Evangelical with a question

[Tobeloved]

2 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Indeed... thank you for proving my point...

If the LDS which is very recent, has had so many branches is so short of time..

What chance did the original Apostles have when we see their struggles to hold things together against the very same forces?  And yet you try so very hard to figure out what was really meant with documents have have about two thousand years of differing opinions and politics at play.

Are you sure you want to go there?  

What you are in essence saying is that Jesus Christ is not strong enough to keep His church growing.

[Tobeloved]

2 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Indeed... thank you for proving my point...

If the LDS which is very recent, has had so many branches is so short of time..

What chance did the original Apostles have when we see their struggles to hold things together against the very same forces?  And yet you try so very hard to figure out what was really meant with documents have have about two thousand years of differing opinions and politics at play.

Are you sure you want to go there?  

What you are in essence saying is that Jesus Christ is not strong enough to keep His church growing.

[Jane_Doe]

9 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

Someone brought up the different denominations in Christianity.  My point was that LDS has them too.

My second point is that I do not think most LDS really understand that Christianity is united of the basic tenants of our faith.

It is because we are united on the basic tenants of our faith that we can root out what is not Christian quickly, because to be a Christian one must believe in the basic tenants of the Christian faith.

 

So this splinter, denominations thing is made much bigger than it is.  And unless someone wants to get very hairy I would not want to discuss it.

The LDS church, or un-ancronymed The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is ONE church.  The groups which have left are no longer part of the LDS church but some other church.  There are no LDS "denominations".

Mainstream Christianity, on the other hand, does have denominations which disagree on such basic questions as "is baptism required for salvation?".  Some, like ToBeLoved believe not, Catholics believe yes.

You really cannot make a comparison between Christian denominations and LDS "denominations".

Edited April 23, 2016 by Jane_Doe

[Tobeloved]

19 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

What do you think this shows?

There were many offshoots of Christianity by ad 200, as well. In fact, there were splinters in the late I. That's why Paul and Peter, and Jude, and James wrote their epistles: it was their vain effort to stop the on-going apostasy they saw all around them.

Lehi

Ummm.... If there were offshoots in 200 AD that would have NOTHING to do with the Epistles being written BEFORE 90 AD.

Most of the problems were from the Jewish Pharisee's who did not believe Jesus was the Messiah and wanted to take people back to the OT times of Moses.  So, if you are going to start with apostasy talk, then I would think about where that will go.

You guys just throw these words out there

[Jane_Doe]

2 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

Someone brought up the different denominations in Christianity.  My point was that LDS has them too.

My second point is that I do not think most LDS really understand that Christianity is united of the basic tenants of our faith.

It is because we are united on the basic tenants of our faith that we can root out what is not Christian quickly, because to be a Christian one must believe in the basic tenants of the Christian faith.

 

So this splinter, denominations thing is made much bigger than it is.  And unless someone wants to get very hairy I would not want to discuss it.

The LDS church, or un-ancronymed The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is ONE church.  The groups which have left are no longer part of the LDS church but some other church.  There are no LDS "denominations".

Mainstream Christianity, on the other hand, does have denominations which disagree on such basic questions as "is baptism required for salvation?".  Some, like ToBeLoved believe not, Catholics believe yes.

You really cannot make a comparison between the two.

[Jane_Doe]

So ToBeLoved, you've stated your opinions quite thoroughly, and people have heard them and advanced in their understanding of the Evangelical doctrine.   Has your understanding of LDS doctrine advanced?

[Tobeloved]

19 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

What do you think this shows?

There were many offshoots of Christianity by ad 200, as well. In fact, there were splinters in the late I. That's why Paul and Peter, and Jude, and James wrote their epistles: it was their vain effort to stop the on-going apostasy they saw all around them.

Lehi

Ummm.... If there were offshoots in 200 AD that would have NOTHING to do with the Epistles being written BEFORE 90 AD.

Most of the problems were from the Jewish Pharisee's who did not believe Jesus was the Messiah and wanted to take people back to the OT times of Moses.  So, if you are going to start with apostasy talk, then I would think about where that will go.

You guys just throw these words out there

[estradling75]

11 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

Someone brought up the different denominations in Christianity.  My point was that LDS has them too.

My second point is that I do not think most LDS really understand that Christianity is united of the basic tenants of our faith.

It is because we are united on the basic tenants of our faith that we can root out what is not Christian quickly, because to be a Christian one must believe in the basic tenants of the Christian faith.

Are you sure you want to go there???  You are in a group that calls themselves Christian... yet your "basic" tenants would "root us out" because we are not Trinitan

 

8 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

Are you sure you want to go there?  

