Spencer Kimball's Teachings


dibster
 Share

Recommended Posts

Issac, Dr. Stuess.....this thread is getting ridiculous....Dibster is just here to spew anti-Mormon garbage....we can see it in the replies. Dibster does not want to understand LDS doctrine in the least. Dibster wants to try and convince us LDS doctrine is wrong and we are going to hell if we continue to believe it...but Dibster loves us! And Dibster believes Dibster is doing the Lords work by harassing us. What Dibster fails to recognize is the LDS doctrine is not just based on the Bible. Dibster does not believe we have modern revelation and a living Prophet of God to guide us. Dibster is just ignorant to the fact that the Saints have accepted a marvelous gift from God....all the plain and simple truths and the Lord's priesthood restored to the Earth. We as LDS must love Dibster and try and show Dibster the truth....lets stop arguing Biblical scripture with Dibster.....lets quote the Book of Mormon, D & C, Pearl of G.P. AS well as the Bible and Dibster will see how the Lord has given us the correct knowledge which was lost or corrupted when the Bible was put together. Dibster.....God bless your heart for trying to offer the Saints here on this board your little piece of spiritual pie, but no thank you....we have the whole bakery!

Well said, but only if he stops quoting from his anti-mormon book...haha... or at least admits that he is using one and has never actually read The Book of Mormon or The Miracle of Forgiveness...but in fairness, you do a good job of using our scriptures already, so I'll let you quote them if you like...I don't think they will make much more difference to him than what has already been said, but you never know...:) He seems like a friendly enough guy, just a bit misguided...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I’ll post a little hymn by a certain gentleman that was off once in a while (in his book Mormon Doctrine), and because of the comments where he was off (despite the fact the book was written before he was an apostle), some critics like to parrot little snippets trying to show that we aren’t Christians. Dibster hasn’t done so, but from his/her comments thus far, I imagine that a few of his/her little “gems” that he/she likes to parrot come from McConkie. So, ladies and germs; you judge if this is about a “different Jesus,” and if the person who wrote this was a “Christian.”

1. I believe in Christ; he is my King!

With all my heart to him I’ll sing;

I’ll raise my voice in praise and joy,

In grand amens my tongue employ.

I believe in Christ; he is God’s Son.

On earth to dwell his soul did come.

He healed the sick; the dead he raised.

Good works were his; his name be praised.

2. I believe in Christ; oh blessed name!

As Mary’s Son he came to reign

’Mid mortal men, his earthly kin,

To save them from the woes of sin.

I believe in Christ, who marked the path,

Who did gain all his Father hath,

Who said to men: “Come, follow me,

That ye, my friends, with God may be.”

3. I believe in Christ—my Lord, my God!

My feet he plants on gospel sod.

I’ll worship him with all my might;

He is the source of truth and light.

I believe in Christ; he ransoms me.

From Satan’s grasp he sets me free,

And I shall live with joy and love

In his eternal courts above.

4. I believe in Christ; he stands supreme!

From him I’ll gain my fondest dream;

And while I strive through grief and pain,

His voice is heard: “Ye shall obtain.”

I believe in Christ; so come what may,

With him I’ll stand in that great day

When on this earth he comes again

To rule among the sons of men.

Forever, and ever, Amen! And Amen!,

Doctor Steuss -- loves his "different" Jesus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When on this earth he comes again

To rule among the sons of men.

Seriously, if our anti-mormon friend comes back with some kinds of response that Mormons believe Jesus is going to come back and reign as President of the earth and preside behind a desk in an exact replica of the oval office that has been built in a secret spot in the D.C. Temple, I am going to lose it. I have actually read literature that makes that claim...hahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, if our anti-mormon friend comes back with some kinds of response that Mormons believe Jesus is going to come back and reign as President of the earth and preside behind a desk in an exact replica of the oval office that has been built in a secret spot in the D.C. Temple, I am going to lose it. I have actually read literature that makes that claim...hahaha

Saints Alive in Jesus produce some real gems, don't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all pretty good fun. I have to say, if I were to address all the reponses here I'd never get away from my computer! Instead let me make some general points:

- Firstly, some responses seem to be avoiding the issue a lot. I'm simply being labelled 'anti' or just quoting from my 'anti-book', or I'm accused of not having read any of this stuff and just picking out individual verses instead. - I think it's disappointing that I'm getting that reaction, since none of you really know me, and you are also deflecting from the question when you spend time saying that stuff. I have read and studied the Book of Mormon, I have even prayed about it - but I never got a testimony of it.

- To the person who tried to minimize the importance of "The Miracle of Forgiveness" by saying that it was written well before Kimball became president of the church, why then do LDS teaching materials use it for references if it isn't important?

- I'm not 'spewing' any kind of 'garbage', I'm just quoting LDS sources, not ranting off the top of my head. Also I haven't mentioned hell once, so I don't know why that was brought up.

