God, but we also can and do know things about Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, since God can and has told us things that God does know about Joseph. Or in other words, by knowing God, it is and has been easy to find out what God knows about Joseph Smith, by simply asking God. Or in other words, by knowing God, and wanting to know if Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, since nobody knows better than God about whether Joseph was one of God’s prophets, it is better to ask what God knows about Joseph than to ask anybody else… and I’m even including Joseph. And btw, the fact that people say Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, while other people say he wasn’t, while all those people claim to have knowledge about Joseph from God, shows that everybody who claims to have knowledge from God does not truly have knowledge from God… because Joseph either was or wasn’t God’s prophet, and nobody knows better than God. Or in other words, prisonchaplain, if you know God, and God knows you, well enough so that you can and do learn about God from God, rather than by what you only read in the “Bible”, then all you have to do to know if Joseph was one of God’s messenger’s is ask God, because nobody knows better than God about the fact of whether or not Joseph was or was not God’s messenger. And btw, if it isn’t totally clear to you, from all of my other posts, I do know for a fact that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, because I do have that knowledge from God. I’m simply trying to speak on your level to help you know how to know what I know.

To help you understand how non-Mormons perceive such statemements, simply change the bold-faced verbage to something like receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit with the physical evidence of speaking in tongues, as the Spirit gives utterance. It's the way some Pentecostals talk. If you just knew God deeper, hungered for Him more, had your eyes open, your heart ready for the FULL truth. We're not proud, we just know some things, have experienced some things, that you non-Pentecostals haven't.

The difference is, rather than teaching that we had restored the true church, or the true gospel, we spoke of fullness, of a second blessing. We were initially treated badly by the broader church, but we persisted in love, humbled ourselves in the 1940s, joining the National Association of Evangelicals, when many still despised us. Gradually, we've become the second largest segment of Christianity, behind the Catholic Church. (I speak of "schools of thought" not denominations). Indeed, there is some talk of the pentecostalization of many evangelical and conservative churches. They have not taken all our teachings, but they have embraced our worship style, our openness to the presence of God, and they have come to respect our faith.

While the general principle we are discussing can apply to your beliefs as well as mine, I think it might help to avoid speaking in general principles while trying to be more specific.

Or in other words, I can also use the general principle I used, and that you seem to want to use, to suggest that without knowing Paul was authorized by God, as one of God’s prophets, you would never know the truth that Paul taught... which would be more in harmony with how I was using the example of Joseph Smith to suggest that if you don’t know someone is a prophet of God, you know that much less about God.

But I could also use the same general principle to suggest that someone must eat spinach while speaking Piglatin before someone can be a prophet of God, if I sincerely believed those things were necessary before someone can be a prophet of God.

Or in other words, as I have been saying, if you want to know if Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, you should simply ask God, which should be a simple thing for someone who claims that they know or want to know God.

And btw, I am not “bashing” your beliefs. I’m simply saying that general principles don’t always apply to every specific case you can possibly imagine.

[mom_of_jcchlsm]

On the mobilization thing: you know it! Millions of Mormons would literally, get up from their desks and tell their bosses "Sorry, I've gotta go. I might be back, but I don't know for sure if or when. Bye!" -- gather up kids from their schools, grab their 72-hour kits, lock up the house and be out of town in an hour and a half if the prophet said to. And the word would travel fast! Every Ward has a phone chain and if it's important, those who can't be reached by phone will be hunted down in person to pass the message, day or night, around the world. I'll bet I'd get a call within half an hour if something shook up in SLC.

[Ray]

Ray: ...we’re not breaking “fellowship” with you either. We’re simply telling you that you don’t have authority from God to do the work that you're doing, because we know who does have authority from God to do the work that God has given. But keep learning from God and someday you will also know better about all of the work of God.

prisonchaplain: I don't know how you define fellowship, Ray. We can't have communion, baptism, teach lessons, or spend eternity together (I assume you're aiming for the Celestial Kingdom). We may both call ourselves Christians, but I'm not seeing much fellowship here. Dialogue, friendly conversation, good wishes for each other, but not spiritual kinship.

Well then based on that definition of “fellowship”, I guess nobody has full fellowship with other people unless they know and accept as much truth as other people expect them to accept.

Or in other words, we can have communion, baptism, teach lessons, or spend eternity together with you just as soon as we know and accept all the truth you expect us [LDS] to accept.

And btw, to make it simple for me, go ahead and give me a list of everything you expect me to accept before you will extend your full fellowship to me.

Ray: If you really want to know God, <knowing Joseph> should be <high in priority>, because Joseph spoke for God.

prisonchaplain: That is the $64,000 question, isn't it? We Pentecostals have convinced much of the Christian world to at least consider our claims about spiritual gifts, Holy Spirit baptism, faith healing, and a corporate worship that expects the presence of God. The approach of Joseph Smith's disciples was to set up a separate religion, and to declare "general Christians" not to be a part of the true Church. So, you either win over the rest of Christianity to full conversion, or you remain friendly but isolated.

As I suggested by previous example, we are part of your idea of “Christianity” in the same way that the earlier Christians were part of "Judaism".

And btw, it was our Lord who said that the other churches were corrupt, and Joseph simply revealed that knowledge from our Lord to us.

Ray: In this case the messenger claimed to be revealing knowledge that he personally gained from God, and if you know God or really want to know God, you can also know whether the message is from God... by receiving that knowledge from God... after simply Asking God... while remembering that our Lord said that if we Ask we will Receive. And no, I don’t believe we should pull away from people who don’t know God as well as we do, and I am trying to show by example that I believe we should try to help others know what we know.

prisonchaplain: But the bottom-line is that you see 'general Christians' as being in need of conversion. You befriend us, do not shy away from us, because you hope to see us come to the full truth. Again, to draw the distinction, my best friend is a non-Pentecostal Southern Baptist preacher. I'm convinced he'd have greater ministry and peace, and power if he'd embrace the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and seek other gifts as well. Nevertheless, I'd invite him to my pulpit, I'm sure he'd invite me to his--we'd share one another's communions, and we look forward to seeing each other in heaven. We differ on some beliefs, but we have fellowship. We are brothers in Christ.

Yes, “general” Christianity is much the same, while we [LDS] are more “peculiar”.

And btw, I'd love to see you invite one of our [LDS] "preachers" to your pulpit!

Or does the fact that we may not invite you mean you may not invite us?

Ray: So do you believe the religion of “Christianity” is merely an appendage to “Judaism”?

Heh, in a sense that is right, but in another sense they are separate and distinct religions.

prisonchaplain: Well, sure. The Jews expelled the followers of the Way. Nevertheless, the New Testament tells us that we are grafted into the seed of Abraham. We are fulfilling many Old Testament prophecies about how the righteousness God had covenanted with the Jews would eventually be offered to the whole world.

While you may believe those prophecies apply to you, we [LDS] believe they apply to us and the gospel we are sharing… through the Church that has been restored by our Lord in these latter days through many of His authorized servants.

Ray: Or in other words, our Lord called, set apart, and authorized other people to do His work, rather than continuing to teach the corrupt teachers who would not listen to Him.

prisonchaplain: And yet, God still seeks to save his people, the Jews. The gospel was to go first to the Jews...

Yes, and it did, and then when the Jews rejected it, it went to the Gentiles, and from the Gentiles it has and will go back to the Jews through the Church God has restored to this Earth.

Ray: For the reason of “why”, consider what our Lord said about how it’s easier to fill new wine skins, instead of trying to restore the old ones. But that is mere speculation, and it’s not really important to know “why”, as long as we know what our Lord “did” in fact do and what He really wants from us.

prisonchaplain: The "why" is not important to the already convinced/converted--but it is a question many 'general Christians' have. One of the most successful arguments the anti-Mormons use, when addressing general Chrstian audiences, is to recite Joseph Smith's "They're all wrong, all corrupt," line. The New Testament tells us to always have an answer for them that ask...

Okay, then my answer is that it was the will of our Lord, partly because those others wouldn’t listen to Him. Or in other words, our Lord doesn’t have to hold a council with corrupt teachers who profess to know Him, to try to get them to change their beliefs, when He can clearly see that they aren't really trying to know Him, and instead are preaching their own doctrine.

And btw, I gave you an example by showing what our Lord did during His mortal ministry.

prisonchaplain: If faith in Joseph Smith is a prerequisite to knowledge of God, then Joseph Smith de facto becomes on par with Jesus (the one way to the Father, John 14:6).

