Head of Public Affairs, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
“On Faith” panelist Michael Otterson heads the worldwide public affairs functions of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. A convert to the Mormon faith, he worked as a journalist and editor for 11 years for newspapers in England, Australia and Japan before devoting his professional life to Church public affairs. Since then he has directed Church public affairs operations in various parts of the world. He has conducted hundreds of news media interviews on a wide range of Church-related issues. In a church that operates worldwide with a lay clergy, Otterson has served twice as a stake president (leader of a group of church congregations), in both England and Australia. He has lived in the United States since 1991 and is now a US citizen.
Close.
Michael Otterson
Head of Public Affairs, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
“On Faith” panelist Michael Otterson heads the worldwide public affairs functions of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
more »
before we were married, DW #2 had a son ('out of wedlock') that died in infancy... She was single.
Later, she joined TSCC and kicked out her b.friend, then went thru the temple as a single gal.
Could she have had the son sealed to her? with or without the father's permission??
To my thinking, the MMM (+ Hofmann) is/are the Granddaddies of them all.
the MMM was a 'glorious' lesson on obedience to leaders which the LDS REFUSE to learn. Hofmann was a lesson in another cover-up, from the Very Top.
(GASP) what if the mishs were to return unexpected one day and find the adults having a nooner on the living room couch/floor/kitchen table?
(DOUBLE GASP) what if that nooner involved something other than the missionary position?
anyone UP for a bit more mainstreaming?
mor.mon.i.tus:
A pathology, whose spread is by uncertain means; perhaps partially social
Sx: A strong aversion to principles & concepts, to main or central philosophy. An over-riding focus on details, minutae, and on the banal aspects of religious thought, morals, and ideals.
Observers report that sufferers cannot differentiate between simple right & wrong without outside quidance.
Dx: repeated mantras heard, 'Follow the prophet', 'Obey the Brethern'
and 'God will not let his prophets lead his people astray'.
Rx: deprogramming. voluntary is infinately more effective than forced or suggested, which are contra-indicated. Removal from LDS influence/control is often helpful.
Here's what your own website says concerning this prophecy. The title is at the top.
Amos prophesies the downfall of Israel—There will be a famine of hearing the word of the Lord
"the downfall of Israel". Now I never said there would not be an apostacy, but this is why I insisted on "COMPLETE" apostasy. And as we can see today, most Jews still do not believe in Christ. So, I agree with the LDS in that there was an apostasy of some sort, but not world wide. Solely within the people of Israel. And I do think that it is possible that this apostasy could be referring to end times in the future from present, although this is only my skeptical thinking.
I am in a hurry a little right now, so I'll make a quick comment concerning Christ's "ordinances". I think their great. All forms of worship are good for the Lord as long as they do not contradict scripture. I think we can agree on that. And to comment on that last statement, my beliefs are stricly biblical. And I will comment on baptism and laying on of hands really quick. I don't have time to find the verses right now and post them though. But I believe baptism is good. It's a form of worship and a public acknowledgment of your faith in Jesus. Laying on of hands is a form of worship that biblically was used for healing or recieving of the Holy Spirit. Although many recieved the Holy Spirit without the laying on of hands and also many were healed without the laying on of hands as well. So laying on of hands is not quite necessary, but to whatever individual can be an important part of worship. I leave worship up to the individual in part because we are all different and I think worship can come in many different flavors. But as we know, not everyone has the same taste. I will come back to this subject a little later, but I gotta get ready for work. Hope you all have a blessed day.
There are scriptures in the Bible that refer to an apostasy:
Amos 8: 11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:
12 And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the LORD, and shall not find it.
If you care to see others, let me know.
Also, as RTC has commented, Christ instituted ordinances, such as baptism, and laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. These ordinances can only properly be done with his authority, which he gave to his apostles. Clearly these were an important part of Christ's teachings, so how do you reconcile Christ's teachings of the need for these ordinances with your beliefs?
I think you have been mistaken or misled. But I don't know anywhere in the Bible where it speaks of a complete apostacy. Also, I think you have the wrong idea who holds the keys to hades.
Rev 1:18
I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
Of course that would be Jesus.
Concerning priesthood. I think you have the wrong idea again. In the OT priests were assigned by God to teach and lead into following the laws. They were the mediators between man and God. But Christ came and became the mediator between man and God.
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time" (1 Tim. 2:5, 6).
And who are the priests these days.
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;
10Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. 1 Pet 2:9-10.
I invite you to read the whole context of these verses so that you know I am not taking them out of their meaning. But to save time and space I just included the main points.
You see, believers are the priests. All of us who believe in Christ are part of this royal priesthood. Not just a group of old guys sitting around telling everyone what the Bible means.
Your right, Christ did set up His church. He is the Head of that church. It is located within us. Upon accepting Christ and recieving the Holy Spirit, we are now a part of that church. The church is located everywhere. Wherever there are believers, there you have a piece of the complete body of Christ, which is the church. I've been trying to explain to you that it is not a particular location. Definately not in Salt Lake. Jesus never said that His church would be in any particular location because He knows the Church is everywhere.
By the way, I accept the Bible as a whole. OT and NT. And of course the OT is still relevant even post-Christ. Like Paul says, if it weren't for the law, then how would I know what sin is? For this, the OT is very important.
I do ask again where you get the idea of a complete apostacy. I'm curious on this. Also, keep in mind "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words will never pass away". If there were a COMPLETE apostacy, then this is clearly a contradiction. Have a great day.
Here's a quote I thought of one day.
"So many people look for the right church, but not the right God".
Thank you for your reply. I am still curious as to what your answer would be in regards to The Church that Jesus Christ set up when he was upon the earth... meaning, IF you don't believe there was a complete apostasy, then what happened to those that were given authority by the Savior to administer in his stead? For truly he did set up His Church as it should be and where is it to be found?
He said "I am "the" way", "the" truth", "the" life... Which to me is saying that I am a god of order, not confusion. Not every man walking in his own way.
You also imply that the LDS Church is inclusive, but in this you would be mistaken, as this is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints, and the doors are open to all who are desirous of coming into the fold of God.
What we do know regarding an apostasy, is that those that were given this authority were eventually killed and this authority was not passed on to others. The keys of administration and the priesthood slowly were lost to the church for various reasons, including rejection of the members to listen to those remaining in authority to teach and lead them.
Therefore, corruption within the church led to an eventual and complete apostasy.
David, it seems as though you really search the Bible to know what it is teaching, and this is awesome. How do you reconcile the need for authority and keys today? What about apostles and prophets? Do you accept the teachings of the Old Testament and how does that teaching fit into your understanding of the Saviors teachings of the New Testament? Is the Old Testament now dead or is there life in these teachings still?
rtc
Anonymous:
The Catholic Church did not exist at the time of Jesus. It is a politically motivated organization instituted to gain a roman emperor more power over the people. Many of it's doctrines were dictated by the Roman emperors for political gain, and therefore many of its doctrines have a source other than from Jesus’ teachings. Even its chain of command is not from any of Jesus’ teachings.
This is why many of the branch faiths broke off. They realized the Catholics were wrong about many things.
That is not to say that the Catholics are no good. God loves them as well; they are just a faith of man’s doctrine, not God’s.
In addition, not all Christian faiths are a branch of the Catholics. Read your history.
Henry James:
On your comment on paradise and heaven, read your scriptures.
If that isn’t enough, ask God.
Thank you so much for such a thoughtful and respectful response. Of course as you may know I might disagree with some beliefs of the LDS, but I intend to show you why.
First of all, you do recognize that the true church of Christ is His body. I'm happy you understand this because this is important. the LDS has taken it one step farther and claiming that they are the body of Christ. Reading Paul's description of the true church does not suggest in any way that the true church is an organization of men with a particular name that excludes other denominations. The true church is on an individual basis, not a pre-determined group of people. Each individual making a complete body of Christ regardless of where you go on Sundays. It is those who have faith in Christ that make a complete body of Christ. I have faith in Christ and believed I am saved. I do not belong to the LDS though. So the LDS claims they are the true church and the true representation of the body of Christ. So this means becasue I am not a member of the LDS, that in their eyes I am not a part of the body of Christ and therefore not saved.
I would like to comment on something you said on your first post. Here it is
"For surely everything of which you posted is evidence that you are one that has truly searched the Bible and realizes what is missing in the world today of the original Church that Jesus Christ organized when he was here upon the earth. "
Actually it's the complete opposite. I don't think theres anything missing. I think God's word is complete and inerrant and therefore sufficient enough for man to obtain salvation. I think there has been too much added. And what I've come to realize is that those who added to the Bible have contradicted the Bible. For example: LDS claim there is marriage in heaven. Jesus said there is no marriage in heaven. Matt 22. I should say that this point of doctrine by the LDS is not an added doctrine but rather a replaced doctrine about what Jesus spoke about. I think that's a big NO-NO.
You say that you know the LDS is the true church and I say that I know it isn't. I think we should encourage each other not to listen to one another about our opinions and find out through God's Word. God instructed us to test everything to see if it really is from God. Quite easy to do I must say. It must be Biblically correct. I have tested the LDS faith and found the beliefs to be not just ani-biblical, but contradictory to the Bible. I have also tested Joseph Smith to see if he truly was a prophet from God. According to Deut 18:20-22 a prophet sent by God who prophecies must be 100% accurate in his prophecies, otherwise he is not a prophet from God. Joseph Smith had several prophecies that failed. So, not a true prophet according to the Bible. Therefore, not a true representation of God as well.