- Did anyone in the Bible ever refer to the 'land of Jerusalem'? How can the Book of Mormon be the most correct book ever written if it gives Jesus' place of birth as a different city from the real one?

- To me, one of the clearest indications that the LDS don't worship the Jesus of the Bible, is that in the Bible Jesus is eternal: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Micah 5:2 whereas LDS belief is that Jesus progressed to his status as 'a god', and was therefore once a man. This means he could not also be eternal, since men are creations. Jesus has always been God, as the Bible explains: " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

- I find it noteworthy that after my very lengthy post on the theme of the thread (essentially Grace vs. Works), no-one has addressed any of the points I made on that theme.

I don't mind discussing more than one issue with people, but it's pretty hard to keep track of everything if several issues are all on the same thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yo dibbie-dib-man, the reason we're not answering your questions is because you're like the umpteenth person to come here and raise the issues you've raised in this thread.

We're just tired of answering the same questions over, and over, and over...

We ain't no Energizer Bunny.

Don't mistake apathy for ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all pretty good fun. I have to say, if I were to address all the reponses here I'd never get away from my computer! Instead let me make some general points:

- Firstly, some responses seem to be avoiding the issue a lot. I'm simply being labelled 'anti' or just quoting from my 'anti-book', or I'm accused of not having read any of this stuff and just picking out individual verses instead. - I think it's disappointing that I'm getting that reaction, since none of you really know me, and you are also deflecting from the question when you spend time saying that stuff. I have read and studied the Book of Mormon, I have even prayed about it - but I never got a testimony of it.

Despite your attempts at sounding diplomatic, you are an anti-mormon, that is to say, you are opposed to Mormon doctrine(not mormon people)and are trying to convince people that they are wrong...The "different Jesus" argument is a case in point. I don't doubt your motivations, or think that you hate mormons etc... I just don't have interest in debating issues upon which you and I have laready made up our minds...We could quote scripture back and forth endlessly, but what it all comes down to is a contest of interpretation...that is one of the points I was trying to make in my last post. I still believe you are using an anti-mormon book as your guide, if not for your personal study of The Book of Mormon, perhaps in your posts here...The anti-book fingerprint is pretty obvious to those of us who have read that kind of literature...I am sorry that you never received a testimony of The Book of Mormon...those who have been answering your questions, myself included, have received that witness, so trying to intelectually thwart a witness from the Holy Spirit of God is rather futile don't you think? It is particularly futile when most of us have had these debates before, if not here, than in our civilian life(haha) or on our missions...We have the answers and witness of the Spirit that satisfy us...that they do not satisfy you, is not something we can control.

- To the person who tried to minimize the importance of "The Miracle of Forgiveness" by saying that it was written well before Kimball became president of the church, why then do LDS teaching materials use it for references if it isn't important?

I think the writer was refering to Bruce R Mckonkie and his book "Gospel Doctrine" as an example of the use of supposed authoratative statments made by church leaders, and quoted by antis...even though this book was written before he became an apostle...do not expect you to know that since it was a bit of topic...Spencer Kimball (I believe) wrote this book as an apostle...it is important because it is a good book.

- I'm not 'spewing' any kind of 'garbage', I'm just quoting LDS sources, not ranting off the top of my head. Also I haven't mentioned hell once, so I don't know why that was brought up.

You did not have to "mention" hell...You did so in your arguments by implication...you assert that Mormons have a different Jesus, and since we both know there is only one that can save us from hell and

you believe that your interpretation is the right one, where does that leave Mormons who supposedly believe in a different one? IN HELL!According to you, otherwise you would not be trying to convince us we are wrong. You did not have to "mention" hell to say we are going there.LOL!

- Did anyone in the Bible ever refer to the 'land of Jerusalem'? How can the Book of Mormon be the most correct book ever written if it gives Jesus' place of birth as a different city from the real one?

This issue was already adressed by me and another poster. That you do not like the answer, does not mean I have to keep beating the horse to death just because you want to keep arguing about it.

- To me, one of the clearest indications that the LDS don't worship the Jesus of the Bible, is that in the Bible Jesus is eternal: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Micah 5:2 whereas LDS belief is that Jesus progressed to his status as 'a god', and was therefore once a man. This means he could not also be eternal, since men are creations. Jesus has always been God, as the Bible explains: " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

We have already discussed which Jesus we believe in...I spoke extensively on the subject...that you do not acceptthat I believe in Jesus who was crucified and was raised from the dead on the third day is not my problem...I am not going to go around and around and around on the same issue...Do yo not think we have read the verses you are quoting? We interpret things differently which is a subject I have already spoken to.

- I find it noteworthy that after my very lengthy post on the theme of the thread (essentially Grace vs. Works), no-one has addressed any of the points I made on that theme.

We have adressed plenty, you just don't like what was said...not going to debate scripture back and forth...intellectual debates between two parties who are firm in their belief are a waste of time.