Ray: Not any more than faith in the apostle Paul and other prophets help us to have actual knowledge from God. And btw, your belief that we should accept only Paul and the other prophets who wrote the Bible is very much like how the ancient Jews believed they should accept only Moses and the other prophets who wrote their texts... while we [LDS] accept more prophets of God who have written more words of God.

prisonchaplain: Mormon honor of Joseph Smith is far beyond what we grant the Apostle Paul. When I become a Christian I do not say, "Jesus has forgiven my sins because of his sacrifice on Calvary, and I believe that Paul was a prophet of God." Faith in the revelations of Joseph Smith is all but a requirement of true Christianity, according to you.

So are you saying that you believe it is "wrong" to honor Paul as a true prophet of God?

Or that it would be wrong to honor Joseph Smith, if you knew he was the prophet through whom God restored the Church to this Earth?

And btw, you’ve been doing well at side-stepping the real issue here, and I will now ask you to simply give me your answer, which you seem to believe every person should give, to the question of whether or not you should accept every prophet of God, and every word of God?

And btw, from past history you can read about in the Bible, you should be able to see that when people who claim to be God’s people no longer accept God’s prophets, who are simply revealing knowledge from God, they will continue to be “cut off” from the “fellowship” of our Lord and His church unless they repent and accept His words.

Or in other words, until you know you should accept the words of Joseph Smith and President Hinckley while knowing they were and are prophets of God, you will continue to cut yourself off from the knowledge God gave and gives us through them.

Or in other words, until you know God well enough to know that what God told those other people is true, you will never know as much as those other people know about God, instead of knowing as much as they know and knew.

[Snow]

Mormon honor of Joseph Smith is far beyond what we grant the Apostle Paul. When I become a Christian I do not say, "Jesus has forgiven my sins because of his sacrifice on Calvary, and I believe that Paul was a prophet of God." Faith in the revelations of Joseph Smith is all but a requirement of true Christianity, according to you.

Okay - so what's your point?

Is it morally wrong that we honor Joseph Smith?

Could someone be a true Christian, in your mind, if they disbelieved the writings of Paul, or John and James and Peter?

Heh, I can only imagine what you thought about Elder Maxwell, Elder Roberts, Hugh Nibley, etc. :)

Or in other words, brother Snow, not all humans speak the same way to each other.

And btw, if you are simply asking me to speak more like you do, I'll simply say "No thank you", while considering one of you to be enough of us. :)

You sound nothing like Elder Maxwell, BH Roberts or Nibly, but when you try to sound all fancy, smamcy intelligent like you suppose they might sound, you just come across as confused and disjointed. Don't try so hard. You're fine the way you are without putt'n on airs.

[prisonchaplain]

Or in other words, I can also use the general principle I used, and that you seem to want to use, to suggest that without knowing Paul was authorized by God, as one of God’s prophets, you would never know the truth that Paul taught... which would be more in harmony with how I was using the example of Joseph Smith to suggest that if you don’t know someone is a prophet of God, you know that much less about God.

An interesting notion. Of course, the Apostle Paul is part of the canon of Scripture. Christian clergy study the Pauline epistles, or the writings of Paul, etc. However, we do not pray for a testimony that Paul was a true prophet of God. In fact, he never claimed to be a prophet, and I do not believe most churches speak of him in that sense.

Perhaps a more apt comparison would be with the Bible itself. There are similarities in the way Mormons speak of Joseph Smith, and the way evangelicals and fundementalists speak of the Bible. The B-I-B-L-E, yes that's the book for me, I stand alone on the Word of God, the B-I-B-L-E--Bible! We speak of God illuminating Scripture to our hearts, of sensing God as we read and meditate on it.

But I could also use the same general principle to suggest that someone must eat spinach while speaking Piglatin before someone can be a prophet of God, if I sincerely believed those things were necessary before someone can be a prophet of God. Or in other words, as I have been saying, if you want to know if Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, you should simply ask God, which should be a simple thing for someone who claims that they know or want to know God. And btw, I am not “bashing” your beliefs. I’m simply saying that general principles don’t always apply to every specific case you can possibly imagine.

Okay, let's cut to the chase. Tell me if I've understood your core bottom-line:

RAY TO PRISONCHAPLAIN: Pray to God and ask Him if Joseph Smith is a prophet of God or not! The Father will tell you in no uncertain terms, if you ask with sincerity and openness.

IF I'm correct here (and even if I'm not, the following explanation will truly help you understand reticent evangelicals), then here is why that prayer is not so easy to pray. In other words:

Why would evangelicals hesitate to simply pray and ask God if the latter day prophecies of Joseph Smith are true or not?

Ray, you actually already answered this question. I wouldn't put in such a "spinach and pig latin" example, but the point is the same. Here's a better example: If a Christian woman wants to marry a non-Christian man, is it okay for her to pray for God's will? After all, she can always witness to him, and win him to Christ after marriage?

No, it's not okay to pray such a prayer. Scripture tells us that Christians are not to enter into marriage with non-Christians, and thus become "unequally yoked." To pray such a disobedient prayer, is to invite the lustful flesh to provide a positive answer.

Likewise, before the evangelical can pray as to whether the BoM, the PoGP, the D&C, President Hinckley, and the CoJCLDS are all true or not, s/he must become convinced a positive answer would not conflict with the truths already gained. If there is a sense that the Triad may conflict with the Bible, that the Mormon distinctives might conflict with General Christian doctrine that I already know is true, and that I know my church is in solid relationship with God, and yet the LDS says it is lacking--I must be brought to the place of probability before I dare utter the prayer.

In the same way, Ray, I doubt you would with openeness and sincerity pray to God whether a Pentecostal distinctive that is nowhere in the LDS theology, is true or not. If Mormonism is true, it would be nonsense to ask about a teaching so "outside the ballpark."

So, before, pressing for the prayer, you must get your listener to the place of saying, "This might all be true...Lord is it?" For general Christians who are not suffering spiritual angst, that's a tall order.

[Ray]

<div class='quotemain'>

Heh, I can only imagine what you thought about Elder Maxwell, Elder Roberts, Hugh Nibley, etc. :)

Or in other words, brother Snow, not all humans speak the same way to each other.

And btw, if you are simply asking me to speak more like you do, I'll simply say "No thank you", while considering one of you to be enough of us. :)

You sound nothing like Elder Maxwell, BH Roberts or Nibly, but when you try to sound all fancy, smamcy intelligent like you suppose they might sound, you just come across as confused and disjointed. Don't try so hard. You're fine the way you are without putt'n on airs.

Heh, I was only trying to say that I write the way that I write, just as other people write as they write, not that I am trying to write or sound like other people by writing the way that I write.

So instead of asking me to change, why don't you try just accepting me as I am?

Huh? Can't you be gracious just a little bit, Snow?

And btw, when I say "And btw", or "Or in other words", I am saying those things for a reason, and it's not because I'm "putt'n on airs".

Or in other words, when I say "Or in other words", I'm simply saying that I'm about to say the same thing I just said "in other words", to help you (or me) tie those thoughts together, while knowing that what I am about to say is simply expressing the same thoughts I just expressed, while simply using "other" words.

And btw, if all that I say helps to help nobody else but me, that is still good enough for me.

And who knows, maybe the point of sharing the gospel with others is simply to help ourselves better express our own thoughts, with the added bonus of sometimes being able to help somebody else.

[Ray]

prisonchaplain,

Please forgive me if I am not interpreting you correctly, but you basically seem to be saying that you see no need to Ask God whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet of God because you are already convinced that the testimonies and evidence against him from other people is sufficient to convince you that it would be foolish to Ask God what God thinks. And that until I, little ole me, or me and a group of other people, who are also only mere mortals, can convince you that there is a very good reason for you to Ask God, you are going to keep the beliefs you have now because you are reasonably convinced that God would agree with the way that you think.

And btw, whether or not I’m right about what you’re actually saying, I still can’t see any good reason to hesitate about Asking God about anything, when you really want to know the truth, because there are many people who can say anything while making it sound convincing, possibly because they really believe what they think, while only God will always tell you the truth.

And btw, I wouldn’t accept anything Paul wrote, or anything anybody else wrote and claimed to be inspired by God, unless I knew for myself that God had actually inspired Paul or other people to write what they wrote… which is the only reason I accept the Bible, and Book of Mormon, and anything else I read anywhere.