You ask where I attend church. I kind of go everywhere. Mostly non-denominational churches. I don't belong to a particular church organization. Like I said, I belong to Christ now, not a man-made church organization. As long as the church I attend remains biblical in it's teachings, I feel comfortable there. Of course it is the Bible that we base our faith on.
I do enjoy these conversations with people of other faiths. Especially those who share the same book as I do. I'd like to know where you get the idea of a complete apostacy of the church which mormons claim that required God to "restore" His church. Now keep in mind "complete" apostacy. Please show me where.
Have a geat day RTC. I hope we can keep this discussion going. No matter what we may agree or disagree on, I love you as a brother and this is why I'm here. So I hope that no matter what the outcome, we can discuss these matters of faith with complete respect for one another and maintain a healthy conversation.
Unfortunately, many people do not really love themselves as they should, because they have not come to know their true worth. For this reason they must come to know Christ by DOING his works as he has commanded them, so that they may come to know not only Him, but themselves, as He created them. Isn't it wonderful?
How sad to think it selfish of him that we would not be expected to learn of us as we are lifted unto Him...
Why think this blasphemous?
I believe this to be the epitomy of grace working miracles on the souls a men!
rtc
Let's get back to basic. Good works are the fruit of love in our heart. If you have love in your heart, you have Christ because Christ is love. The bottomline here is Love as in love your neighbor as yourself. If there is love in every heart, there is peace and all these ramblings here is over. This is the sum of all Christ's teachings. Atheist and theist alike if they let love reign in their heart, harmony and peace reigns. What a wonderful world it could be.
Maybe you are tired of hearing from me, but I am waiting up late for my son to come home from a John Mayer concert. lol
Sooo my friend, I can't resist commenting once again and this time on your most recent post, since I have time to kill.
I wanted you to know a little bit more about the LDS perspective of how we view our salvation. My understanding goes like this...
I believe that my salvation is fixed and immovable. PERIOD. Now what does that mean? Well, it means that Jesus Christ has done what is necessary for me to receive the ultimate glory possible, and you too. In fact, he has done this for every single person who will ever be born on this earth whether they know it or not.
Meaning = Deity has done their part 100%. They are bound by law to keep their end of the bargain. Done deal. Signed, sealed, delivered, I am bought!
What is the catch? = Submit to the law. Follow the Savior, Keep his commandments and then do my best to become like him.
So, the plan for salvation is a sure thing, for those who love the Savior and willingly follow him. Remember, there are two choices in this world. You must make a choice between which master? It must be evident by your actions, and it will be, and one of them will reward you for it.
I am sorry if this makes some uncomfortable that justice is involved, but if it were not, then why did he come and "hang" around to show us the way?
I believe there is much more at stake here than manners. I believe that it is imperative that we become something different than the natural man that we are, IF we are to claim that inheritance of which so many feel entitlement.
rtc
After my last post I decided I best tell you "why" I loved your recent posts considering your final statement in your comment here...
"I know I will be getting a harsh response for this, but I expect that. I hope not to be offensive, but clearly I am trying to tell you the truth."
David, I am sure you would not believe me, BUT I will tell you that most mormons reading this particular post would be shaking their heads, and NOT because they would be offended in any way whatsoever. Now, I hope I do NOT offend you by what I am going to say to you, because this is not my intent.
But brother, from the LDS perspective, you are RIGHT ON my friend! It is not my intent to sound confusing either, as I realize that you do not believe that the LDS Church is The Church of Jesus Christ here in these latter-days, but I tell you from the bottom of my heart that it is!
For surely everything of which you posted is evidence that you are one that has truly searched the Bible and realizes what is missing in the world today of the original Church that Jesus Christ organized when he was here upon the earth. You illustrate beautifully exactly the organization of HIS church through the representation of His body and of course He is at the Head of it.
We as members of the LDS Church also believe this as well, and yet we DO claim to be members (of the body) of His Church with Him as the HEAD directing all things by and through his authority, for as in ancient times he has called living prophets today to organize and administer his gospel. We are not protestant or baptist or catholic or reformers of any kind, etc...
We believe that there was apostasy wherein the priesthood authority and keys that Christ ordained to his original twelve were lost or rejected, therefore the need for a complete restoration.
You mentioned KEYS. Keys are authority and power to administer holy ordinances in His name for the salvation of mankind. You are right about keys... keys are for the saving and progressing of His people and they have been restored also, many of them!
When Jesus Christ said that he would build his church upon the rock, we firmly testify that He was speaking of Himself, meaning the rock of revelation! Which comes to those who submit to the Baptism of water and also of fire which is receiving of the Holy Ghost. These are the laws required for entrance into His Kingdom, and must be done by those having proper authority. Not of man, but of Him, who is the HEAD.
David, you are not offensive to any person here that is a member of the LDS church I am sure, even if you do not recognize the LDS Church as what we believe it to be.
But I would ask you a few questions... if Christ set His Church up once and it is not in existence as you can identify it was in the past, why would he not do so again when he felt the time was right and if not, why would you think he would not or could not?
Also, If he has been willing in times past to lead His people, be it in the Old Testament, or in setting up His Church and giving keys of authority and priesthood to His twelve apostles, who all of these were mere "men", why are you so opposed to this today?
In the world we live today, do we not need his voice and gifts and power more than ever?
I hope you don't mind my asking, as I am fascinated with so many of your conclusions below and am wondering if you attend any particular congregation that shares your same beliefs?
rtc
"but I think you need to study what Paul talks about concerning what God's church is. It is His body. And becoming a member of that body is confession of faith. Any organization of men that claims that they are the only true church on the planet is false. The true church is Christ's body. Not a building. Jesus said that upon this rock I will build my church. Sorry, he wasn't talking about Peter (Cephas or Petra in Greek means 'little rock'" That rock is Jesus. The little rock is Peter who Jesus sends out to spread the gospel. Also, historically, the catholic church did not exist until the reign of Constantine in the 3rd century. Until then there were no popes or bishops or whatever. The Christians were persecuted for their beliefs until Constantine came around. They were the true Christians that were martyred for their beliefs and they belonged to the body of Christ, the True of God. If you look historically, the early Christians didn't have popes or even a building. Most congregated in their homes and traveled around spreading the gospel. You quoted Matt 5:14 that His church would be the light of the world. Cross reference that with the book of James and you will see that God meant that His people, not a church organized by men, would be that light. Also, when you say the gates of Hades will not prevail against it, you might want to consider that to mean God's people. God's people won't go to hell right? So the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Also, look at revelation where Jesus says He hold the keys to Hades. Jesus holds the keys to hades, not the catholic church."
Sorry but you have it wrong. You cannot "RETURN" to the Father. You can go there after this life though. Sorry, you were never there before your birth. 1 Cor 15:46. I pointed this out earlier and yes it has to do with resurrection. But the point is that we start in the natural (earthly body) and end in the (spiritual) body. Pre-existence is false teaching. So is thinking that your works can save you. So is God the Father being a man first that progressed to godhood and now lives on a planet called Kolob. There is nothing Christian about these claims. Some people call you a cult. I think I'll pass on that judgement. But you are a different religion than Christianity. I hope that one day you can find the true God of the Bible. Also, I hope that one day you will realize that Jesus died for our sins so that by faith alone we can be saved. Our works do not save us. I pointed out how works are important, but they do not save us.(Luke 18:13-14; John 3:16; Rom. 4:5; Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5). I saw many LDS jump at the chance to say, thanks we believe that too. But you believe it in a different way. I know my faith alone in Jesus has saved (see 'has saved') me. It's not something I work towards. If you see how all the apostles described salvation, they described it as already being saved upon acceptance of Christ. Mormons decscribe it as you will be saved in the future. So this is an obvious intention that you assume that you have to work to recieve salvation. Actually, I should say godhood, which is completely anti-biblical. Saying that you have to do works is saying that Christ's work wasn't enough for us and basically denies the importance of His death for us. I would love to talk to you all who have faith in the LDS system. I think we need to do some Bible study together. But first I know what your gonna say if I prove your beliefs are anti-biblical.
"The Bible isn't reliable"
"The catholic church changed it".
"I prayed about it and the Spirit told me it was true".
Am I correct. Are these gonna be the excuses? I don't want to prove YOU wrong. I want to prove the Bible right, not for my sake, but for yours. But if you have faith in the Bible and claim that it is not reliable, then your faith is without reason. Please let's talk.
In the Book of Mormon several examples show prophets preaching so effectively that the people listening "had no more desire to do evil." Benjamin preaching in Mosiah 5 and Ammon in Alma 19 are two such examples.
What does that mean? Were these people suddenly perfected? Was this a temporary or a lasting thing?
I actually experience this often. Sometimes it's a movie; sometimes the scriptures and sometimes just a talk in Church or in a conference with Church speakers. Someone will say something and I'll feel some kind of spiritual (or emotional, or intellectual, or whatever) confirmation that what they're saying is something I need to act on.
At that moment I feel perfect--like I couldn't possibly ever do something to harm someone else or myself again. Unfortunately, the duration of both my feeling and my resolve varies, but if I were to stare death in the face at the moments I feel like that I would be unafraid.
But what if I were to stare death in the face two weeks later just after backbiting, or telling a lie, or even committing adultery. It would be a different story.