What you are in essence saying is that Jesus Christ is not strong enough to keep His church growing.

No I am not... You are interpreting it that way.  I am saying that Christ is doing exactly what he intended to do and has always done.  He gives us truth and directions and then lets us choose which path to take (obedience or disobedience).  When we choose evil the light and knowledge he gave become lost and distorted, until he restores it(in his own due time)... Like the scripture record that he has repeatedly done.

 

 

Edited April 23, 2016 by estradling75

[Jane_Doe]

Dup.

Edited April 23, 2016 by Jane_Doe

[Tobeloved]

23 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

What do you think this shows?

There were many offshoots of Christianity by ad 200, as well. In fact, there were splinters in the late I. That's why Paul and Peter, and Jude, and James wrote their epistles: it was their vain effort to stop the on-going apostasy they saw all around them.

Lehi

I think there is a HUGE difference.

In Jereusalem, there were Jews all over.  Christianity had to go through this entire transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant of Jesus Christ, PLUS their were many, many Jewish people who were against the faith from the beginning.

Three major faiths stem from the Bible; Judaism, Islaam and Christianity.

I do not consider Mormon splinter groups anything like the Apostles who were killed for their faith.  Or the Mormon apostles who live in very nice houses and are held to high regard.

[LeSellers]

1 hour ago, Tobeloved said:

Lehi, let's look at it

Titus 3:5

4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, 5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,

It is the regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, it is not a physical baptism with water.

The washing is a physical washing, as shown by many translations. The structure of the sentence shows the washing of regeneration and the renewing by the Holy Spirit are two, separate things. John says that he baptized with water (washing or bathing for the remission of sin), and that Christ would baptize with fire and the Holy Ghost: two separate things.

The Greek is thus:

Quote

ουκ^{G3756 PRT-N}  εξ^{G1537 PREP}  εργων^{G2041 N-GPN}  των^{G3588 T-GPN}  εν^{G1722 PREP}  δικαιοσυνη^{G1343 N-DSF}  ων^{G3739 R-GPN}  εποιησαμεν^{G4160 V-AAI-1P}  ημεις^{G1473 P-1NP}  αλλα^{G235 CONJ}  κατα^{G2596 PREP}  τον^{G3588 T-ASM}  αυτου^{G846 P-GSM}  ελεον^{G1656 N-ASM}  εσωσεν^{G4982 V-AAI-3S}  ημας^{G1473 P-1AP}  δια^{G1223 PREP}  λουτρου^{G3067 N-GSN}  παλιγγενεσιας^{G3824 N-GSF}  και^{G2532 CONJ}  ανακαινωσεως^{G342 N-GSF}  πνευματος^{G4151 N-GSN}  αγιου^{G40 A-GSN}  

Young makes it so:

Quote

(not by works that are in righteousness that we did but according to His kindness,) He did save us, through a bathing of regeneration, and a renewing of the Holy Spirit,

The interesting neuter noun here is λουτρόν (G3067, λουτρου in the genitive case). Thayer defines it as bathing, bath, the act of bathing. Bathing requires water.

It is important to recall that Christianity was an offshoot of Judaism. So the term Paul used here (which is the same one used to translate "bathing" in the LXX Old Testament Song of Solomon)  for the washing of sheep. One wonders how that could be considered a function of the Holy Ghost. It is related to Strong's G3068: λούω: 1) to bathe, wash
1a) of a dead person 1b) washing to cleanse blood out of wounds. Again, specific use of water for cleansing. Cleansing by the Holy ghost comes later, after baptism.

Titus 3:5 has to do with both water baptism and the cleansing power of the Holy Ghost. There is no reason to eliminate the element of water, except to reject the commandment of Christ to be baptized.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

1 hour ago, Tobeloved said:

Lehi, let's look at it

Titus 3:5

4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, 5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,

It is the regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, it is not a physical baptism with water.

The washing is a physical washing, as shown by many translations. The structure of the sentence shows the washing of regeneration and the renewing by the Holy Spirit are two, separate things. John says that he baptized with water (washing or bathing for the remission of sin), and that Christ would baptize with fire and the Holy Ghost: two separate things.