Anyway, I think I’ve said all I need to say to you on this issue for now. What and How you choose to believe what you believe is the truth is up to you, and I have given you my advice repeatedly and to the point where I believe you understand what I told you.

[prisonchaplain]

you basically seem to be saying that you see no need to Ask God whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet of God because you are already convinced that the testimonies and evidence against him from other people is sufficient to convince you that it would be foolish to Ask God what God thinks. And that until I, little ole me, or me and a group of other people, who are also only mere mortals, can convince you that there is a very good reason for you to Ask God, you are going to keep the beliefs you have now because you are reasonably convinced that God would agree with the way that you think.

I'm saying I am here to share and learn. However, before I would pray for a testimony about a whole system of beliefs that run on many levels contrary to truths I've already received, I would need to be convinced that the new system is at least probably true. Every time you see a Hindu, a Muslim, a Buddhist, etc., you don't whisper a prayer, "God, am I wrong...are they right?" You'd be spiritually paralyzed if you did so.

Now, Ray, I could, righ now, today--and, in fact probably have--prayed something like, "Lord, I don't think this stuff is right, it goes against much that I have learned, much that I have seen you reveal to me, but if there's anything to it, let me know." But, that's not the prayer I think most Mormons have in mind, when they urge "investigators" to pray if the BoM is true, etc.

And btw, I wouldn’t accept anything Paul wrote, or anything anybody else wrote and claimed to be inspired by God, unless I knew for myself that God had actually inspired Paul or other people to write what they wrote… which is the only reason I accept the Bible, and Book of Mormon, and anything else I read anywhere.

Reason + Revelation + Faith = Testimony

[prisonchaplain]

Well then based on that definition of “fellowship”, I guess nobody has full fellowship with other people unless they know and accept as much truth as other people expect them to accept. Or in other words, we can have communion, baptism, teach lessons, or spend eternity together with you just as soon as we know and accept all the truth you expect us [LDS] to accept. And btw, to make it simple for me, go ahead and give me a list of everything you expect me to accept before you will extend your full fellowship to me.

Ray, are you saying that I do have authority to offer communion, conduct baptisms, teach lessons in your church? Come now. Even by the standards of "progressive Mormons" like Prof. Robinson, we cannot share these ordinances with one another, and we will likely continue to try to convert one another (we meaning the movements).

As I suggested by previous example, we are part of your idea of “Christianity” in the same way that the earlier Christians were part of "Judaism". And btw, it was our Lord who said that the other churches were corrupt, and Joseph simply revealed that knowledge from our Lord to us.

Except that the early Christians never rejected Judaism--the leaders drove them out of the synagogues--again a full generation after the resurrection. If God told Joseph Smith to reject the established churches of the day, he did right. However, from the outsider's viewpoint, the move was unprecedent in biblical or church history. Even Luther was more or less forced out.

Okay, then my answer is that it was the will of our Lord, partly because those others wouldn’t listen to Him. Or in other words, our Lord doesn’t have to hold a council with corrupt teachers who profess to know Him, to try to get them to change their beliefs, when He can clearly see that they aren't really trying to know Him, and instead are preaching their own doctrine. And btw, I gave you an example by showing what our Lord did during His mortal ministry.

And yet, God has you talking to me, Professor Robinson engaging Prof. Blomberg, and many other such dialogues. There is no doubt that most Christians of the 1820s era were not ready to abandon their churches for Joseph Smith's truly radical teachings. However, it rankles non-Mormon Christians to be compared with the Jews of Jesus day, who, you'll remember, declared "His blood be upon us."

[prisonchaplain]

Yes, “general” Christianity is much the same, while we [LDS] are more “peculiar”. And btw, I'd love to see you invite one of our [LDS] "preachers" to your pulpit! Or does the fact that we may not invite you mean you may not invite us?

Well, you've made my point. We might experience friendship and dialogue, but not spiritual fellowship. I think Snow stated this dilemma well: We (LDS) want you Christians to accept us as being Christian too, while we (again LDS) do not believe that you (non-LDS Christians) have authority to carry out Christian ordinances, nor to fully represent Jesus to the world. Ray, how could I invite to my pulpit a speaker who does not even believe I have authority to speak from it myself?

So are you saying that you believe it is "wrong" to honor Paul as a true prophet of God?

Or that it would be wrong to honor Joseph Smith, if you knew he was the prophet through whom God restored the Church to this Earth?

I'm saying that to the non-LDS Christian the manner in which Mormons honor Joseph Smith is greater than what we have seen in the Bible or in church history. Of course, if what Joseph Smith said is true, I suppose you'd have to be right, since none of us have yet recognized him at all.

And btw, you’ve been doing well at side-stepping the real issue here, and I will now ask you to simply give me your answer, which you seem to believe every person should give, to the question of whether or not you should accept every prophet of God, and every word of God?

Question two is easy--yes, Christians should embrace every word of God. Question one strikes me as odd. Jews and non-LDS Christians generally do not speak of "accepting prophets." We accept Jesus, we obey the Word of God. And, I guess that's my simple point. I'm not saying you are wrong, evil, or heretical in your honor of prophets--just pointing out that many non-Mormons will look twice at it. It is unusual to us.

And btw, from past history you can read about in the Bible, you should be able to see that when people who claim to be God’s people no longer accept God’s prophets, who are simply revealing knowledge from God, they will continue to be “cut off” from the “fellowship” of our Lord and His church unless they repent and accept His words.

The bottom-line problem was not the personalities, but the messages. Prophets would preach repentence, warn of coming judgement, call the people away from the worship of idols and false gods. These messages were often rejected, and punishment came. The focus was on the words of God, not the messengers who brought them.

Okay - so what's your point? Is it morally wrong that we honor Joseph Smith? Could someone be a true Christian, in your mind, if they disbelieved the writings of Paul, or John and James and Peter?

If Joseph Smith was a true prophet, then it would be appropriate to honor him. I'm just explaining why non-LDS Christians are somewhat surprised at the level of honor you give him. I would not say it is morally wrong, but rather that it is outside of the usual Judeo-Christian practice, with the possible exception of Catholic veneration of Mary and the Saints.

Your second question poses an odd circumstane. Generally speaking, those who come to faith in Christ are not given, as you have previously pointed out, a doctrinal test. They embrace the reality of their sinful state, cry out to Jesus for forgiveness, and embrace the love and life God offers them.

If in the course of their studies they came to disbelieve major portions of the New Tesament would they still be a Christian? My guess is that they might well walk away from the faith all together in such a circumstance. However, stated in a vacuum, the faith that saves is faith in Christ, not in biblical writers.

[Snow]

Heh, I was only trying to say that I write the way that I write, just as other people write as they write, not that I am trying to write or sound like other people by writing the way that I write.

So instead of asking me to change, why don't you try just accepting me as I am?

Huh? Can't you be gracious just a little bit, Snow?

I can be gracious. I admit that you are right about the fullness of the gospel or at least right in a number of the things you said about it. I thought you would fold and give up on it before I had to concede but you eventually got around to making your point sucessfully.

I just think you sometimes come across as a self-rigtheous know-it-all pedant who doesn't know it all.

[Ray]

Okay, I’ll go one more time through the mill since you still don’t seem to understand what I have been saying.

prisonchaplain: ...before I would pray for a testimony about a whole system of beliefs that run on many levels contrary to truths I've already received, I would need to be convinced that the new system is at least probably true.

Perhaps you could make my point by explaining how you received those truths that you’ve already received, and “who” in fact “convinced” you that those beliefs were true.

For instance, was it by receiving personal revelation from God, line upon line, and precept upon precept, or was it by embracing an entire system of beliefs all at once based upon what some people told you to be true?

And btw, in saying “some people”, I’m including all the people who wrote the Bible, because until you know by personal revelation from God that what those people wrote was actually inspired by God, you are basing your faith in God in what some other people have told you about God, rather than faith you received from God.

prisonchaplain: Every time you see a Hindu, a Muslim, a Buddhist, etc., you don't whisper a prayer, "God, am I wrong...are they right?" You'd be spiritually paralyzed if you did so.

Heh, I don’t learn much of anything by simply seeing “a Hindu, or Muslim, or Buddhist, etc.”, but when I hear from “a Hindu, or Muslim, or Buddhist, etc.”, by reading or listening to what they or anybody else in another religion writes or talks about, I Ask God if there is any truth in what those people are trying to tell me.