So is the gateway to "heaven" about the timing of one's death? Or is it instead about some verbal or internal acknowledgement of a belief system, without regard to the works required by those who support that credo
The answer, at least for me, is in the LDS belief that an individual continues to progress after this life ends. Heaven might not be an end-point, but rather a phase--just as our life on earth is a phase. We continue to progress after this life. So a "deathbed repentance" will be exposed for what it truly is in the next life as an individual continues to try to improve himself.
But it is all about the topic. If the Muslims via their/your book of death and destruction were successful in ramming their/your "myth-based" religion down our throats, there would be no theology topics to discuss.
What are you promoting these days, Muslim conquest or global freedom of religion? Must be the former based on your normal "wishy-wash".
In all fairness to Brother Otterson, it would be nearly a full-time job to keep up with all of the comments here and to respond when necessary. I don't think this was part of the job description....
In my opinion, it is great that he is able to periodically post anything here. I, too, wish him a speedy recovery....
Thanks for your posts. I too hope you will recover from your injuries quickly. Might I also suggest that if you can't find the time to respond to posts here that you (or the Church) should find those who can? It makes no sense to me to start a thread like this and have no official representation from the Church. Unless having responses from non-credentialed people like me is what you want.
As for being saved by simply professing faith - i think Jesus made it pretty clear that is simply not enough(pardon me for not taking the time to look up book and verse)
"Not everone who saith unto me "Lord! Lord! shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that DOETH the will of my Father, which is in heaven"
"If ye love me, KEEP my commandments"
"Master, what shall I do to inherit Eternal Life?"...
Christ's telling response was not "just believe in me", it was instead - "you know the commandments"
I had been thinking much along the same lines of RTC's the last post, but she captured the ideas much better than I would have- thanks, RTC, for you comments.
In addition, I disagree with some that have depicted the LDS as believing that we can earn our way to heaven completely by our own merits. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is abundantly clear that we can only return to God's presence by relying wholly on the merits of Christ.
Regarding works, as RTC mentioned, Christ invites us to follow him, and although we cannot obtain perfection in this life, certainly there is an expectation that we do our best to keep His commandments. Christ was perfect, but he was baptized, not for forgiveness of sins, but to show us the way. He lived His life in service to others and asks us to do the same. How can we follow Christ without trying to do as He did (works)? Of course we still have to rely on Him for what we cannot yet do ourselves.
Your last two post... this is exactly how I feel about grace and works as well. I also believe that this is exactly how it should be interpreted when one seeks to know the truth by the spirit. I can feel that you are an honest seeker of truth David.
Works truly spring from the fountain of faith in Christ... a natural spring that "should" flow freely without compulsion. But to ignore this as an expectation that one does need to develop would be wrong as well in my opinion.
At least for me, I know that it would be much easier to allow myself to feel that I could just sit back and be "me" and that is good enough for God, because I know he loves me absolutely and unconditionally. Can I do that? Yes. Do I know he will still loves me and save me? Yes.
But still there is that "still small voice" that beckons me to be more than "me" IF I call myself a disciple of Christ. Disciple is to be disciplined, and in this case, to his cause. So we are to be that "light" of the world as he was and be him to the best of our ability.
If ye love me, keep my commandments. (Is this saying, prove it, cuz he sure did?)
As I have love you, love one another. (Is this a commandment or a nice comment? Expected?)
And this is all about doing and becoming. (Work? Change? Who ME?)
Like I said before, we best get on, because there is more to life than the honeymoon, if we are to call ourselves disciples of Christ...
The symbol of which, should be how we worship him made manifested then, in how we serve one another.
The question could be,
Can they see His image in our countenance? Frankly, that is a heavy burden to bear, isn't it? But, maybe that IS the "nail".
Anyway, thanks, because I really loved your comments:-)
rtc
My apologies re Concerned the Christian Now Liberated cluttering up this thread with his concerns on me, Islam and Muslims that has nothing to do with your essay or the LDS.
Wonderfully said Tim. I agree with you fully. I must remind everyone that when we have the true faith that James speaks about that the works are a natural part of that faith, kind of like breathing. And remember, our works are not of our own, but Christ working through us. Mormons works for salvation, meaning they do it out of selfish ambition. Works are meant to glorify God by Him working through us. Not as a means for us to gain anything. Why would Jesus sacrifice Himself for us then?
Eliminating the militaristic passages from the book of death would go a long way in "peace-a-fying" the current young Islamic terrorists who are "brain washed" with the current koran.
Eliminating the anti-female passages in the koran would make Muslim women human.
Support of global freedom of religion by the many Muslim sects would set the Arab world ablaze in religious education and fervor.
Otterson says that a "Mere declaration of belief is not enough to merit salvation. There also has to be action." Anytime salvation is conditional on action the question arises as to what action and how much action. Are our actions good enough or do we fall short because of frequency or because of magnitude? The whole point of God's free gift of salvation through belief in Christ as the Son of God was to free mankind from such a system. You do not need works to be saved. As an example, it is generally accepted by most Christians that a person can be saved on their death bed after a life of zero good works and having no chance to preform any good works because of their health. Where is the action/good works in this case? There are none. Christ said that the first shall be last and the last shall be first. He said that those who worked in the vineyard for a full day are paid the same as those who worked a half day. Those, like Otterson, who will have worked a full day may complain but it won't do any good. All that is required to receive God's most precious gift is to profess and believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Through belief and faith in Christ salvation is for all mankind regardless of sins or works or any other conditions some may want to create.
Sorry Henry. I thought you really thought I was wearing my yamaka right now. I get it now. I'm just a humorless blub, sorry.
I know you do not believe in God, but I must point out one thing you said concerning LDS.
The Mormons give themselves an OUT for every contingency in their articles of faith by saying "we believe the Bible to be the word of God, AS LONG AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY."
I have been saying the same thing over and over again to mormons. Here's a clear example of "check in your mind at the door. We'll do the thinking for you." Quite dangerous.
I don't presume that you were addressing your entire post on the Catholic Church to me, but...
I believe that all churches lilke the Catholics, Mormons, and Muslims who base their belief system on a supernatural, fantastical being are at best metaphorical mythologies, and the few are consistently at their best.
IF one believes that Jesus
a. was REALLY the only begotten son of God
and b. that he REALLY said the things written in the gospels 40-70 years after his death
I can see how your arguments make sense.
I don't believe point a, and there is no evidence to make us rely on point b.
The Mormons DO have a problem with the quote "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it" IF one believes the Bible's every word and Christ's divinity.
The Mormons give themselves an OUT for every contingency in their articles of faith by saying "we believe the Bible to be the word of God, AS LONG AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY."
they can always claim that phrase was mistranslated. Nice system.
Couple things I want to clear up. Why would anyone assume I'm Jewish? I'm actually mexican, but whatever, go ahead and assume all you want.
The reason I don't say I'm neither catholic or protestant is because I think they define where you stand in terms of Biblical understanding. I have studied the Bible for myself and think the major issue between catholic and protestand theology stands as the works and faith issue. It all comes down to Paul's testimony and James' testimony. Pauls is faith alone. James says you need works. Seems contradicting but it isn't. I see catholics lean towards works more instead of faith for salvation. I see protestants lean towards faith more and do no works. Then I read Paul and James description and they go together quite well. Their talking about two differnt works. Paul is describing that faith alone can save you, not works. But what kind of works. Traditional works. Ex: Circumsicion, baptism, etc. These works are not requirements for salvation. It is by faith alone that we are saved. But James says we must work. Even satan believes Jesus died on the cross and rose again, so how does our faith differ from satan's? By refraining from sin and showing our faith through works. Not traditional works. Paul sets it up by saying just faith and James finishes it by saying what kind of faith. I think this meets in the middle of catholic and protestant theology. And this is why I call myself Christian, not catholic, protestant, mormon or whatever.
By the way Anonymous, thanks for your description of Jesus' church, but I think you need to study what Paul talks about concerning what God's church is. It is His body. And becoming a member of that body is confession of faith. Any organization of men that claims that they are the only true church on the planet is false. The true church is Christ's body. Not a building. Jesus said that upon this rock I will build my church. Sorry, he wasn't talking about Peter (Cephas or Petra in Greek means 'little rock'" That rock is Jesus. The little rock is Peter who Jesus sends out to spread the gospel. Also, historically, the catholic church did not exist until the reign of Constantine in the 3rd century. Until then there were no popes or bishops or whatever. The Christians were persecuted for their beliefs until Constantine came around. They were the true Christians that were martyred for their beliefs and they belonged to the body of Christ, the True Chruch of God. If you look historically, the early Christians didn't have popes or even a building. Most congregated in their homes and traveled around spreading the gospel. You quoted Matt 5:14 that His church would be the light of the world. Cross reference that with the book of James and you will see that God meant that His people, not a church organized by men, would be that light. Also, when you say the gates of Hades will not prevail against it, you might want to consider that to mean God's people. God's people won't go to hell right? So the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Also, look at revelation where Jesus says He hold the keys to Hades. Jesus holds the keys to hades, not the catholic church. I know I will be getting a harsh response for this, but I expect that. I hope not to be offensive, but clearly I am trying to tell you the truth.
Christianity: 2.1 billion
Islam: 1.3 billion
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion
Hinduism: 900 million
Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
Buddhism: 376 million
primal-indigenous: 300 million
African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
Sikhism: 23 million
Juche: 19 million
Spiritism: 15 million
Judaism: 14 million
Baha'i: 7 million
Jainism: 4.2 million
Shinto: 4 million
Cao Dai: 4 million
Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
Tenrikyo: 2 million
Neo-Paganism: 1 million
Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
Scientology: 500 thousand
Jesus said his Church would be "the light of the world." He then noted that "a city set on a hill cannot be hid" (Matt. 5:14). This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other churches. Jesus promised, "I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). This means that his Church will never be destroyed and will never fall away from him. His Church will survive until his return.
