Baptist praise for the Book of Mormon

[Sunday21]

Where is this congregation and how fast can we baptism them?

 

[Blackmarch]

wow.

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Blackmarch

[Traveler]

14 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

Where is this congregation and how fast can we baptism them?

 

 

This guy reminds me of a fundamental minister I met on my mission in Bend Oregon.  He loved the Book of Mormon and us missionaries.  We went to his home for dinner every week - we even baptized a family from his congregation in his baptismal fount because ours was in bad need of repair.   And yes he attended the baptism and congratulated the family.  But when he taught (quoted) from the Book of Mormon in his weekly Sunday sermons - he would not tell his congregation the Book of Mormon was the source.  Of course I encouraged him and his family to be baptized but he was concerned that with his baptism many in his congregation would be lost.

I have also been personally conflicted with individuals that try to live with one foot either in or one foot out (sort-of-speaking).  But at the same time - I have also come to understand that  all of us do this to some degree or another.  It would seem we are all conflicted - the more we are convinced we are not conflicted - the more blind we become to our own conflicts and the more impatient we become of other's conflicts.  Sometimes I wonder if such conflict boils over into arguments - especially over doctrine with those that, in reality, are on our "side".  

As a side note - historically, those that have been wounded and killed in war are as likely (often more likely) to have been so injured by friendly fire.

 

The Traveler

[Guest Scott]

I don't mean to be negative or burst anyone's bubble, but I only want to be realistic. There is a lot of missing information and background in this post.

Lynn Ridenhour claims to be a Southern Baptist minister, but the Southern Baptists don't claim him as such and say that he is falsely claiming to be a minister.  Supposedly he was ordained a minister in 1965, but the Southern Baptist dispute this.  He is also highly chastised by the Baptists for preaching about the Book of Mormon and for claiming to be a minister.  

So, while it is good that he is teaching about the book of Mormon, it is a big stretch to portray this as a Baptist Minister preaching the Book of Mormon to a Baptist congregation.  

The truth is that all Baptists conventions and denominations have an extremely negative view of (what they refer to as) Mormonism.   You can see it in their statements:

http://www.truthandgrace.com/baptistonmormon.htm

There are simply no Baptist denominations that view Mormonism is a positive manner, or at least none that I am aware of.  You can google Southern Baptist or Baptist view on Mormonism to try and find one, but I never have:

https://www.google.com/search?ei=nCehW9P1D6WVjwTShoaIBA&q=southern+baptist+view+on+mormonism&oq=southern+baptist+view+on+mormonism&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39j0i22i30.3318.4613..4919...0.0..0.92.301.4......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71.16XG1cTcS3I

https://www.google.com/search?ei=yyehW9SCM6fqjwT9p5nQBA&q=baptist+view+on+mormonism&oq=baptist+view+on+mormonism&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39j0i22i30.4313.4872..5188...0.0..0.104.193.1j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71.GE7Cj5t6ycc

I would challenge anyone to find just one. 

 

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Scott

[Jane_Doe]

I actually have talked with this guy on other forums.  He's a great dude and does really good work.  And yes he takes a lot of crap from other Baptists for this.

I think he's absolutely awesome.  I 100% respect his choice to remain Baptist.  I figure, good things are good, and the more goodness we bring into people's life the better -- even if it doesn't include the goodness of baptism. 

[Vort]

2 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

I 100% respect his choice to remain Baptist.

I'm curious what you mean by this. For example, I respect his choice to remain a Baptist despite believing in the Book of Mormon the same as I respect his choice to wear leather chaps to bed or drink cheap beer or listen to Conway Twitty eight-tracks or call his wife "Honey Buns". Those things are his choice, and he gets to make those choices. Okay by me.

I also respect my neighbor's choice to engage in (consensual) fornication with his girlfriend, smoke cigarettes, and tell filthy jokes to his like-minded friends. I do not approve of such choices, however, so I would not say that I "100% respect" those choices. I simply acknowledge them as choices that he has the right to make, however wrong they might be.

In the case of the Baptist minister, we have a clearly bad choice being made: By the minister's own declaration, he has received a divine testimony of the word of God as brought forth through Joseph Smith. Yet he refuses to follow the path clearly outlined in that book of which he has gained testimony. Instead of uniting himself with the Saints of God and treading the path as a brother, he stands outside, deceiving himself that he is somehow taking a higher or nobler stance by retaining his old affiliations and, at least to some extent, beliefs instead of following Christ's example. I do not condemn him for this choice; that is not my place. But I recognize the choice as being wrong, and in that sense, I don't respect it at all.

So when you say that you "100% respect his choice to remain Baptist", do you mean the first type of respect described above or the second?

[warnerfranklin]

“You can tell a tree by the fruit it bears.”  Matthew 17:7

”...If you believe not these words, believe in Christ...” 2 Nephi 33:10

He recognizes our faith for what it is because he has honestly studied it.   He is helping people believe in Christ. Both are to be commended. 