And btw, I have actually learned quite a bit about God, and God’s work on this Earth, by learning about how some people in other religions “borrowed” some thoughts that God originally revealed or inspired His people to reveal to other people as they shared what they believed.

prisonchaplain: Now, Ray, I could, right now, today--and, in fact probably have--prayed something like, "Lord, I don't think this stuff is right, it goes against much that I have learned, much that I have seen you reveal to me, but if there's anything to it, let me know." But, that's not the prayer I think most Mormons have in mind, when they urge "investigators" to pray if the BoM is true, etc.

Heh, if you start with the premise that information is not true simply because it seems to go against your current beliefs, your negative approach to the information can actually prevent you from seeing the truth, but if you approach the information with the idea that there might be some truth there, while Asking God to help you see it, you will often find that there is in fact some truth in what most people are saying.

And FYI, even Satan uses half-truths in saying what he says to people, as he mixes some truth with lies.

prisonchaplain: Reason + Revelation + Faith = Testimony

While that equation might look right to you, I see several problems with your formula.

For instance, if all values but Reason were 0, with Reason being the only 1, your testimony would be based on nothing more than Reason.

And btw, faith is simply another word for assurance, so an assurance from God = faith from God = revelation from God = a testimony of God’s assurance to those who receive it. Reason is simply the process of thinking or the explanations we give for believing.

And to tie all of this into what I was telling you before, to know the truth, I suggest that you simply Ask God, while using Reason to think about what you are Asking God about, with the hope (or expectation) of Receiving God’s assurance (or Faith) concerning what God knows to be true, which God can give you through personal Revelation as God assures you of what God knows to be true, at which point you will then have God’s Testimony and what should then be your testimony as you explain your reasoning of what you received to other people.

And btw, this is the last time I’m going to get into this issue with you here, so if you still don’t understand me, I suggest that you keep thinking about what I have already told you while Asking God if there is any truth to what I told you, and what Joseph Smith told you, as you learn more about his testimony from him.

prisonchaplain: …the early Christians never rejected Judaism.

By “Judaism”, I’m referring to the doctrine taught by the Jews during the mortal ministry of our Lord, and the doctrine many Jews are still teaching, in rejection of Jesus Christ as our Savior.

Or in other words, the early Christians rejected Judaism, by rejecting the teachers and priests of Judaism, who rejected Jesus Christ as our Savior.

prisonchaplain: Ray, how could I invite to my pulpit a speaker who does not even believe I have authority to speak from it myself?

Heh, you can invite anybody you want to your pulpit, can’t you? And if you believed some of us (LDS) have authority to preach, perhaps you probably would.

prisonchaplain: Jews and non-LDS Christians generally do not speak of "accepting prophets." We accept Jesus, we obey the Word of God.

But surely you are aware of how our Lord told the Jews (or His people) that they had rejected His prophets, by rejecting the words He gave through them.

And just as the Jews (or His people) thought they had accepted all of God’s prophets, while destroying only the “false” prophets, you only accept and obey some of the words of God because you reject those God gave us through Joseph… and Brigham Young… and President Hinckley… and many of the other prophets God “raised up” after Joseph.

prisonchaplain: The bottom-line problem was not the personalities, but the messages …messages were often rejected, and punishment came. The focus was on the words of God, not the messengers who brought them.

The focus we place on Joseph stems from the faith we have in the words God gave us through Joseph, and we only proclaim that Joseph was a prophet after knowing (or believing) that he actually revealed God’s words. And by rejecting the words of Joseph, you are actually rejecting God, by not knowing (or believing) God inspired him.

prisonchaplain: If Joseph Smith was a true prophet, then it would be appropriate to honor him. I'm just explaining why non-LDS Christians are somewhat surprised at the level of honor you give him. I would not say it is morally wrong, but rather that it is outside of the usual Judeo-Christian practice, with the possible exception of Catholic veneration of Mary and the Saints.

I’ll wait until you know Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and what his work was, before asking what you think about Joseph.

prisonchaplain: Generally speaking, those who come to faith in Christ are not given, as you have previously pointed out, a doctrinal test. They embrace the reality of their sinful state, cry out to Jesus for forgiveness, and embrace the love and life God offers them.

How do you suppose anyone truly knows the reality of their sinful state? … or that Jesus can forgive them? … or that there really is a God who loves them and offers them a better life?

By simply believing the people who preach that information to them, either by speaking or writing some words in a Book?

Is that your idea of how people develop faith in God?

If not, and you truly do know that God lives, and loves you, and that Jesus Christ is our Savior, you must know that in no other way than by having received personal revelation from God to assure you of those truths.

And if you have learned those truths from God, what is stopping you from learning more from God?

prisonchaplain: If in the course of their studies they came to disbelieve major portions of the New Testament would they still be a Christian? My guess is that they might well walk away from the faith all together in such a circumstance. However, stated in a vacuum, the faith that saves is faith in Christ, not in biblical writers.

Good answer. Now apply the faith you have already received to learning more truth from God.

[prisonchaplain]

Note to all lurkers--this post has gotten quite unwieldy and long, so in this particular post I am going to greatly summarize and condense Ray's comments. You may wish to refer to previous posts if you have not done so. Ray, feel free to correct where my summaries have left out important details.

Okay, I’ll go one more time through the mill since you still don’t seem to understand what I have been saying.

I'm glad you're enjoying this as much as we are. :)

Ray asks how I came to know the truths I know (truths that in my view seem to contradict some Mormon doctrines). The short answer is that I learned through teachers, the affirmation and direction of the Holy Spirit, and through my own study of the Holy Bible. Like most Christian converts, belief in the Holy Bible was pretty much a given, once I'd accepted Christ. The Word truly proved sharper than a two-edged sword. As I got older, I had opportunity to "test" my beliefs on the mission field, and later in graduate seminary--where we were trained to "rightly divide the word," rather than simply memorize what our professors had presented.

BTW, Ray, I seem to recall that you are an adult convert to Mormonism, from a Christian movement (Church of Christ, I believe). It might be useful for you to share how you came to the place of questioning the fullness of your general Christian faith.

Ray mentions that it is useful to seek truth wherever it may be found (even non-Christian religions). Well, of course. As a chaplain, I encounter such opportunities daily, and have learned much. It's one thing to pray "Lord, increase my knowledge through today's encounters," and praying, "Lord, am I wrong...is this new revelation right?"

Ray reiterates that it is wise to openly look for truth whereever it may be found. My simple response is that I probably would not hang out here if I didn't see some wisdom to be gained.

prisonchaplain: Reason + Revelation + Faith = Testimony

From Ray's analysis, I figured I'd better offer some details to explain what I mean by the equation. "Reason" is often called "General Revelation," by theologians. It refers to the wonders of nature, the study of religious writings, the analysis of religious arguments and apologetics, the use of 'common sense,' and all other means by which God declares in Romans 1 that "men are without excuse."

Revelation, specifically refers to spiritual or divine revelation. The assurance of the Holy Spirit. That still small voice. The sense of conviction that leads to repentence. That which causes Mormons to recite, "I know that the Church is true, that JS is a prophet..."

Faith is that point of saying, I've observed, I've heard from God, there are still questions, but I believe and receive!"

And btw, this is the last time I’m going to get into this issue with you here, so if you still don’t understand me, I suggest that you keep thinking about what I have already told you while Asking God if there is any truth to what I told you, and what Joseph Smith told you, as you learn more about his testimony from him.

Ray, whether your choose to continue this dialogue, join a different string, or never communicate with me again is up to you. I just pray that the time has been fruitful for you. God bless you and lead you.

Rays says: But surely you are aware of how our Lord told the Jews (or His people) that they had rejected His prophets, by rejecting the words He gave through them.

Ray, you've made my point. The focus was always on the words--the message. The messengers were rejected because of the message that brought.

Ray says that when non-LDS Christians reject the words of JS etc. we are rejecting the prophets of God. Ultimately, the bottom-line question comes down to this: were the messages of the LDS prophets from Joseph Smith on God's words or not?

Ray asks how people come to know they are sinners needing to repent, and ask God to forgive their wrongs, because of Christ's sacrifice at Calvary. Of course, the answer is that the hear the word of God, sense from the Holy Spirit that it is true, probably have had some previous opportunities to rationally grapple with the gospel message, and then they respond in faith. Yes, I believe--I receive God's mercy.

So, asks, Ray, what's to keep anyone from going further, and receiving additional truths that may be out there (i.e. from the LDS)? IF it is true, that God will indeed grow the seed of faith, until the LDS surpasses general Christianity, much as Christians surpassed Judaism. IF the revelations were not true, all bets are off.