Among the Christian churches, only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Jesus. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began in 1517. (Most of today’s Protestant churches are actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots.)
Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. This is unequaled by any institution in history.
Even the oldest government is new compared to the papacy, and the churches that send out door-to-door missionaries are young compared to the Catholic Church. Many of these churches began as recently as the nineteenth or twentieth centuries. Some even began during your own lifetime. None of them can claim to be the Church Jesus established.
The Catholic Church has existed for nearly 2,000 years, despite constant opposition from the world. This is testimony to the Church’s divine origin. It must be more than a merely human organization, especially considering that its human members— even some of its leaders—have been unwise, corrupt, or prone to heresy.
Any merely human organization with such members would have collapsed early on. The Catholic Church is today the most vigorous church in the world (and the largest, with a billion members: one sixth of the human race), and that is testimony not to the cleverness of the Church’s leaders, but to the protection of the Holy Spirit.
Thanks for your entirely speculative distinction between Heaven and Paradise.
What kind of week have you been smoking to know all this so definitively?
It is of course absurd to think that any human can have any kind of knowledge of these matters that is other than fantastical, and reading your little disquisition made the absurdity of the exercise about as dramatic as I have seen. I thank you for that.
Maybe Jihadist and other moderate Muslims will do so in their own sweet time.
However, I truly do not believe that would solve the extremist problem. If people want to live in the middle ages, or want to be evil, they'll do it with or without holy scripture.
Look at some of our very own Christian sects in this country, the Jonestown disaster, the Koresh disaster, the Westboro Baptist Church, etc.
Just because some enlightened individuals say not to take the bible too literaly, does not mean you no longer have extremism.
Also, please do not forget that Islam is more than just a religion, it is also a lifestyle ingrained in people for hundreds of years. That is something you can change overnight by denouncing those sections you find objectionable.
You might want to read what modern NT scholars have to say about the good thief. Many conclude the story was a later addition to attract more converts. There were no reporters at the crucifixion for the needed attestations.
e.g. As per Professor Crossan from his book, Who is Jesus:
“My best historical reconstruction would be something like this. Jesus was arrested during the Passover festival, most likely in response to his action in the Temple. Those who were closest to him ran away for their own safety. I do not presume that there were any high-level confrontations between Caiaphas and Pilate and Herod Antipas either about Jesus or with Jesus. I doubt they would have agreed before the festival that fast action was to be taken against any disturbance and that a few examples by crucifixion might be especially useful at the outset.
And I doubt very much if Jewish police or Roman soldiers needed to go too far up the chain of command in handling a Galilean peasant like Jesus. It is hard for us to imagine the casual brutality with which Jesus was probably taken and executed. All those "last week" details in our gospels, as distinct from the brute facts just mentioned, are prophecy turned into history, rather than history remembered."
David,
The thief next to Jesus was saved from hell by his fiath, but entry into heaven is another thing.
Paradise is where you go after death awaiting judgement day. While you wait in paradise, not heaven, you are exposed to the teachings of God and Jesus. If someone stands in for your baptism, you have the option to accept it or not. When Jesus returns to this earth the dead will again have the chance to Qualify for heaven. Only by your works and your faith can you achieve the right to enter gods house (heaven). It is better and carrys more weight if you do it here before you die when things are not so clear as they will be in paradise.
the problem, David, with defining yourself as Christian
is that there are thousands of variations of "Christian Beliefs."
My brother William the tells me that Mormon beliefs are as consistent with the Bible as the way most other Christians interpret it.
The Bible admits of an almost infinite number of interpretations. It is porbably bad to kill according to the Bible, but there are a number of siturations where God directs people to kill in his name, including Genocide.
So the concept of a "strict literal reading" of the Bible is a concept that can NOT work in practice.
It's kind of like the consitution and the Supreme Court.
Mormons think their prophet is here to clear up ambiguities, but as JD will tell you, there are still plenty of ambiguities left over even with God communicating regularly with Salt Lake City.
There are a lot of interpretations that can be taken from this. As far as I understand the after life, a disembodied spirit is not the same as a resurrected spiritual body. There is a period between death and resurrection where we do not have physical bodies. I think most Christians believe this, all except the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I could be wrong.
BTW, I understand you wanting to be defined by your Christianity first and foremost; I too would like to be defined by my Christianity first and foremost.
I understand what you are trying to say and I still disagree.
There are those who are evil, extremist like people, they exist everywhere. They start out harmless, and then they become more and more violent because they gather in number.
Please, Concerned, do not shear everyone over the same comb. You take on Jihadist simply because she is Muslim, that does not make her a terrorist. Even Hitler has his moments of glory. He gave the Germans work, a sense of belonging, all the while he deceived the entire country.
I wish I could explain it better, but right now I am too tired. We'll talk again tomorrow.
Yeah your right, it is about the bodily resurrection. But are we resurrected in our natural bodies first? When we die and go to heaven are we in our natural bodies? You might want to re-read that. When Jesus resurrected from the dead on the third day wasn't He in a spiritual body? It says no one recognized Him. So obviously He was not in His natural, earthly born body. So, we are in our natural bodies now, which is first, then our spiritual. Spiritual is not first, like it says. By the way, I'm not protestant. I'm a Christian.
After looking at the scripture you quoted I realized it is actually unambiguously *not* making reference to the pre-mortal. Nor is it making reference to non-corporal spirits. It is speaking of the resurrection.
First natural, that is the natural body, second Spiritual, that is a spiritual body or a glorified, uncorrupted body.
Here is the context:
"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a *natural body*; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a *spiritual body.*
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual." (1 Corinthians 15:42-46)
In all fairness, as a protestant you have no reason to believe in a pre-mortal existence. There are no unambiguous references to it in the Bible. I do not think you can say for sure that there is not a pre-mortal existence based on Biblical data. I believe I lived with God before I was born, because of my faith that God has revealed this truth to His modern Prophets.
I do not think it is obvious, I think it is ambiguous. For example, the verse you quote could mean a number of things, e.g., when God created man, he created the body first and breathed into him his spirit according to Genesis.
Mormons would say it was a pre-mortally existent spirit, Christians would say a recently created spirit, niether have unambiguous Biblical data to back it up.
Mormons look at various Biblical verses as evidence of pre-mortal existence. One is the following:
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations" (Jeramiah 1:5).
Christians will say it refers to God's foreknowledge, I think the most straightforward exegesis is possible with a conception of pre-mortal existence, but ultimately it is ambiguous.
Good point. The difference in this case is what is right according to the Bible. Mormons base their faith on the Bible like I do. However, they teach false doctrines. Ex: pre-existence. Obviousy the Bible says otherwise. So, does that mean I can come along and say murder is ok too. I know the Bible says not to murder, but screw it, let's make it part of our faith anyway. Hey Joe and Brigham, grab a knife!! Let's stab us some people in the name of God!!
Concerning pre-existence. What does the Bible say?
1 Corinthians 15:46
46The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.
Go ahead and read that in the KJV as well since I know you do not accept any other translations. It says the same thing. I also encourage you to read the whole context so you know I'm not taking this verse out of context but instead know that it is specifically telling us humans that we never pre-existed. This is false doctrine and this is why I do not listen to LDS. I already know what your gonna say. "I believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins and resurrected too". Yeah, but do you have the right Jesus?
This is why I am stricly Biblical in my beliefs. How can you base your beliefs on the Bible and then believe the same divine inspiration inspired another doctrine (BOM) that contradicts itself? Sorry RTC, we differ in our faiths even though we use the same basis for our beliefs, the Bible.
So, if I know your beliefs contradict Biblical scripture, I know not to take heed to your words of description of the afterlife, or heaven. You think you will become a god. Sorry, the Bible says otherwise.
I hope I do not come off as offensive. I truly believe LDS is false teaching.
"Freedom of religion is a basic human right, right up there with freedom of the press, vote, and to live and die in peace."
Those are our human rights, there are many countries which do not have these same basic rights. By far, not all of them are Muslim!
Take the former USSR, Cuba, Zimbabwe, etc. They aren't (weren't) Muslim, yet they did not have any of those rights either. Any time you have extremists rule, you will find those rights taken away.
All Comments (98)
before we were married, DW #2 had a son ('out of wedlock') that died in infancy... She was single.
Later, she joined TSCC and kicked out her b.friend, then went thru the temple as a single gal.
Could she have had the son sealed to her? with or without the father's permission??
To my thinking, the MMM (+ Hofmann) is/are the Granddaddies of them all.
the MMM was a 'glorious' lesson on obedience to leaders which the LDS REFUSE to learn. Hofmann was a lesson in another cover-up, from the Very Top.
(GASP) what if the mishs were to return unexpected one day and find the adults having a nooner on the living room couch/floor/kitchen table?
(DOUBLE GASP) what if that nooner involved something other than the missionary position?
you heard it first here.
no, it's not a youth speaker
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13834042/
anyone UP for a bit more mainstreaming?
mor.mon.i.tus:
A pathology, whose spread is by uncertain means; perhaps partially social
Sx: A strong aversion to principles & concepts, to main or central philosophy. An over-riding focus on details, minutae, and on the banal aspects of religious thought, morals, and ideals.