The Greek is thus:

Quote

ουκ^{G3756 PRT-N}  εξ^{G1537 PREP}  εργων^{G2041 N-GPN}  των^{G3588 T-GPN}  εν^{G1722 PREP}  δικαιοσυνη^{G1343 N-DSF}  ων^{G3739 R-GPN}  εποιησαμεν^{G4160 V-AAI-1P}  ημεις^{G1473 P-1NP}  αλλα^{G235 CONJ}  κατα^{G2596 PREP}  τον^{G3588 T-ASM}  αυτου^{G846 P-GSM}  ελεον^{G1656 N-ASM}  εσωσεν^{G4982 V-AAI-3S}  ημας^{G1473 P-1AP}  δια^{G1223 PREP}  λουτρου^{G3067 N-GSN}  παλιγγενεσιας^{G3824 N-GSF}  και^{G2532 CONJ}  ανακαινωσεως^{G342 N-GSF}  πνευματος^{G4151 N-GSN}  αγιου^{G40 A-GSN}  

Young makes it so:

Quote

(not by works that are in righteousness that we did but according to His kindness,) He did save us, through a bathing of regeneration, and a renewing of the Holy Spirit,

The interesting neuter noun here is λουτρόν (G3067, λουτρου in the genitive case). Thayer defines it as bathing, bath, the act of bathing. Bathing requires water.

It is important to recall that Christianity was an offshoot of Judaism. So the term Paul used here (which is the same one used to translate "bathing" in the LXX Old Testament Song of Solomon)  for the washing of sheep. One wonders how that could be considered a function of the Holy Ghost. It is related to Strong's G3068: λούω: 1) to bathe, wash
1a) of a dead person 1b) washing to cleanse blood out of wounds. Again, specific use of water for cleansing. Cleansing by the Holy ghost comes later, after baptism.

Titus 3:5 has to do with both water baptism and the cleansing power of the Holy Ghost. There is no reason to eliminate the element of water, except to reject the commandment of Christ to be baptized.

Lehi

[Tobeloved]

5 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Are you sure you want to go there???  You are in a group that calls themselves Christian... yet your "basic" tenants would "root us out" because we are not Trinitan

The thing is though, is that these basic tenants of the Christian faith existed BEFORE Mormonism.  So, they were not written to 'root some out" they were written as an agreement to the tenants of the Christian faith.

So, how can you say they 'root you out'.  Your prophet knew exactly what he was doing when he wrote his writings.

[Tobeloved]

13 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

..

Edited April 23, 2016 by Tobeloved

[Tobeloved]

13 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

..

Edited April 23, 2016 by Tobeloved

[Tobeloved]

13 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

..

Edited April 23, 2016 by Tobeloved

[LeSellers]

11 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

Ummm.... If there were offshoots in 200 AD that would have NOTHING to do with the Epistles being written BEFORE 90 AD.

Most of the problems were from the Jewish Pharisee's who did not believe Jesus was the Messiah and wanted to take people back to the OT times of Moses.  So, if you are going to start with apostasy talk, then I would think about where that will go.

You guys just throw these words out there

I am well aware of where this could go. I want it to go there.

I am not "throw[ing] these words out there." The apostasy of the early christian Church is a pivotal event, and it must be part of the discussion, eventually.

Please go back and read what I wrote about the apostasy of the I. Paul wrote many of his letters to combat it. Peter wrote his to combat it. James, and Jude wrote to combat it. John wrote specifically to combat it. Their efforts were vain.

Some, but not all, of the early apostates were Jews. Some were Greeks, some Romans. There were splinters in the late I, there were far more of them 160 years after the Resurrection, that is, around ad 200. I was just echoing your arbitrary time line regarding the splinters and offshoots of the Restoration.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

11 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

Ummm.... If there were offshoots in 200 AD that would have NOTHING to do with the Epistles being written BEFORE 90 AD.

Most of the problems were from the Jewish Pharisee's who did not believe Jesus was the Messiah and wanted to take people back to the OT times of Moses.  So, if you are going to start with apostasy talk, then I would think about where that will go.

You guys just throw these words out there

I am well aware of where this could go. I want it to go there.

I am not "throw[ing] these words out there." The apostasy of the early christian Church is a pivotal event, and it must be part of the discussion, eventually.

Please go back and read what I wrote about the apostasy of the I. Paul wrote many of his letters to combat it. Peter wrote his to combat it. James, and Jude wrote to combat it. John wrote specifically to combat it. Their efforts were vain.

Some, but not all, of the early apostates were Jews. Some were Greeks, some Romans. There were splinters in the late I, there were far more of them 160 years after the Resurrection, that is, around ad 200. I was just echoing your arbitrary time line regarding the splinters and offshoots of the Restoration.

Lehi

[Tobeloved]

15 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

No I am not... You are interpreting it that way.  I am saying that Christ is doing exactly what he intended to do and has always done.  He gives us truth and directions and then lets us choose which path to take (obedience or disobedience).  When we choose evil the light and knowledge he gave become lost and distorted, until he restores it(in his own due time)... Like the scripture record that he has repeatedly done

Have you read what Jesus Himself told the disciples right before He died?  It was NOT that there was some new revelation or an upgrade to the Christian church, it was there would be FALSE PROPHETS.