[Ray]

prisonchaplain,

You do seem to understand me now, so it seems that I no longer have anything to teach you about “how” to know the truth, but I would like to address another comment you made which you seem to think might help you.

BTW, Ray, I seem to recall that you are an adult convert to Mormonism, from a Christian movement (Church of Christ, I believe). It might be useful for you to share how you came to the place of questioning the fullness of your general Christian faith.

In a nutshell, I’ve always had questions concerning the gospel, while believing there is a LOT to learn, and I think my whole life has prepared me to hear more, about the love I will never earn.

Heh, but instead of writing a book about all of the things I have heard and read and thought about, I’ll begin by recalling the first moment I made contact with members of the Church.

I was 28 years old and working for my Dad in Kingman, Arizona, who was a general contractor. My Dad was also a preacher on Sundays, the full-time minister of “his” church. And btw, his Dad, my Granddad, was also a preacher, with me trying to follow their example.

Anyway, I was then at one of his clients’ house doing some remodeling in the kitchen, and sometime during that day I took a break and browsed around. The house was owner occupied but the owners were out of town, and while looking around I noticed a pile of the same books on top of the fireplace mantle. I was curious to see which book it was so I walked over and opened a cover, and after reading the first few pages I put it down, walked away, came back to take another look, and then flipped to some other place (Alma, I think) which mentions baptism by fire and the Holy Ghost.

And btw, I had never even heard of the “Book of Mormon” before then, and while I had heard and read other stories about angels and ghosts from other people, the description Joseph gave of Moroni stirred a “curious” feeling inside me. And although I didn’t know what I was feeling then, I still can remember that feeling.

And that’s about where I left it until a few days later at the cabinet shop, when I casually started talking about what I had read to someone else who was working there with me. And then after saying something like, “how could somebody possibly believe something like that”, I discovered he was an inactive member who did honestly believe it, and still believed it, as he told me about that feeling, and at that moment I could feel that feeling again, though I still neither believed nor disbelieved those feelings.

And that’s about where I left that, until a few months later when I met a returned missionary from the Church, but at that time I didn’t know that, her mother only telling me she had returned from a mission in Spain.

And btw, I had met and had become acquainted with her mother a while before that, while she had visited several times while visiting her brother and his family in “my” church, or the church where my Dad taught, where I sometimes taught with him.

Anyway, since I hadn’t heard much about missionaries in “my” church before, and she was a pretty young lady, I started asking her some questions to find out what she had done in Spain on her mission. And then she and her family invited me to go to dinner after church, since my Dad and his wife, my stepmother, were away in Alaska at that time, in which case I would have normally eaten with them. But since I was trying to be a good host, while also wanting to hear more from her, while also wanting some dinner, I went with them and sat with her to get to know her better.

And btw, at this point I should also probably tell you that I knew she and her mother were visiting from North Carolina, and I also knew there wasn’t much of a chance of developing a “romantic” relationship with her, for another reason I will explain later.

Anyway, while talking during dinner I discovered she was a member of “another” church, at which point my questions changed to asking her more about “that” church. But there wasn’t time for many questions then because I had to run some errands, so I left while knowing a little about her and a just little bit more about “her” church.

And at this point I should probably tell you that the “Church of Christ” has Sunday morning and evening meetings, and I was pretty sure I’d see her again since her mother and her brother came to all meetings.

And btw, while giving the “sermon” during that meeting, I was particularly impressed with how well she was paying attention to me, and she was even taking notes.

After the evening service, I continued to talk with her with a “friendly” feeling, when she then invited me to go have ice cream with her family after church, during which time we talked some more, and were just beginning to get warmed up, when she invited me to their house so we could continue the conversation.

And btw, at this time I should probably tell you that her mother also had a house in that city, as well as a house in North Carolina, and with her mother and everyone else at her mother’s brother’s house we were free to discuss issues without concern for stirring up “unfriendly” feeling from her mother’s brother, who didn’t agree and was openly against the teachings of “her” church.

Anyway, during those conversations, I began to come up with some really “serious” questions, about “the” Church and related issues, for which she had some answers, which then led us into discussions which lasted until a little after midnight, when I decided that I should probably leave. And then at that time she gave me a Book of Mormon, so that I then had my own copy, which I continued to read and ponder and pray about both during and after our meetings.

And btw, all of this also occurred about 2 weeks before I was going to be moving from Kingman, Arizona, to Gresham, Oregon, a suburb of Portland, and by the time of my move I had met with missionaries in the Church in that area, and one had a companion who had recently returned to his home in Gresham, and gave me his name and number, who I then contacted after my move to get his help with meeting other missionaries in this area, with whom I continued to have discussions.

And btw, by that time I had already discovered that the Book of Mormon is true, that Joseph Smith had to be a prophet, by default, and that the Church had actually been restored in these latter days, as foretold by the prophets who wrote the Bible. All of which I still know to be true, while I have learned other things, through the power of the Holy Ghost.

And btw, I drove through Salt Lake City on the way to Gresham and stopped by the temples in Las Vegas, St. George, and Salt Lake City, telling my family about all these things as soon as I got the chance to see them, and as of yet they still don’t believe it.

Oh, one more thing. I was moving up here to go to Columbia Christian college, a college affiliated with the Church of Christ, where I was planning to study to become a preacher, with full tuition and living expenses paid by my family as I lived with my Grandmother who lived in Gresham, while also being near by brother who lives in this area too... who took me in for a while until I could get on my feet, since my Grandmother no longer felt comfortable using her husband's pension money to support me, since my Granddad had earned all of that money from "their' church, which I no longer supported.

Heh, and btw, that is not a sad story, because I knew I was doing the right thing... although I would have preferred and still hold out hope that my family will join "the" Church too.

[Snow]

Your second question poses an odd circumstane. Generally speaking, those who come to faith in Christ are not given, as you have previously pointed out, a doctrinal test. They embrace the reality of their sinful state, cry out to Jesus for forgiveness, and embrace the love and life God offers them.

I reject that assertion out of my experience with internet Christians, typically evangelical.

When asked what a Mormon would have to do to to become a "true Christian" the answer goes something like this: stop believing that Joseph Smith was a prophet, accept that salvation is by faith alone, and accept the creeds and councils view of the Trinity... in other words, a doctrinal test.

[prisonchaplain]

<div class='quotemain'>

Your second question poses an odd circumstane. Generally speaking, those who come to faith in Christ are not given, as you have previously pointed out, a doctrinal test. They embrace the reality of their sinful state, cry out to Jesus for forgiveness, and embrace the love and life God offers them.

I reject that assertion out of my experience with internet Christians, typically evangelical.

When asked what a Mormon would have to do to to become a "true Christian" the answer goes something like this: stop believing that Joseph Smith was a prophet, accept that salvation is by faith alone, and accept the creeds and councils view of the Trinity... in other words, a doctrinal test.

We are comparing two vastly different situations here. You must be aware of how "the altar call" is given at most evangelical churches. After the pastor's sermon, which probably included some discussion about all of us being sinners, all needing to repent, and that faith in Jesus can bring forgiveness we need. Then the charge is given: If you want to be a Christian today. If you want God to forgive your sins, because of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection...Come forward, let's pray the sinner's prayer together! Following the prayer, those who come are congratulated on their new life in Christ.

What you have done is quite different. You've laid out your Mormon beliefs, including the Restoration of the gospel. Then you've asked, "What must I do to be a Christian in your eyes?" Well, if I were asked that, and my sense is that you wanted to be sure, absolutely sure...and I wanted to be fully confident of my answer, I'd probably say: The safest route would be to reexamine your current beliefs. If you would have full fellowship with us, they are not compatible with ours. You'd have to choose between us and Joseph Smith, cause either he's right or we are.

Bottom-line: If there is a "doctrinal test," I suppose it would initially be to accept the message of the Good News. New converts may have no concept of the Holy Trinity. However, as they come into the community of faith, and hear of it, hear of our teachings about heaven, hell, the Bible, etc. they will generally either accept the teachings or leave the church. Should they leave, we can only hope they find a fellowship that might more clearly explicate the truths of God precept upon precept.

So, is there a doctrinal test to salvation or not? Well, the gospel means rejecting the old life and embracing the new. It means chosing to follow God. If that is to happen in the evangelical community of faith, it will likely mean that EX-____ (be they Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, or some other religion all together) not only embrace new teachings, but abandon some old ones that run contrary.