Observers report that sufferers cannot differentiate between simple right & wrong without outside quidance.
Dx: repeated mantras heard, 'Follow the prophet', 'Obey the Brethern'
and 'God will not let his prophets lead his people astray'.
Rx: deprogramming. voluntary is infinately more effective than forced or suggested, which are contra-indicated. Removal from LDS influence/control is often helpful.
rt self-centeredness, self-righteousness
June 14, 2007 8:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 14, 2007 20:33
Jim A,
I'm gonna copy and paste from the LDS website about the verses you posted Amos 8:11
http://scriptures.lds.org/amos/8/11-12
Here's what your own website says concerning this prophecy. The title is at the top.
Amos prophesies the downfall of Israel—There will be a famine of hearing the word of the Lord
"the downfall of Israel". Now I never said there would not be an apostacy, but this is why I insisted on "COMPLETE" apostasy. And as we can see today, most Jews still do not believe in Christ. So, I agree with the LDS in that there was an apostasy of some sort, but not world wide. Solely within the people of Israel. And I do think that it is possible that this apostasy could be referring to end times in the future from present, although this is only my skeptical thinking.
I am in a hurry a little right now, so I'll make a quick comment concerning Christ's "ordinances". I think their great. All forms of worship are good for the Lord as long as they do not contradict scripture. I think we can agree on that. And to comment on that last statement, my beliefs are stricly biblical. And I will comment on baptism and laying on of hands really quick. I don't have time to find the verses right now and post them though. But I believe baptism is good. It's a form of worship and a public acknowledgment of your faith in Jesus. Laying on of hands is a form of worship that biblically was used for healing or recieving of the Holy Spirit. Although many recieved the Holy Spirit without the laying on of hands and also many were healed without the laying on of hands as well. So laying on of hands is not quite necessary, but to whatever individual can be an important part of worship. I leave worship up to the individual in part because we are all different and I think worship can come in many different flavors. But as we know, not everyone has the same taste. I will come back to this subject a little later, but I gotta get ready for work. Hope you all have a blessed day.
God bless you
June 14, 2007 1:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 14, 2007 13:02
David,
There are scriptures in the Bible that refer to an apostasy:
Amos 8: 11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:
12 And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the LORD, and shall not find it.
If you care to see others, let me know.
Also, as RTC has commented, Christ instituted ordinances, such as baptism, and laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. These ordinances can only properly be done with his authority, which he gave to his apostles. Clearly these were an important part of Christ's teachings, so how do you reconcile Christ's teachings of the need for these ordinances with your beliefs?
June 14, 2007 11:35 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 14, 2007 11:35
Hello again RTC,
I think you have been mistaken or misled. But I don't know anywhere in the Bible where it speaks of a complete apostacy. Also, I think you have the wrong idea who holds the keys to hades.
Rev 1:18
I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
Of course that would be Jesus.
Concerning priesthood. I think you have the wrong idea again. In the OT priests were assigned by God to teach and lead into following the laws. They were the mediators between man and God. But Christ came and became the mediator between man and God.
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time" (1 Tim. 2:5, 6).
And who are the priests these days.
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;
10Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. 1 Pet 2:9-10.
I invite you to read the whole context of these verses so that you know I am not taking them out of their meaning. But to save time and space I just included the main points.
You see, believers are the priests. All of us who believe in Christ are part of this royal priesthood. Not just a group of old guys sitting around telling everyone what the Bible means.
Your right, Christ did set up His church. He is the Head of that church. It is located within us. Upon accepting Christ and recieving the Holy Spirit, we are now a part of that church. The church is located everywhere. Wherever there are believers, there you have a piece of the complete body of Christ, which is the church. I've been trying to explain to you that it is not a particular location. Definately not in Salt Lake. Jesus never said that His church would be in any particular location because He knows the Church is everywhere.
By the way, I accept the Bible as a whole. OT and NT. And of course the OT is still relevant even post-Christ. Like Paul says, if it weren't for the law, then how would I know what sin is? For this, the OT is very important.
I do ask again where you get the idea of a complete apostacy. I'm curious on this. Also, keep in mind "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words will never pass away". If there were a COMPLETE apostacy, then this is clearly a contradiction. Have a great day.
Here's a quote I thought of one day.
"So many people look for the right church, but not the right God".
God bless
June 13, 2007 8:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 20:34
David -
Thank you for your reply. I am still curious as to what your answer would be in regards to The Church that Jesus Christ set up when he was upon the earth... meaning, IF you don't believe there was a complete apostasy, then what happened to those that were given authority by the Savior to administer in his stead? For truly he did set up His Church as it should be and where is it to be found?
He said "I am "the" way", "the" truth", "the" life... Which to me is saying that I am a god of order, not confusion. Not every man walking in his own way.
You also imply that the LDS Church is inclusive, but in this you would be mistaken, as this is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints, and the doors are open to all who are desirous of coming into the fold of God.
What we do know regarding an apostasy, is that those that were given this authority were eventually killed and this authority was not passed on to others. The keys of administration and the priesthood slowly were lost to the church for various reasons, including rejection of the members to listen to those remaining in authority to teach and lead them.
Therefore, corruption within the church led to an eventual and complete apostasy.
David, it seems as though you really search the Bible to know what it is teaching, and this is awesome. How do you reconcile the need for authority and keys today? What about apostles and prophets? Do you accept the teachings of the Old Testament and how does that teaching fit into your understanding of the Saviors teachings of the New Testament? Is the Old Testament now dead or is there life in these teachings still?
rtc
June 13, 2007 7:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 19:52
Anonymous:
The Catholic Church did not exist at the time of Jesus. It is a politically motivated organization instituted to gain a roman emperor more power over the people. Many of it's doctrines were dictated by the Roman emperors for political gain, and therefore many of its doctrines have a source other than from Jesus’ teachings. Even its chain of command is not from any of Jesus’ teachings.
This is why many of the branch faiths broke off. They realized the Catholics were wrong about many things.
That is not to say that the Catholics are no good. God loves them as well; they are just a faith of man’s doctrine, not God’s.
In addition, not all Christian faiths are a branch of the Catholics. Read your history.
Henry James:
On your comment on paradise and heaven, read your scriptures.
If that isn’t enough, ask God.
June 13, 2007 2:14 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 14:14
RTC,
Thank you so much for such a thoughtful and respectful response. Of course as you may know I might disagree with some beliefs of the LDS, but I intend to show you why.
First of all, you do recognize that the true church of Christ is His body. I'm happy you understand this because this is important. the LDS has taken it one step farther and claiming that they are the body of Christ. Reading Paul's description of the true church does not suggest in any way that the true church is an organization of men with a particular name that excludes other denominations. The true church is on an individual basis, not a pre-determined group of people. Each individual making a complete body of Christ regardless of where you go on Sundays. It is those who have faith in Christ that make a complete body of Christ. I have faith in Christ and believed I am saved. I do not belong to the LDS though. So the LDS claims they are the true church and the true representation of the body of Christ. So this means becasue I am not a member of the LDS, that in their eyes I am not a part of the body of Christ and therefore not saved.
I would like to comment on something you said on your first post. Here it is
"For surely everything of which you posted is evidence that you are one that has truly searched the Bible and realizes what is missing in the world today of the original Church that Jesus Christ organized when he was here upon the earth. "
Actually it's the complete opposite. I don't think theres anything missing. I think God's word is complete and inerrant and therefore sufficient enough for man to obtain salvation. I think there has been too much added. And what I've come to realize is that those who added to the Bible have contradicted the Bible. For example: LDS claim there is marriage in heaven. Jesus said there is no marriage in heaven. Matt 22. I should say that this point of doctrine by the LDS is not an added doctrine but rather a replaced doctrine about what Jesus spoke about. I think that's a big NO-NO.
You say that you know the LDS is the true church and I say that I know it isn't. I think we should encourage each other not to listen to one another about our opinions and find out through God's Word. God instructed us to test everything to see if it really is from God. Quite easy to do I must say. It must be Biblically correct. I have tested the LDS faith and found the beliefs to be not just ani-biblical, but contradictory to the Bible. I have also tested Joseph Smith to see if he truly was a prophet from God. According to Deut 18:20-22 a prophet sent by God who prophecies must be 100% accurate in his prophecies, otherwise he is not a prophet from God. Joseph Smith had several prophecies that failed. So, not a true prophet according to the Bible. Therefore, not a true representation of God as well.
You ask where I attend church. I kind of go everywhere. Mostly non-denominational churches. I don't belong to a particular church organization. Like I said, I belong to Christ now, not a man-made church organization. As long as the church I attend remains biblical in it's teachings, I feel comfortable there. Of course it is the Bible that we base our faith on.
I do enjoy these conversations with people of other faiths. Especially those who share the same book as I do. I'd like to know where you get the idea of a complete apostacy of the church which mormons claim that required God to "restore" His church. Now keep in mind "complete" apostacy. Please show me where.
Have a geat day RTC. I hope we can keep this discussion going. No matter what we may agree or disagree on, I love you as a brother and this is why I'm here. So I hope that no matter what the outcome, we can discuss these matters of faith with complete respect for one another and maintain a healthy conversation.
God bless you
June 13, 2007 1:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 13:02
Mel -
Unfortunately, many people do not really love themselves as they should, because they have not come to know their true worth. For this reason they must come to know Christ by DOING his works as he has commanded them, so that they may come to know not only Him, but themselves, as He created them. Isn't it wonderful?