There is a reason why the Southern Baptist Convention has instructed their pastors to tell their congregations to not open their doors to our missionaries. It’s becauze their own studies have shown that for every LDS member who joins their church 26 Southen Baptist become Latter Day Saints.

[warnerfranklin]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

I do not condemn him for this choice; that is not my place. But I recognize the choice as being wrong, and in that sense, I don't respect it at all.

 

“God’s word doesn’t change, but our ability to understand it does.”

”Line upon line. Precept upon precept.”

“....If you believe not these words, believe in Christ...” 2 Nephi 33:10

From the time I first heard of the Church until I became a member was 36 years. I am thankful that Saints I came into contact with had the wisdom to understand that I was operating with incomplete information and helped me become the best Christian I could be with the information I had. 

That this man is going as far as he can is to be commended. That he is trying to create peace between us and those who are often hostile towards our faith is to be applauded.  

Edited September 18, 2018 by warnerfranklin
Grammar

[Larry Cotrell]

(I know it's been a while but I was having Mormonhub withdrawals, love you guys!)

I obviously can't speak for this Baptist minister, but I can speak as an Evangelical who has read the Book of Mormon. When Evangelicals read the Book of Mormon, they read it from an Evangelical perspective and background, so they don't understand the theological differences. For example, in Alma 11:44 Amulek tells Zeezrom:

" but everything shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil."

Evangelicals read this as the trinity even though that is obviously not what it means. My point is not to babble about the Trinity, but simply show that Evangelicals read The Book of Mormon incorrectly. 

*Again, I can't speak definitively for Dr. Lynn Ridenhour, and I don't mean to.

[Chilean]

45 minutes ago, warnerfranklin said:

There is a reason why the Southern Baptist Convention has instructed their pastors to tell their congregations to not open their doors to our missionaries. It’s becauze their own studies have shown that for every LDS member who joins their church 26 Southen Baptist become Latter Day Saints.

That is so interesting! I live in GA, and there are many many Southern Baptists and First Baptist churches here.

Do you happen to have a source for your claim about "every LDS member who joins their church 26 Southern Baptist become Latter Day Saints."  I'd liked to read more about it.

Thanks!

 

[Jane_Doe]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

I'm curious what you mean by this. 

"11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

[warnerfranklin]

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/faithbased/2007/12/southern_baptists_vs_the_mormons.html

30 minutes ago, Chilean said:

That is so interesting! I live in GA, and there are many many Southern Baptists and First Baptist churches here.

Do you happen to have a source for your claim about "every LDS member who joins their church 26 Southern Baptist become Latter Day Saints."  I'd liked to read more about it.

Thanks!

 

 I couldn’t find the article I quoted, apologies. But I found a related one. Hope that helps!

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

"Angelo, where is that scripture found?"

"It's in the Old Testament, somewhere?!"

[Chilean]

18 hours ago, warnerfranklin said:

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/faithbased/2007/12/southern_baptists_vs_the_mormons.html

 I couldn’t find the article I quoted, apologies. But I found a related one. Hope that helps! 

Super! Thanks!!

 

[Vort]

20 hours ago, Jane_Doe said:

"11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

So when you write "I 100% respect his choice", you simply mean "I allow him to choose"?

[Traveler]

There are times and places that the Baptists and Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints get along very well.   I did a lot of work for DuPont at their now closed facility on land that is now the DuPont forest in  NC - very beautiful place (one of my favorite in the world).  At the time the plant manager was Baptist and at my first blush there was prejudice (on both sides). The area was hard hit economically and the local bishop worked with the Baptists to help many desperate families.  During this same time I was key in automating the facility and the plant director and I became very close.  So close that when DuPont decided to sell the facility the plant manager put together an employee buyout and I was listed as one of the critical board members to validate the buyout. 

BTW the US trade commission nixed the buyout because it would have been a monopoly which is sort-of true but a flawed excuse.   The sale was okay-ed to a Germany company that took the technology to Germany and closed the plant a week after the buy; some 300 well paid employees lost their lively hood causing more economic problems in the area.  Bill Clinton was president - I do not know how much he was involved but it was a trade and business blunder; 100% government mistake that did not help anyone doing business in the US and I suspect that someone in the Clinton administration profited that should not have.

Back to the Baptist and Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints get along - there were many friends and joint activities - it is the best I have seen in corporation between rival religions.  I was aware of some switching of "sides" (both ways) but It was about equal and very few.  I cannot speak for those that became Baptists but for the Baptist that become members - they were fantastic family solid members.  I would welcome any such to our fold. 

 

The Traveler

[Jersey Boy]

On 9/18/2018 at 1:35 PM, Larry Cotrell said:

(I know it's been a while but I was having Mormonhub withdrawals, love you guys!)

I obviously can't speak for this Baptist minister, but I can speak as an Evangelical who has read the Book of Mormon. When Evangelicals read the Book of Mormon, they read it from an Evangelical perspective and background, so they don't understand the theological differences. For example, in Alma 11:44 Amulek tells Zeezrom:

" but everything shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil."