[prisonchaplain]

In a nutshell, I’ve always had questions concerning the gospel, while believing there is a LOT to learn, and I think my whole life has prepared me to hear more, about the love I will never earn.

Thank you for sharing your testimony, Ray. An important truth we can all learn from your story is that spiritual questions should be encouraged and grappled with, not suppressed and discouraged as "not faith-promoting."

[Snow]

We are comparing two vastly different situations here. You must be aware of how "the altar call" is given at most evangelical churches. After the pastor's sermon, which probably included some discussion about all of us being sinners, all needing to repent, and that faith in Jesus can bring forgiveness we need. Then the charge is given: If you want to be a Christian today. If you want God to forgive your sins, because of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection...Come forward, let's pray the sinner's prayer together! Following the prayer, those who come are congratulated on their new life in Christ.

What you have done is quite different. You've laid out your Mormon beliefs, including the Restoration of the gospel. Then you've asked, "What must I do to be a Christian in your eyes?" Well, if I were asked that, and my sense is that you wanted to be sure, absolutely sure...and I wanted to be fully confident of my answer, I'd probably say: The safest route would be to reexamine your current beliefs. If you would have full fellowship with us, they are not compatible with ours. You'd have to choose between us and Joseph Smith, cause either he's right or we are.

Bottom-line: If there is a "doctrinal test," I suppose it would initially be to accept the message of the Good News.

I don't think it a different matter at all. We can go to some "Christian" message boards and verify this - Rapture Ready, Christian Forums, a Baptist site I visited - This is how the discusion always goes.

What must I do to be saved?

--Repent, accept Christ, have faith.

That's it?

--Yes that's it.

You're sure?

---Absolutely sure.

Good, cuz I am LDS and I already did that - so I'm good to go, right?

...and here's where it gets all squirrelly... The stupid ones says something like:

---Oh, well in that case you must 1. reject Joseph Smith, 2. accept non-scriptural creeds of the trinity, and 3, reject the necessity of obeying God.

The clever ones, or the ones that have observed the clever ones say something like...

---Well you're not saved because you believe in the wrong Jesus.

Which of course completely insane because we all know there is only one Jesus in question. Here even the clever ones get stuck when you correctly point out it is not a different Jesus, it is just that we believe that Jesus has different attributes then what they believe. At about this time, the dishonest ones start to show themselves by making all sorts of absurd allegations, changing their story, equivacating, obfuscating, but in short, it always comes down to a doctrinal test. It is a matter of faith PLUS correct understanding of doctrine that is required.

Granted, most Christians are dishonest bigots, but the vocal evangelicals that fit this pattern are all over the internet.

[prisonchaplain]

I don't think it a different matter at all. We can go to some "Christian" message boards and verify this - Rapture Ready, Christian Forums, a Baptist site I visited

I knew it! Snow's been slumming

- This is how the discusion always goes: What must I do to be saved? --Repent, accept Christ, have faith. That's it? --Yes that's it. You're sure? ---Absolutely sure. Good, cuz I am LDS and I already did that - so I'm good to go, right? ...and here's where it gets all squirrelly... The stupid ones says something like: ---Oh, well in that case you must 1. reject Joseph Smith, 2. accept non-scriptural creeds of the trinity, and 3, reject the necessity of obeying God. The clever ones, or the ones that have observed the clever ones say something like...---Well you're not saved because you believe in the wrong Jesus.

Which of course completely insane because we all know there is only one Jesus in question. Here even the clever ones get stuck when you correctly point out it is not a different Jesus, it is just that we believe that Jesus has different attributes then what they believe. At about this time, the dishonest ones start to show themselves by making all sorts of absurd allegations, changing their story, equivacating, obfuscating, but in short, it always comes down to a doctrinal test. It is a matter of faith PLUS correct understanding of doctrine that is required.

If we changed that key punchline of yours, let's see how it would play out. "Good, because I am MUSLIM and I already did that - so I'm good to go right?

Well, you must reject MUHAMMED, accept the "non-Scriptural creeds of the Trinity, and 3. reject the necessity of obeying God.

OR: Well, you're not saved because you believe in the wrong Jesus.

But we do believe in the same Jesus in the Bible, we just believe Jesus has different attributes.

So the dilemma of how evangelicals are to perceive Christian sects with very divergent beliefs is akin to our struggle with an obviously different religion--but one that also has Abrahamic origins, is monotheistic, and accepts much of what we teach about Jesus. Anyone figuring that Muslims will soon be embraced as spiritual family by the National Association of Evangelicals? Nah...probably not.

So, once again, what is required for salvation? 43% of Mormons passed Barna's fairly detailed "doctrinal" test of salvation itself. You're real question is, are Mormons "born again," "saved" "going to heaven" according to evangelicals? We are sometimes asked the same about Catholics.

My obfuscation is: I hope so. I'm not comfortable saying I think so, and cannot say I know so. Without judging the right/wrong nature of them, the Mormon plan of salvation, understanding of the attributes of God & Jesus, approach to Scripture and prophecy, and, of course, the reservation of the Celestial Kingdom primarily for LDS, all run so contrary to evangelical understanding.

Perhaps Ray is right. As we live life, dialogue with one another, do our own study, and seek the direction of our God, the Holy Spirit will illumine our paths. At some point we will know that we know that we are either proceeding properly, or are in need of change. Either the "born again Mormon" or the "god-hearted evangelical" will be convicted in their spirits, and begin to move the other direction.

On the other hand, the spiritually self-righteous, the modern day Pharisee will not change, and will not ever "know" they are wrong, because they were never really right. Jesus never knew them.

[Guest MrsS]

So, once again, what is required for salvation? 43% of Mormons passed Barna's fairly detailed "doctrinal" test of salvation itself. You're real question is, are Mormons "born again," "saved" "going to heaven" according to evangelicals?

PC, what is your definition of "born again", "saved", "going to heaven" ?

Born Again: Mine is that I have realized that I wanted to live a righteous life, walk with Christ. I have acknowledged my sins, and between myself, Jesus Christ and my Bishop ~ worked at repentance of those sins. I was baptized by full immersion for the remission of those sins, and I received the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands by those with authority. This is in accordance with the teachings of Christs ancient church as it states in the Bible.

Saved: By living according to the commandments that God, through and of Jesus Christ have given us through His prophets; the ancient prophets and living prophets; by repenting of those sins that I shall continue to commit on a near daily basis, by attending Church regularly, particiating in the Sacrament, by accepting and fulfilling my callings to the best of my ability. I will be that much closer to the Celestial Kingdom.

It is my understanding that everyone ends up in Heaven. Or am I mistaking Heaven with resurrection? Everyone who has been born of mortal body will be resurrected, irregardless of whether they have accepted God, Jesus Christ or not. I have always thought that Heaven and the Spirit World were one and the same.

The telestial, terrestial and celestial kingdoms are different ~ these places are where the righteous will live after the second coming of Christ.

Thus said: I am a Christian. I believe in Christ, I honor Christ, I worship Christ; Jesus Christ.

Thus said: I am a member of: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

[prisonchaplain]

PC, what is your definition of "born again", "saved", "going to heaven" ?

MrsS, welcome to this string. At this point in a rather lengthy discussion, we're dealing with the dilemma that Mormons, on the one hand, insist that they are Christians--and would have other Christians recognize them as such--and, on the other hand, do not recognize the authority of non-LDS Christians to represent Christ in a true and complete manner. SNOW raises the question: If evangelicals believe that salvation is by faith, not works, and by the grace of God, then why do they question Mormon salvation? So, to your questions (answers being from an evangelical, not LDS, perspective):

Born Again = ACCEPT Jesus as Lord and Savior, BELIEVE Jesus saves us because of his death, burial, and resurrection, CONFESS our sins, and ask God to forgive us because of Jesus. As the earlier post you responded to stated, 43% of Mormons who responded to a Barna questioneer, indicated they had done all of this.

"Saved" is another term for born again. Although, it can also have the understanding of "enduring to the end." Mormons tend to emphasize the life of salvation, which causes misunderstanding amongst evangelicals, who perceive such talk as works-salvation.

"Going to heaven" = Succesfully enduring to the end, and hearing the words from Jesus, "Well done, good and faithful servant, enter into my kingdom."

It is my understanding that everyone ends up in Heaven. Or am I mistaking Heaven with resurrection? Everyone who has been born of mortal body will be resurrected, irregardless of whether they have accepted God, Jesus Christ or not. I have always thought that Heaven and the Spirit World were one and the same. The telestial, terrestial and celestial kingdoms are different ~ these places are where the righteous will live after the second coming of Christ.