How sad to think it selfish of him that we would not be expected to learn of us as we are lifted unto Him...
Why think this blasphemous?
I believe this to be the epitomy of grace working miracles on the souls a men!
rtc
June 13, 2007 11:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 11:43
Let's get back to basic. Good works are the fruit of love in our heart. If you have love in your heart, you have Christ because Christ is love. The bottomline here is Love as in love your neighbor as yourself. If there is love in every heart, there is peace and all these ramblings here is over. This is the sum of all Christ's teachings. Atheist and theist alike if they let love reign in their heart, harmony and peace reigns. What a wonderful world it could be.
June 13, 2007 10:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 10:57
David -
Maybe you are tired of hearing from me, but I am waiting up late for my son to come home from a John Mayer concert. lol
Sooo my friend, I can't resist commenting once again and this time on your most recent post, since I have time to kill.
I wanted you to know a little bit more about the LDS perspective of how we view our salvation. My understanding goes like this...
I believe that my salvation is fixed and immovable. PERIOD. Now what does that mean? Well, it means that Jesus Christ has done what is necessary for me to receive the ultimate glory possible, and you too. In fact, he has done this for every single person who will ever be born on this earth whether they know it or not.
Meaning = Deity has done their part 100%. They are bound by law to keep their end of the bargain. Done deal. Signed, sealed, delivered, I am bought!
What is the catch? = Submit to the law. Follow the Savior, Keep his commandments and then do my best to become like him.
So, the plan for salvation is a sure thing, for those who love the Savior and willingly follow him. Remember, there are two choices in this world. You must make a choice between which master? It must be evident by your actions, and it will be, and one of them will reward you for it.
I am sorry if this makes some uncomfortable that justice is involved, but if it were not, then why did he come and "hang" around to show us the way?
I believe there is much more at stake here than manners. I believe that it is imperative that we become something different than the natural man that we are, IF we are to claim that inheritance of which so many feel entitlement.
rtc
June 13, 2007 4:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 04:05
Flashlight-
So nice to see you and I really appreciated your comments.
rtc
June 13, 2007 3:39 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 03:39
David -
After my last post I decided I best tell you "why" I loved your recent posts considering your final statement in your comment here...
"I know I will be getting a harsh response for this, but I expect that. I hope not to be offensive, but clearly I am trying to tell you the truth."
David, I am sure you would not believe me, BUT I will tell you that most mormons reading this particular post would be shaking their heads, and NOT because they would be offended in any way whatsoever. Now, I hope I do NOT offend you by what I am going to say to you, because this is not my intent.
But brother, from the LDS perspective, you are RIGHT ON my friend! It is not my intent to sound confusing either, as I realize that you do not believe that the LDS Church is The Church of Jesus Christ here in these latter-days, but I tell you from the bottom of my heart that it is!
For surely everything of which you posted is evidence that you are one that has truly searched the Bible and realizes what is missing in the world today of the original Church that Jesus Christ organized when he was here upon the earth. You illustrate beautifully exactly the organization of HIS church through the representation of His body and of course He is at the Head of it.
We as members of the LDS Church also believe this as well, and yet we DO claim to be members (of the body) of His Church with Him as the HEAD directing all things by and through his authority, for as in ancient times he has called living prophets today to organize and administer his gospel. We are not protestant or baptist or catholic or reformers of any kind, etc...
We believe that there was apostasy wherein the priesthood authority and keys that Christ ordained to his original twelve were lost or rejected, therefore the need for a complete restoration.
You mentioned KEYS. Keys are authority and power to administer holy ordinances in His name for the salvation of mankind. You are right about keys... keys are for the saving and progressing of His people and they have been restored also, many of them!
When Jesus Christ said that he would build his church upon the rock, we firmly testify that He was speaking of Himself, meaning the rock of revelation! Which comes to those who submit to the Baptism of water and also of fire which is receiving of the Holy Ghost. These are the laws required for entrance into His Kingdom, and must be done by those having proper authority. Not of man, but of Him, who is the HEAD.
David, you are not offensive to any person here that is a member of the LDS church I am sure, even if you do not recognize the LDS Church as what we believe it to be.
But I would ask you a few questions... if Christ set His Church up once and it is not in existence as you can identify it was in the past, why would he not do so again when he felt the time was right and if not, why would you think he would not or could not?
Also, If he has been willing in times past to lead His people, be it in the Old Testament, or in setting up His Church and giving keys of authority and priesthood to His twelve apostles, who all of these were mere "men", why are you so opposed to this today?
In the world we live today, do we not need his voice and gifts and power more than ever?
I hope you don't mind my asking, as I am fascinated with so many of your conclusions below and am wondering if you attend any particular congregation that shares your same beliefs?
rtc
"but I think you need to study what Paul talks about concerning what God's church is. It is His body. And becoming a member of that body is confession of faith. Any organization of men that claims that they are the only true church on the planet is false. The true church is Christ's body. Not a building. Jesus said that upon this rock I will build my church. Sorry, he wasn't talking about Peter (Cephas or Petra in Greek means 'little rock'" That rock is Jesus. The little rock is Peter who Jesus sends out to spread the gospel. Also, historically, the catholic church did not exist until the reign of Constantine in the 3rd century. Until then there were no popes or bishops or whatever. The Christians were persecuted for their beliefs until Constantine came around. They were the true Christians that were martyred for their beliefs and they belonged to the body of Christ, the True of God. If you look historically, the early Christians didn't have popes or even a building. Most congregated in their homes and traveled around spreading the gospel. You quoted Matt 5:14 that His church would be the light of the world. Cross reference that with the book of James and you will see that God meant that His people, not a church organized by men, would be that light. Also, when you say the gates of Hades will not prevail against it, you might want to consider that to mean God's people. God's people won't go to hell right? So the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Also, look at revelation where Jesus says He hold the keys to Hades. Jesus holds the keys to hades, not the catholic church."
June 13, 2007 3:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 03:31
LDS folks,
Sorry but you have it wrong. You cannot "RETURN" to the Father. You can go there after this life though. Sorry, you were never there before your birth. 1 Cor 15:46. I pointed this out earlier and yes it has to do with resurrection. But the point is that we start in the natural (earthly body) and end in the (spiritual) body. Pre-existence is false teaching. So is thinking that your works can save you. So is God the Father being a man first that progressed to godhood and now lives on a planet called Kolob. There is nothing Christian about these claims. Some people call you a cult. I think I'll pass on that judgement. But you are a different religion than Christianity. I hope that one day you can find the true God of the Bible. Also, I hope that one day you will realize that Jesus died for our sins so that by faith alone we can be saved. Our works do not save us. I pointed out how works are important, but they do not save us.(Luke 18:13-14; John 3:16; Rom. 4:5; Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5). I saw many LDS jump at the chance to say, thanks we believe that too. But you believe it in a different way. I know my faith alone in Jesus has saved (see 'has saved') me. It's not something I work towards. If you see how all the apostles described salvation, they described it as already being saved upon acceptance of Christ. Mormons decscribe it as you will be saved in the future. So this is an obvious intention that you assume that you have to work to recieve salvation. Actually, I should say godhood, which is completely anti-biblical. Saying that you have to do works is saying that Christ's work wasn't enough for us and basically denies the importance of His death for us. I would love to talk to you all who have faith in the LDS system. I think we need to do some Bible study together. But first I know what your gonna say if I prove your beliefs are anti-biblical.
"The Bible isn't reliable"
"The catholic church changed it".
"I prayed about it and the Spirit told me it was true".
Am I correct. Are these gonna be the excuses? I don't want to prove YOU wrong. I want to prove the Bible right, not for my sake, but for yours. But if you have faith in the Bible and claim that it is not reliable, then your faith is without reason. Please let's talk.
God bless
June 13, 2007 3:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 03:26
In the Book of Mormon several examples show prophets preaching so effectively that the people listening "had no more desire to do evil." Benjamin preaching in Mosiah 5 and Ammon in Alma 19 are two such examples.
What does that mean? Were these people suddenly perfected? Was this a temporary or a lasting thing?
I actually experience this often. Sometimes it's a movie; sometimes the scriptures and sometimes just a talk in Church or in a conference with Church speakers. Someone will say something and I'll feel some kind of spiritual (or emotional, or intellectual, or whatever) confirmation that what they're saying is something I need to act on.
At that moment I feel perfect--like I couldn't possibly ever do something to harm someone else or myself again. Unfortunately, the duration of both my feeling and my resolve varies, but if I were to stare death in the face at the moments I feel like that I would be unafraid.
But what if I were to stare death in the face two weeks later just after backbiting, or telling a lie, or even committing adultery. It would be a different story.
So is the gateway to "heaven" about the timing of one's death? Or is it instead about some verbal or internal acknowledgement of a belief system, without regard to the works required by those who support that credo
The answer, at least for me, is in the LDS belief that an individual continues to progress after this life ends. Heaven might not be an end-point, but rather a phase--just as our life on earth is a phase. We continue to progress after this life. So a "deathbed repentance" will be exposed for what it truly is in the next life as an individual continues to try to improve himself.
June 13, 2007 3:12 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 13, 2007 03:12
Jihadist,
But it is all about the topic. If the Muslims via their/your book of death and destruction were successful in ramming their/your "myth-based" religion down our throats, there would be no theology topics to discuss.
What are you promoting these days, Muslim conquest or global freedom of religion? Must be the former based on your normal "wishy-wash".