Evangelicals read this as the trinity even though that is obviously not what it means. My point is not to babble about the Trinity, but simply show that Evangelicals read The Book of Mormon incorrectly. 

*Again, I can't speak definitively for Dr. Lynn Ridenhour, and I don't mean to.

Just to inform you as to what is likely the main reason why the Book of Mormon speaks of the three separate personages of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost being one God: In order for the eternal God to be able to effectively function as God, there must be three personages with three separate and distinct divine responsibilities within the active, unified Godhead. Therefore, there there must be a God the Father, who is the Father of our spirits; there must be a God the Saviour and Redeemer who enters mortality and atones for the sins of the world; and there must be a God the Testator, a personage of spirit who testifies of the Father and the Son and spiritually empowers the saints. In other words, each personage of the Godhead cannot effectively function as God independent of the other two personages. The only way each personage within the Godhead can function effectively as God is to be inextricably linked and fully unified with the other two personages as an interdependent divine corporate body or presidency, each with his own distinct role and responsibilities. It’s for this very reason that the LDS scriptures speak of the Father and the Son both participating in the creation of our spirits. Interesting, most Latter-Day Saints believe God the Father created our spirits without the need for the participation of God the Son, but the Book of Moses and the Doctrine and Covenants testify that Christ did indeed participate in the creation of our spirits. This fact corroborates the truth that God the Father cannot function as God on his own without being unified in power and glory with the Son and the Holy Ghost.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Jersey Boy

[zil]

13 minutes ago, Jersey Boy said:

It’s for this very reason that the LDS scriptures speak of the Father and the Son both participating in the creation of our spirits. Interesting, most Latter-Day Saints believe God the Father created our spirits without the need for the participation of God the Son, but the Book of Moses and the Doctrine and Covenants testify that Christ did indeed participate in the creation of our spirits.

Would you mind specifying the chapters/sections and verses you're referencing here?

[Jersey Boy]

14 minutes ago, zil said:

Would you mind specifying the chapters/sections and verses you're referencing here?

To start:

26 And I, God, said unto mine Only Begotten, which was with me from the beginning: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and it was so. And I, God, said: Let them have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Moses2)

4 And now, behold, I say unto you, that these are the generations of the heaven and of the earth, when they were created, in the day that I, the Lord God, made the heaven and the earth,

5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air; (Moses 3)

The creation of man by both the Father and the Son, spoken of in Moses 2:26, is testifying to the spiritual creation of man, a fact made plain by Moses 3:3-4.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by Jersey Boy

[Guest]

On 9/18/2018 at 12:35 PM, Larry Cotrell said:

(I know it's been a while but I was having Mormonhub withdrawals, love you guys!)

I obviously can't speak for this Baptist minister, but I can speak as an Evangelical who has read the Book of Mormon. When Evangelicals read the Book of Mormon, they read it from an Evangelical perspective and background, so they don't understand the theological differences. For example, in Alma 11:44 Amulek tells Zeezrom:

" but everything shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil."

Evangelicals read this as the trinity even though that is obviously not what it means. My point is not to babble about the Trinity, but simply show that Evangelicals read The Book of Mormon incorrectly. 

*Again, I can't speak definitively for Dr. Lynn Ridenhour, and I don't mean to.

Wow.  A blast from the past.  Welcome back.

[unixknight]

I got a kick out of hearing a talk from the Book of Mormon in that dynamic Southern Baptist style.  Seriously, it was a treat!

[Larry Cotrell]

13 hours ago, Jersey Boy said:

Just to inform you as to what is likely the main reason why the Book of Mormon speaks of the three separate personages of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost being one God: In order for the eternal God to be able to effectively function as God, there must be three personages with three separate and distinct divine responsibilities within the active, unified Godhead. Therefore, there there must be a God the Father, who is the Father of our spirits; there must be a God the Saviour and Redeemer who enters mortality and atones for the sins of the world; and there must be a God the Testator, a personage of spirit who testifies of the Father and the Son and spiritually empowers the saints. In other words, each personage of the Godhead cannot effectively function as God independent of the other two personages. The only way each personage within the Godhead can function effectively as God is to be inextricably linked and fully unified with the other two personages as an interdependent divine corporate body or presidency, each with his own distinct role and responsibilities. It’s for this very reason that the LDS scriptures speak of the Father and the Son both participating in the creation of our spirits. Interesting, most Latter-Day Saints believe God the Father created our spirits without the need for the participation of God the Son, but the Book of Moses and the Doctrine and Covenants testify that Christ did indeed participate in the creation of our spirits. This fact corroborates the truth that God the Father cannot function as God on his own without being unified in power and glory with the Son and the Holy Ghost.

Thank you for helping me to understand the reasons. Again, all I'm saying is that your typical Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox/Whatever won't understand all that ⬆️ when they pick up a Book of Mormon, not to mention the other differences in doctrine.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Larry Cotrell