To quote the stereotypical country preacher, "It's heaven or hell, sister!" Evangelicals, and indeed nearly all of non-LDS Christianity understand the "many mansions" of John's gospel to refer to the housing that's available. There's more than enough room for "whosever will." We do not understand them as referring to different heavenly kingdoms.

The way to heaven, and to the Father, then, is only through Jesus. John 14:6

What Snow asks is, do evangelicals believe that Mormons who pass the "born again test" get into heaven, or is there a doctrinal test? And, if there is a doctrinal test, is salvation really by faith and grace?

Thus said: I am a Christian. I believe in Christ, I honor Christ, I worship Christ; Jesus Christ.

Thus said: I am a member of: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Please understand that the following is no comparison--but simply to make a point. There is a religious organizaton called The Church of Jesus Christ Christian. We would consider it a heresy, as it is part of Christian Identity (so-called Christian White Supremacists). So, name alone does not impress.

Furthermore, as I pointed out to Snow, Muslims believe in Jesus. They highly honor him. They believe he was born of a virgin. They pray to the same God of Abraham we do. They live spiritually disciplined lives. And, my understanding is that most Mormons would guess that faithful Muslims will indeed end up in the Terrestial Kingdom.

BUT, for evangelicals, with one heaven and one hell, the solution is not so simple. These same folk who are devout, and who worship the Father, deny that Jesus is the Son of God, or that God has a son at all. Furthermore, they declare that anyone who believes that Jesus is the Son of God, or is God, is an infidel--an unbeliever. So, though they honor Jesus, have they found the one way, truth, and life, that Jesus declared himself to be? Evangelicals would say, NO.

Mormons present another dilemma. Yes, Jesus is divine, but so is Lucifer (though he went astray). So are we all, in that we are immortal backwards and forwards. Also, to a lesser extent than Muslims, Mormons also view evangelicals as deficient, as part of UNRESTORED Christianity.

So, MrsS, we all have our testimonies, and those things which we know. We also continue to dialogue with open hearts and minds, to hear and learn whatever God may have for us. Those who sincerely seek God will be open to whatever he might reveal that is new, different, or simply of greater light. B)

[Snow]

If we changed that key punchline of yours, let's see how it would play out. "Good, because I am MUSLIM and I already did that - so I'm good to go right?

I am not exactly sure of your point here. According to to LDS doctrine the Muslim still has a ways to go as would anyone to achieve full salvation. But, according to Born-Againism, if the Muslim repents and accepts Christ as their savior, then PRESTO, they are saved. Nothing else is required. Period. That is unless you do not believe in the Faith Only concept. My point is that Evangelical anti-Mormon either 1. Are not really Born-Again proponents, or 2. are religious bigots who will lie and reject their own beliefs to elevate themselves by denigrating the "other".

My obfuscation is: I hope so. I'm not comfortable saying I think so, and cannot say I know so. Without judging the right/wrong nature of them, the Mormon plan of salvation, understanding of the attributes of God & Jesus, approach to Scripture and prophecy, and, of course, the reservation of the Celestial Kingdom primarily for LDS, all run so contrary to evangelical understanding.

It matters not (for Born-Againism) if the LDS plan of salvation and theology are right or wrong because they irrelevant to salvation.

I have no problem with your position or presentation. I would question if you really believe in the faith only/born-again concept, seems to me your not sure, but your approach is honest and fair. Now, what percentage of Evangelicals are the ones I complain about I don't really know. Could be most - couild be a few. What I do know is this - of the LDS critics that are dishonest and bigoted (as opposed to honest and fair LDS critics who I don't mind at all), close to 99% of them are Evangelical.

[prisonchaplain]

I would question if you really believe in the faith only/born-again concept, seems to me your not sure, but your approach is honest and fair.

I suppose it comes down to "faith alone in what?" Is it enough to get the name right? I have faith in Jesus, so I'm saved right? If so, Mormons, Muslims, hey even some Hindus I've encountered--who believe that while in America they ought to worship the American god, Jesus--would all be good.

So, no, it's not enough to get the name right. With Islam, it's pretty clear. They don't pretend to be Christians, nor do they pray that Allah forgive their sins BECAUSE of Christ's atoning death on the cross (they believe one of the disciples was crucified in his stead, and that the New Testament represents a corruption of what Jesus' taught, written by misguided followers). They do not come to the Father through Jesus. So, I'd feel pretty safe counseling the Muslim who asked to embrace the gospel message, knowing that if it is given in any detail at all, s/he will realize that it is incompatible with his current practice. Acceptance of the gospel would de facto mean rejection of some basic Muslim beliefs.

Mormonism is more of a quandry for open-minded evangelicals, for exactly the reason Barna highlighted--nearly half of Mormons could embrace the gospel message in good conscience, without contradicting any of their theological understandings.

The good news is that you need not worry about my level of comfort with YOUR salvation experience. Rather, you will continue to serve God with your faith, your intellect, your heart, and your deeds. Both Old and New Testament Scriptures (and, I imagine, passages from the other Sacred Works) all promise that if we do so with sincerity, we will find God.

[Guest Ceannyopinype]

children in her car, after the new Nike Air Jordan 11 Concords went on ce n'est pas une pauvre victime de la societe ou de la mode on a totalement le droit d'etre a la mode sans pourtant etre des victimes!!!!! et peut etre que l'annee prochaine elle la portera encore vous n'en savez rien j'en est une et ca fais 2ans que je la met et quelle me tien chaud je ne l'est pas laisser au placar . Or les banques lient tr souvent crit immobilier et assurance de pr ?maison ?au sein d'un me package, sans toujours laisser le choix au consommateur. Spyder Jackets Sale L'UCI a confirm les sanctions prononc en ao dernier par l'Usada qui l'a radi vie et l'a priv de ses r durant la majeure partie de sa carri Armstrong, qui est aujourd'hui de 41 ans, a pris sa retraite d du cyclisme professionnel d 2011. dans la liturgie du baptême, les parents, parrain et marraine, et ceux dans l'assemblée qui croient, doivent répondre aux questions de la profession de foi vous . en Dieu le Père, en Jésus, en l'Esprit Saint, Ã* l'Eglise etc . mais ce texte lÃ* n'a pas Ã* être modifié, c'est la foi de l'Eglise ! that said, i feel much better and relaxed. you are my sisters and brothers and if there's anything that keeps us from reconnecting, let's smash it! :) (this was written in heart break about three years ago9)Aiuti e consigliCosa posso offrire:Pernottamento:forse farti visitare la cittÃ* cena assieme ad amici altro:cabbageMomenti migliori in cui sono disponibile:if we are there, obviously. with visa invitations i can help over internet, too.!!! ::: ))))Trasporti pubblici: 15 min walk from town hall square CittÃ* limitrofe più importanti, con distanza: there is a newly re opened airfield just outside the city limits, that flies to riga and stockholm a couple of times per week. but it would be much cheaper to get to riga by the morning bus. it is only 250 km away and there is a ryanair airport, as well as buses further to europe (ecolines and eurolines) and boat to stockholm. riga is really great but a bit dangerous. tallinn, of course, is the capital of estonia. a soviet baltic nordic mixture, bit of everything. perhaps i could get you an accommodation there, too. it is only 190 km away, and buses run quite frequently, two or three times hourly during most of the day. trains are perhaps more convenient, but less frequent. either you go by bus or train, you can get a direct stop in the airport. daily boats to helsinki (some hours) and stockholm (overnight) from the tallinn ferry port. safe nordic capitals both of them. and, of course, russia. busses to st. petersburg, which is only 300 km away. train to moscow. the russian embassy is located is tallinn. if you want to go off the beaten track, hit russia through pskov, which is a big city with a lot of inheritance. pilgrims could also visit the famous pechory monastery on their way there.Meelis Kaldalu de Tartu Tartumaa Estonia HC nombre de usuario meelis Burberry Outlet Store Message posted on the August 09th, 2012 01:20 pm ET des excuses yen a des tas mais de préférence un truc que l'autre que pas changer sans être malheureux du coup il comprend et m'en veux pas. et je peux faire du recyclage comme ca ! Autant d'arguments qui font donc de L'ange de la vengeance l'égal des futurs chefs d'oeuvre de l'allumé Ferrara (King of New York, Bad lieutnant ou Nos funérailles) avec ce petit parfum bis supplémentaire. William Friedkin, Ã* l'époque, ne s'y trompera pas puisqu'il poussera la Warner Ã* distribuer le film.L'Angleterre des Plantagenets Cheap burberry Outlet Shop Online,Discount Burberry Outlet Canada Déplorables des 2 cotés je trouve. Dites le au brave juge Mezgo, il vous écoutera peut être. Et dites le aussi chez vous, tant que vous le pouvez. La patrie des droits de l Ã* faire où on lui dit de faire risque de vouloir jouer sur le plan juridique le rôle des Etats Unis sur le plan militaire. On joue comme on peut, faut pas avoir la grosse tête, mais quel dommage tout de même, on a le meilleur fusil d du monde, on peut vous le dire, chaque fois qu tire en l pour effrayer les serbes, ce sont les chiens qui se sauvent par peur du bruit. Dans un mois et demi serais a Auckland mais avant d arriver la il a fallu s de l et la jungle des agences de voyages. Spyder Jackets Sale Après ce niveau plutot difficile (ah les garces de fantomes assassins !) Pigeon dans son jus, gnocchi au basilic et Saint Jacques sur lit de ces : Pledge Bank est certainement utile pour mobiliser des gens sur des "trucs" (voir par ex. 36 Trucs), et le challenge (xxx personnes s'engagent, il manque yyy engagements, etc.) est une id e int ressante. Mais pour s'adresser des consommateurs (ou utilisateurs), m me des consommateurs d veloppement durable, je crois que le concept des Demandeurs est plus efficace. En bref, Pledge Bank et Demandeurs, des concepts et services compl mentaires. Burberry Scarf A lot of persons may perhaps feel it is inconvenient to clean the UGG boots each and every time if you have only a tiny blemish on it and they go away it in the way and clear it once they have to. Some water may dried up, but get them over loaded and your boots will be ruined. As the lengthier the stain leaves on it the tougher to clean it, so in case you need uggs uk to use a cleanly UGG boot you can't be sluggish. Mort de rire, mal au ventre, l'hilarit totale! Each event has a sponsor challenge, it may or may not be your primary sponsor but you will have opportunities to level it up not only with the special challenges, but during regular career mode gameplay. They don all get unlocked in one season.