June 12, 2007 11:31 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 23:31
Neal,
In all fairness to Brother Otterson, it would be nearly a full-time job to keep up with all of the comments here and to respond when necessary. I don't think this was part of the job description....
In my opinion, it is great that he is able to periodically post anything here. I, too, wish him a speedy recovery....
June 12, 2007 11:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 23:27
Bro. Otterson,
Thanks for your posts. I too hope you will recover from your injuries quickly. Might I also suggest that if you can't find the time to respond to posts here that you (or the Church) should find those who can? It makes no sense to me to start a thread like this and have no official representation from the Church. Unless having responses from non-credentialed people like me is what you want.
As for being saved by simply professing faith - i think Jesus made it pretty clear that is simply not enough(pardon me for not taking the time to look up book and verse)
"Not everone who saith unto me "Lord! Lord! shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that DOETH the will of my Father, which is in heaven"
"If ye love me, KEEP my commandments"
"Master, what shall I do to inherit Eternal Life?"...
Christ's telling response was not "just believe in me", it was instead - "you know the commandments"
and there are many others.
Neal
June 12, 2007 11:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 23:10
I had been thinking much along the same lines of RTC's the last post, but she captured the ideas much better than I would have- thanks, RTC, for you comments.
In addition, I disagree with some that have depicted the LDS as believing that we can earn our way to heaven completely by our own merits. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is abundantly clear that we can only return to God's presence by relying wholly on the merits of Christ.
Regarding works, as RTC mentioned, Christ invites us to follow him, and although we cannot obtain perfection in this life, certainly there is an expectation that we do our best to keep His commandments. Christ was perfect, but he was baptized, not for forgiveness of sins, but to show us the way. He lived His life in service to others and asks us to do the same. How can we follow Christ without trying to do as He did (works)? Of course we still have to rely on Him for what we cannot yet do ourselves.
June 12, 2007 10:24 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 22:24
David -
Your last two post... this is exactly how I feel about grace and works as well. I also believe that this is exactly how it should be interpreted when one seeks to know the truth by the spirit. I can feel that you are an honest seeker of truth David.
Works truly spring from the fountain of faith in Christ... a natural spring that "should" flow freely without compulsion. But to ignore this as an expectation that one does need to develop would be wrong as well in my opinion.
At least for me, I know that it would be much easier to allow myself to feel that I could just sit back and be "me" and that is good enough for God, because I know he loves me absolutely and unconditionally. Can I do that? Yes. Do I know he will still loves me and save me? Yes.
But still there is that "still small voice" that beckons me to be more than "me" IF I call myself a disciple of Christ. Disciple is to be disciplined, and in this case, to his cause. So we are to be that "light" of the world as he was and be him to the best of our ability.
If ye love me, keep my commandments. (Is this saying, prove it, cuz he sure did?)
As I have love you, love one another. (Is this a commandment or a nice comment? Expected?)
And this is all about doing and becoming. (Work? Change? Who ME?)
Like I said before, we best get on, because there is more to life than the honeymoon, if we are to call ourselves disciples of Christ...
The symbol of which, should be how we worship him made manifested then, in how we serve one another.
The question could be,
Can they see His image in our countenance? Frankly, that is a heavy burden to bear, isn't it? But, maybe that IS the "nail".
Anyway, thanks, because I really loved your comments:-)
rtc
June 12, 2007 9:13 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 21:13
Whoooaaaaa........
Mr. Otterson,
My apologies re Concerned the Christian Now Liberated cluttering up this thread with his concerns on me, Islam and Muslims that has nothing to do with your essay or the LDS.
June 12, 2007 8:16 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 20:16
Concerned, I saw Jihadist at Susan Jacoby's latest. Go get her there and leave this thread alone. Is she ignoring you?
June 12, 2007 7:31 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 19:31
Wonderfully said Tim. I agree with you fully. I must remind everyone that when we have the true faith that James speaks about that the works are a natural part of that faith, kind of like breathing. And remember, our works are not of our own, but Christ working through us. Mormons works for salvation, meaning they do it out of selfish ambition. Works are meant to glorify God by Him working through us. Not as a means for us to gain anything. Why would Jesus sacrifice Himself for us then?
June 12, 2007 5:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 17:51
Muslim sympathizers,
Eliminating the militaristic passages from the book of death would go a long way in "peace-a-fying" the current young Islamic terrorists who are "brain washed" with the current koran.
Eliminating the anti-female passages in the koran would make Muslim women human.
Support of global freedom of religion by the many Muslim sects would set the Arab world ablaze in religious education and fervor.
June 12, 2007 5:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 17:37
Otterson says that a "Mere declaration of belief is not enough to merit salvation. There also has to be action." Anytime salvation is conditional on action the question arises as to what action and how much action. Are our actions good enough or do we fall short because of frequency or because of magnitude? The whole point of God's free gift of salvation through belief in Christ as the Son of God was to free mankind from such a system. You do not need works to be saved. As an example, it is generally accepted by most Christians that a person can be saved on their death bed after a life of zero good works and having no chance to preform any good works because of their health. Where is the action/good works in this case? There are none. Christ said that the first shall be last and the last shall be first. He said that those who worked in the vineyard for a full day are paid the same as those who worked a half day. Those, like Otterson, who will have worked a full day may complain but it won't do any good. All that is required to receive God's most precious gift is to profess and believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Through belief and faith in Christ salvation is for all mankind regardless of sins or works or any other conditions some may want to create.
June 12, 2007 5:28 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 17:28
Sorry Henry. I thought you really thought I was wearing my yamaka right now. I get it now. I'm just a humorless blub, sorry.
I know you do not believe in God, but I must point out one thing you said concerning LDS.
The Mormons give themselves an OUT for every contingency in their articles of faith by saying "we believe the Bible to be the word of God, AS LONG AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY."
I have been saying the same thing over and over again to mormons. Here's a clear example of "check in your mind at the door. We'll do the thinking for you." Quite dangerous.
June 12, 2007 5:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 17:17
David
the "Jewish thing" was a joke. Sorry for being unclear.
Remember King David in the Bible? Wrote the Psalms? he was Jewish. Star of David and all that.
peace
Henry the JUBU
June 12, 2007 4:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 16:53
Anon
I don't presume that you were addressing your entire post on the Catholic Church to me, but...
I believe that all churches lilke the Catholics, Mormons, and Muslims who base their belief system on a supernatural, fantastical being are at best metaphorical mythologies, and the few are consistently at their best.
IF one believes that Jesus
a. was REALLY the only begotten son of God
and b. that he REALLY said the things written in the gospels 40-70 years after his death
I can see how your arguments make sense.
I don't believe point a, and there is no evidence to make us rely on point b.
The Mormons DO have a problem with the quote "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it" IF one believes the Bible's every word and Christ's divinity.
The Mormons give themselves an OUT for every contingency in their articles of faith by saying "we believe the Bible to be the word of God, AS LONG AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY."
they can always claim that phrase was mistranslated. Nice system.
June 12, 2007 4:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 16:51
Oh one more thing. What's the difference between paradise and heaven?
June 12, 2007 4:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 16:38
Couple things I want to clear up. Why would anyone assume I'm Jewish? I'm actually mexican, but whatever, go ahead and assume all you want.
The reason I don't say I'm neither catholic or protestant is because I think they define where you stand in terms of Biblical understanding. I have studied the Bible for myself and think the major issue between catholic and protestand theology stands as the works and faith issue. It all comes down to Paul's testimony and James' testimony. Pauls is faith alone. James says you need works. Seems contradicting but it isn't. I see catholics lean towards works more instead of faith for salvation. I see protestants lean towards faith more and do no works. Then I read Paul and James description and they go together quite well. Their talking about two differnt works. Paul is describing that faith alone can save you, not works. But what kind of works. Traditional works. Ex: Circumsicion, baptism, etc. These works are not requirements for salvation. It is by faith alone that we are saved. But James says we must work. Even satan believes Jesus died on the cross and rose again, so how does our faith differ from satan's? By refraining from sin and showing our faith through works. Not traditional works. Paul sets it up by saying just faith and James finishes it by saying what kind of faith. I think this meets in the middle of catholic and protestant theology. And this is why I call myself Christian, not catholic, protestant, mormon or whatever.
By the way Anonymous, thanks for your description of Jesus' church, but I think you need to study what Paul talks about concerning what God's church is. It is His body. And becoming a member of that body is confession of faith. Any organization of men that claims that they are the only true church on the planet is false. The true church is Christ's body. Not a building. Jesus said that upon this rock I will build my church. Sorry, he wasn't talking about Peter (Cephas or Petra in Greek means 'little rock'" That rock is Jesus. The little rock is Peter who Jesus sends out to spread the gospel. Also, historically, the catholic church did not exist until the reign of Constantine in the 3rd century. Until then there were no popes or bishops or whatever. The Christians were persecuted for their beliefs until Constantine came around. They were the true Christians that were martyred for their beliefs and they belonged to the body of Christ, the True Chruch of God. If you look historically, the early Christians didn't have popes or even a building. Most congregated in their homes and traveled around spreading the gospel. You quoted Matt 5:14 that His church would be the light of the world. Cross reference that with the book of James and you will see that God meant that His people, not a church organized by men, would be that light. Also, when you say the gates of Hades will not prevail against it, you might want to consider that to mean God's people. God's people won't go to hell right? So the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Also, look at revelation where Jesus says He hold the keys to Hades. Jesus holds the keys to hades, not the catholic church. I know I will be getting a harsh response for this, but I expect that. I hope not to be offensive, but clearly I am trying to tell you the truth.