The problem is is that nothing that LDS says about the Christian church happened.  1800 AD, years later there are I think 6 Billion Christians.  

None of the Biblical prophets ever prophesized about JS or what he said happened.

 

I would think about that.

[Tobeloved]

5 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

I am well aware of where this could go. I want it to go there.

I am not "throw[ing] these words out there." The apostasy of the early christian Church is a pivotal event, and it must be part of the discussion, eventually.

Please go back and read what I wrote about the apostasy of the I. Paul wrote many of his letters to combat it. Peter wrote his to combat it. James, and Jude wrote to combat it. John wrote specifically to combat it. Their efforts were vain.

Some, but not all, of the early apostates were Jews. Some were Greeks, some Romans. There were splinters in the late I, there were far more of them 160 years after the Resurrection, that is, around ad 200. I was just echoing your arbitrary time line regarding the splinters and offshoots of the Restoration.

Lehi

If you offer no sources, url's, Bible verses ect to make your point and think that I am going to go try to figure out what you are saying, you are wrong.

 

What you should do is start with one thing, instead of 6 or 7 and show how you came to that conclusion and list your sources.  Then we can talk, but all this opinion with lack of any source, I'm not doing that.

So it is your choice

[LeSellers]

9 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

Have you read what Jesus Himself told the disciples right before He died?  It was NOT that there was some new revelation or an upgrade to the Christian church, it was there would be FALSE PROPHETS.

Why didn't He say here would be no more prophets? Why warn about false ones if there would not also be true prophets?

9 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

The problem is is that nothing that LDS says about the Christian church happened.  1800 AD, years later there are I think 6 Billion Christians.  

Eh, wrong. The fact that there was a Reformation required that the apostasy did happen. Why would Luther and Hess and the others risk their lives to reform the church if it wasn't in apostasy?

Your 6 billion number is an exaggeration by about a factor of 4.

9 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

None of the Biblical prophets ever prophesized about JS or what he said happened.

This is false. Many did: Peter, John, Paul, Jesus Himself.

Lehi

Edited April 23, 2016 by LeSellers

[Tobeloved]

1 minute ago, LeSellers said:

Why didn't He say here would be no more prophets? Why warn about false ones if there would not also be true prophets?

Eh, wrong. The fact that there was a Reformation required that the apostasy did happen. Why would Luther and Hess and the others risk their lives to reform the church if it wasn't in apostasy?

This is false. Many did: Peter, John, Paul, Jesus Himself.

Lehi

I see, no sources or scripture, but you just say what is your opinion.  I am  going to stop talking to you  if you do not back this up with something.  It is immature to keep doing this in a doctrinal discussion.

[LeSellers]

5 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

Have you read what Jesus Himself told the disciples right before He died?  It was NOT that there was some new revelation or an upgrade to the Christian church, it was there would be FALSE PROPHETS.

Why didn't He say here would be no more prophets? Why warn about false ones if there would not also be true prophets?

6 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

The problem is is that nothing that LDS says about the Christian church happened.  1800 AD, years later there are I think 6 Billion Christians.  

Eh, wrong. The fact that there was a Reformation required that the apostasy did happen. Why would Luther and Hess and the others risk their lives to reform the church if it wasn't in apostasy?

5 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

None of the Biblical prophets ever prophesized about JS or what he said happened.

This is false. Many did: Peter, John, Paul, Jesus Himself.

Lehi

[Tobeloved]

14 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

23 minutes ago, Tobeloved said:

The problem is is that nothing that LDS says about the Christian church happened.  1800 AD, years later there are I think 6 Billion Christians.  

Eh, wrong. The fact that there was a Reformation required that the apostasy did happen. Why would Luther and Hess and the others risk their lives to reform the church if it wasn't in apostasy?

The problem Lehi is your timeline.  JS was clear that Christianity went into apostasy in the 1st  Century.

BUT Martin Luther was from the 15th and 16th Centuries.  Furthermore, the reformation separated only Protestants and Catholics in that protestants wanted to have their own churches.

IT DID NOT kill Christianity in anyway, because Protestants and Catholics still both exist and are both Christian.

I am interested to hear your reply.

Edited April 23, 2016 by Tobeloved

[Tobeloved]

6 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Why didn't He say here would be no more prophets? Why warn about false ones if there would not also be true prophets?

Lehi

Because evidently the false prophets were going to do much harm to His children and were the priority.  It is telling that in that speech that real prophets are not mentioned at all.  I think that is interesting in itself.