[Guest Ceannyopinype]

Bar du coinDans ce décor de brocante, on pratique même le duel, plus exactement le FightPod, en opposant ses sélections musicales sur lecteur MP 3. . ces voleurs de vo only. le magasin le plus nul a chier de l histoire de paris. pas de prix, des vendeurs qui tirent une de ces tronches en vous prenant pour un voleur et en plus ils sont incompeteants, pas de choix. Jean Marc: si tu fais attention a tout ce qu'on te raconte, tu devras rester tranquillement chez toi. La prudence doit t'accompagner partout même dans ta ville, n'est ce pas?. Je suis Amaya et j'habite au Pays Basque sans problèmes. Salut. Burberry Bags 11h18: Roger remporte son premier jeu de service sans trop de soucis, enfin. On peut quand m pas dire qu'il est en train de revenir. (1 0) Mes cheveux n'étant pas trop crépus, plutot mélangés genre bouclés Afro épais. Il y a lontemps, j'ai fais un défrisage sans soude chez un coiffeur africain, Mais cela n'a pas du tout marché , j'ai du les coupés malheureusement car ils étaient cassant aux pointes, mais je n'avais pas de trous . Google a annoncé le lancement d'une entreprise qui se consacrera aux défis du vieillissement. C'est un dirigeant d'Apple qui en prend la tête. Spyder Jackets Outlet Nike accuse Adidas d'avoir enfreint le brevet de sa chaussure de sport Flyknit, lanc au mois de f et avait obtenu un r provisoire il y a un peu plus de deux mois. Mes amis, il y a un moyen pour gagner beaucoup beaucoup d'argent, genre un chiffre avec 6 zéros. Après c'était juste pour dire qu'on peut très bien jouer dans de très bonnes conditions (voire meilleures si on y met le prix), sans avoir d'ampli (ou juste un petit).Le topic des Requins TN Cheap burberry Outlet Shop Online,Discount Burberry Outlet Canada Should drug companies compete: During the panel discussions with five drug companies (all represented by men), the moderator picked up the competitive tone to their statements. She raised the question if the race to provide the best contraceptives would be beneficial to the project as a whole. While this might initially create a competitive market, in the long run it might be better if these companies worked together at providing methods at very low and affordable costs in all project areas. Couper la glace en tranches de 1cm d'épaisseur et les répartir sur le biscuit, répartir les morceaux de meringue concassée puis rouler le biscuit en vous aidant du film alimentaire. les copines! Burberry Coats J'envisage de changer de guitare électrique d'içi la fin du mois.Je joue depuis a peu prés 10 ans, mais en grande partie sur classique et acoustique, car mon electrique actuelle m'a relativement vite lassé. Je devais avoir 17 ans quand je l'ai acheté, pas beaucoup de sous, mais j'avais craqué sur une les paul epiphonetout a fait classique, entrée de gamme etc.Mais Ã* la longue, entre la mauvaise résonnance, les parasites sons, le manche autoroute, le poids, les bends qui désacordent tout. bref, le manque de fulidité a eu raison de moi, d'ou ma préference pour les acoustiques.Pour autant, j'adore l'electrique, et je rêve d'une guitare, pas forcément polyvalente, mais stable!!! Un manche plus fin, des frets plus précises etc.Je dispose d'un budget aux alentours de 700 euros. Pour mes styles, ils sont assez variés. Mais je dirais, du bon vieux heavy, le blues, le bon vieux rocks etc. Des sons lourds et des sons légers qui doivent sonner. Et je prends beaucoup de plaisir sur Ã* improviser et composer. Je ne sais pas si cela rentre en compte dans le choix d'une guitare, mais je le préciseEn vous remerciant tous d'avance pour vos avis de connaisseurs2 epsylone 3078 jours / 16 msgsau vu des styles pratiqués, je dirais gibson. en occase tu devrais pouvoir trouver quelque chose de sympa pour ce prix.après je trouve que les esp ltd sont de bons rapports qualité/prix, avec un confort de jeu très chouette.Si jamais tu es intéressé, je la vends 700fdpin. (1000e neuve)pas une rayure, plastique sur certaine plaque. bref neuf pour le prix de l'occaz4 joth 2071 jours / 1113 msgsUne Sg, tres confortable, bon pour le rock, hard blues, trés legere, c'est la guitar que je joue le plus, devant la Lp et la stratBesoin de conseils pour l'achat d'un ampli voix Cette interaction a été étudiée dans des bars. Une jeune femme avait pour mission d'entrer et si un garçon la regardait, elle devait soit détourner le regard, soit le regarder 2 secondes dans les yeux, soit le regarder 4 secondes dans les yeux. Avant cela nous avions eu un scenic dont le volume de chargement n'était plus compatible avec nos besoins, nous partons en famille (papa mama un bébé) en camping autonome c'est a dire, tente, habits chaud (montagne.), matériel de randonnée, matériel bébé,. sur des trajets de 3000 Ã* 5000km Ã* l'étranger; et sur une durée de 3 Ã* 5 semaines. c'est ce qui nous avait amenés au Kangoo et autres ludospaces pour pouvoir charger. Spyder Ski Jackets Furthermore, curriculum can refer to what a school or educational system prescribes for a specific group of learners or at what the teacher does in class. a lesson). L'échange de tirs prochain va être assez féroce. Vous devriez être bien équipé. Dirigez vous vers le côté opposé de l'allée, en face de l'égout où la relique étrange a été trouvée. Vous verrez deux ou trois types de dos, tuez les rapidement et cachez vous immédiatement, parce que ceci incitera les autres ennemis Ã* vous tirer dessus. Mais vous devrez garder un il sur votre gauche, parce que c'est l'endroit d'où les ennemis arriveront, et si vous les laissez faire, ils vous abattront facilement. Et je dirai même plus : cette forme de partage et la facilité d'accès Ã* la musique sont d'un tel confort que je songe depuis quelques mois Ã* passer tous mes vieux CD en mp3 avant de les revendre ou les mettre au recyclage afin de gagner de la place chez moi et désencombrer un peu. La raison est simple: je ne les écoute plus, mon lecteur CD est Ã* l'arrêt la majorité du temps, jalousant les lecteurs mp3 qui le remplace systématiquement.