I don't mind discussing more than one issue with people, but it's pretty hard to keep track of everything if several issues are all on the same thread.

IF you were someone in the church, or maybe someone who was investigating the church and needed answers to questions, than I think your reception would have been a bit warmer...I think you will find that as you gain more experience debating scripture and other matters of faith, you will find that arguments like this, seldom, if ever, lead to any kind of real conversion. Because any conversion based on intellectual interpretations is subject to change any time someone comes up with a better argument...The Greeks learned that long ago, and one of the appeals of Christianity when it entered the scene, is that it cut through all the retoric and philosophies of the day like a hot knife through butter...at least for those whe were earnestly seeking the truth by study and by faith. A witness from The Holy Ghost dispels the arguments of man, and leaves the recipient filled with light and peace regarding even the most difficult matters of faith...I encourage you in your studies to seek the influence of that spirit, and not rely on intellect alone as your guide...If that's what you do already, then great!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dibster,

Did anyone in the Bible ever refer to the 'land of Jerusalem'?

You mean prior or after the redactors got their hands on it? And what does it matter? Why does one group of post-exilic Israelites (who weren’t even Jewish for that matter) have to use the same terminology that a small portion of Judaic writers used?

How can the Book of Mormon be the most correct book ever written if it gives Jesus' place of birth as a different city from the real one?

And this is an anti-Mormon polemic. If you don’t want the title, then don’t use the tripe. Of course you have read the quote about the Book of Mormon being “the most correct book” in context and know the following lines that predicate why and how it is “the most correct book.” Of course you have, haven’t you? But then again, if you had read the quote in context I wonder what form of dishonesty would motivate someone to utilize it in such a manner.

The fact still remains that it doesn’t say “in Jerusalem,” it says “at Jerusalem, the land of…” Despite your best efforts, the state of Jerusalem during the period when Lehi and his family left would fit such terminology. Despite your inability to see it, it is actually a point towards the historicity and authenticity of the book instead of against it. “At Jerusalem” during that period (you know, when Zedekiah was reigning as a puppet-king) would be akin to me saying that I was born in Las Vegas, despite the fact that I was technically born in “Spring Valley” which is not part of Las Vegas proper; yet my legal birthplace would still remain “Las Vegas.”

Don't let this stop you from using either of these anti-Mormon chestnuts though. And please continue to think that despite your inability to let them go, and your inflammatory insistence that we worship a "different Jesus,” that the label of “anti-Mormon” isn’t deserved.

- To me, one of the clearest indications that the LDS don't worship the Jesus of the Bible, is that in the Bible Jesus is eternal: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Micah 5:2 whereas LDS belief is that Jesus progressed to his status as 'a god', and was therefore once a man. This means he could not also be eternal, since men are creations. Jesus has always been God, as the Bible explains: " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

Are you saying that Jesus wasn’t once a man? You’re right; we do worship a different Jesus than you. Ours is the Jesus of the Bible. I’m not sure which one yours is.

BTW, stick to your own doctrinal beliefs as your understanding of LDS doctrine is abysmal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"BTW, stick to your own doctrinal beliefs as your understanding of LDS doctrine is abysmal."

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I would beg to differ. (can't help feeling you'll take that as an invitation to test me!! ha ha!) I'm happy sticking with the Bible for my doctrinal beliefs, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"BTW, stick to your own doctrinal beliefs as your understanding of LDS doctrine is abysmal."

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I would beg to differ. (can't help feeling you'll take that as an invitation to test me!! ha ha!)

The first rule of dialoguing with other religions is let them tell you what they believe instead of you telling them what they believe.

Mormonism is like any other faith body. It has a particular vocabulary and understanding of scripture. You (as a non believer) think that in your pride and pomposity you can read your own beliefs, tenets, and presuppositions upon our beliefs. It is rude and it is wrong. It is as egocentric as people trying to read the Messiah ben Yosef into prophecies of the Messiah ben David just because they want there to be only one "anointed one."

I'm happy sticking with the Bible for my doctrinal beliefs, thanks.

And I’m happy with not placing limits on the means that G-d will use to show me truth. You have the thing you worship (a book), and I have mine (the Great I AM).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it really that difficult to grasp, this notion of faith vs. works? Of course there is no work that a man can do that can earn or pay for his salvation. Our salvation is a purely free gift, paid for alone by the blood of the Lamb of God, even Jesus Christ.

However, like a great many other things, we cannot expect to inherit such a wonderful gift without becoming capable of receiving it. Like a 3 year old hoping to one day receive a car from his parents, he has some preparation and development to go through in order to be able to receive the vehicle, but none of those efforts will afford it, it is a free gift.

Can we expect to be handed something so infinitely greater in scope, so exponentially larger in responsibility, so immeasurably more valuable, and which offers such a tremendously higher level of freedom than a car with no more preparation than the will to receive? Do we really believe that it is easier to undergo the preparations for inheritance of the kingdom of God than a motor-vehicle?

-a-train

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share