God bless
June 12, 2007 4:29 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 16:29
I found these interesting statistics:
Christianity: 2.1 billion
Islam: 1.3 billion
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion
Hinduism: 900 million
Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
Buddhism: 376 million
primal-indigenous: 300 million
African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
Sikhism: 23 million
Juche: 19 million
Spiritism: 15 million
Judaism: 14 million
Baha'i: 7 million
Jainism: 4.2 million
Shinto: 4 million
Cao Dai: 4 million
Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
Tenrikyo: 2 million
Neo-Paganism: 1 million
Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
Scientology: 500 thousand
This is the website: http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html#Spiritism
June 12, 2007 4:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 16:10
Henry James, it's called the Universal Church.
Jesus said his Church would be "the light of the world." He then noted that "a city set on a hill cannot be hid" (Matt. 5:14). This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other churches. Jesus promised, "I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). This means that his Church will never be destroyed and will never fall away from him. His Church will survive until his return.
Among the Christian churches, only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Jesus. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began in 1517. (Most of today’s Protestant churches are actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots.)
Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. This is unequaled by any institution in history.
Even the oldest government is new compared to the papacy, and the churches that send out door-to-door missionaries are young compared to the Catholic Church. Many of these churches began as recently as the nineteenth or twentieth centuries. Some even began during your own lifetime. None of them can claim to be the Church Jesus established.
The Catholic Church has existed for nearly 2,000 years, despite constant opposition from the world. This is testimony to the Church’s divine origin. It must be more than a merely human organization, especially considering that its human members— even some of its leaders—have been unwise, corrupt, or prone to heresy.
Any merely human organization with such members would have collapsed early on. The Catholic Church is today the most vigorous church in the world (and the largest, with a billion members: one sixth of the human race), and that is testimony not to the cleverness of the Church’s leaders, but to the protection of the Holy Spirit.
June 12, 2007 3:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 15:47
sorry, meant to say: ..is something you can not change overnight....
June 12, 2007 3:14 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 15:14
Mark
Thanks for your entirely speculative distinction between Heaven and Paradise.
What kind of week have you been smoking to know all this so definitively?
It is of course absurd to think that any human can have any kind of knowledge of these matters that is other than fantastical, and reading your little disquisition made the absurdity of the exercise about as dramatic as I have seen. I thank you for that.
Henry
June 12, 2007 3:13 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 15:13
Concerned,
Maybe Jihadist and other moderate Muslims will do so in their own sweet time.
However, I truly do not believe that would solve the extremist problem. If people want to live in the middle ages, or want to be evil, they'll do it with or without holy scripture.
Look at some of our very own Christian sects in this country, the Jonestown disaster, the Koresh disaster, the Westboro Baptist Church, etc.
Just because some enlightened individuals say not to take the bible too literaly, does not mean you no longer have extremism.
Also, please do not forget that Islam is more than just a religion, it is also a lifestyle ingrained in people for hundreds of years. That is something you can change overnight by denouncing those sections you find objectionable.
June 12, 2007 3:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 15:10
Mark,
You might want to read what modern NT scholars have to say about the good thief. Many conclude the story was a later addition to attract more converts. There were no reporters at the crucifixion for the needed attestations.
e.g. As per Professor Crossan from his book, Who is Jesus:
“My best historical reconstruction would be something like this. Jesus was arrested during the Passover festival, most likely in response to his action in the Temple. Those who were closest to him ran away for their own safety. I do not presume that there were any high-level confrontations between Caiaphas and Pilate and Herod Antipas either about Jesus or with Jesus. I doubt they would have agreed before the festival that fast action was to be taken against any disturbance and that a few examples by crucifixion might be especially useful at the outset.
And I doubt very much if Jewish police or Roman soldiers needed to go too far up the chain of command in handling a Galilean peasant like Jesus. It is hard for us to imagine the casual brutality with which Jesus was probably taken and executed. All those "last week" details in our gospels, as distinct from the brute facts just mentioned, are prophecy turned into history, rather than history remembered."
June 12, 2007 2:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 14:42
Concerned,
Here's my question:
If Jihadist and Muslims like her completed your steps 1 and 2, what would that do? How would that change the world and the Muslim religion?
Or do you demand this only to make yourself feel better?
June 12, 2007 2:39 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 14:39
David,
The thief next to Jesus was saved from hell by his fiath, but entry into heaven is another thing.
Paradise is where you go after death awaiting judgement day. While you wait in paradise, not heaven, you are exposed to the teachings of God and Jesus. If someone stands in for your baptism, you have the option to accept it or not. When Jesus returns to this earth the dead will again have the chance to Qualify for heaven. Only by your works and your faith can you achieve the right to enter gods house (heaven). It is better and carrys more weight if you do it here before you die when things are not so clear as they will be in paradise.
June 12, 2007 2:14 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 14:14
The Problem with David's "Christianity"
Aside from the fact that David is Jewish,
the problem, David, with defining yourself as Christian
is that there are thousands of variations of "Christian Beliefs."
My brother William the tells me that Mormon beliefs are as consistent with the Bible as the way most other Christians interpret it.
The Bible admits of an almost infinite number of interpretations. It is porbably bad to kill according to the Bible, but there are a number of siturations where God directs people to kill in his name, including Genocide.
So the concept of a "strict literal reading" of the Bible is a concept that can NOT work in practice.
It's kind of like the consitution and the Supreme Court.
Mormons think their prophet is here to clear up ambiguities, but as JD will tell you, there are still plenty of ambiguities left over even with God communicating regularly with Salt Lake City.
June 12, 2007 9:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 09:50
Gaby,
Jihadist and other "liberal" Muslims need to do two simple things. 1) condemn the militancy and anti-female passages of the koran.
2) admit that there should be freedom of religion in every country.
We have been requesting this since the beginning of the On Faith blog.
June 12, 2007 2:16 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 02:16
Hi David,
There are a lot of interpretations that can be taken from this. As far as I understand the after life, a disembodied spirit is not the same as a resurrected spiritual body. There is a period between death and resurrection where we do not have physical bodies. I think most Christians believe this, all except the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I could be wrong.
BTW, I understand you wanting to be defined by your Christianity first and foremost; I too would like to be defined by my Christianity first and foremost.
Best,
Jd1
June 12, 2007 12:49 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 00:49
Concerned,
I understand what you are trying to say and I still disagree.
There are those who are evil, extremist like people, they exist everywhere. They start out harmless, and then they become more and more violent because they gather in number.
Please, Concerned, do not shear everyone over the same comb. You take on Jihadist simply because she is Muslim, that does not make her a terrorist. Even Hitler has his moments of glory. He gave the Germans work, a sense of belonging, all the while he deceived the entire country.
I wish I could explain it better, but right now I am too tired. We'll talk again tomorrow.
June 12, 2007 12:34 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2007 00:34
Jd1,
Yeah your right, it is about the bodily resurrection. But are we resurrected in our natural bodies first? When we die and go to heaven are we in our natural bodies? You might want to re-read that. When Jesus resurrected from the dead on the third day wasn't He in a spiritual body? It says no one recognized Him. So obviously He was not in His natural, earthly born body. So, we are in our natural bodies now, which is first, then our spiritual. Spiritual is not first, like it says. By the way, I'm not protestant. I'm a Christian.
June 11, 2007 8:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 11, 2007 20:53
David,
After looking at the scripture you quoted I realized it is actually unambiguously *not* making reference to the pre-mortal. Nor is it making reference to non-corporal spirits. It is speaking of the resurrection.
First natural, that is the natural body, second Spiritual, that is a spiritual body or a glorified, uncorrupted body.
Here is the context:
"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a *natural body*; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a *spiritual body.*
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual." (1 Corinthians 15:42-46)
In all fairness, as a protestant you have no reason to believe in a pre-mortal existence. There are no unambiguous references to it in the Bible. I do not think you can say for sure that there is not a pre-mortal existence based on Biblical data. I believe I lived with God before I was born, because of my faith that God has revealed this truth to His modern Prophets.
All the best my freind,
Jd1
June 11, 2007 8:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 11, 2007 20:27
David,
I do not think it is obvious, I think it is ambiguous. For example, the verse you quote could mean a number of things, e.g., when God created man, he created the body first and breathed into him his spirit according to Genesis.
Mormons would say it was a pre-mortally existent spirit, Christians would say a recently created spirit, niether have unambiguous Biblical data to back it up.
Mormons look at various Biblical verses as evidence of pre-mortal existence. One is the following:
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations" (Jeramiah 1:5).
Christians will say it refers to God's foreknowledge, I think the most straightforward exegesis is possible with a conception of pre-mortal existence, but ultimately it is ambiguous.
Best,
Jd1
June 11, 2007 8:07 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 11, 2007 20:07
Henry,
Good point. The difference in this case is what is right according to the Bible. Mormons base their faith on the Bible like I do. However, they teach false doctrines. Ex: pre-existence. Obviousy the Bible says otherwise. So, does that mean I can come along and say murder is ok too. I know the Bible says not to murder, but screw it, let's make it part of our faith anyway. Hey Joe and Brigham, grab a knife!! Let's stab us some people in the name of God!!
June 11, 2007 7:18 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 11, 2007 19:18
David
I don't think you are being offensive. Persistent and painstaking, both good qualities.
As i see it, the possibilities are
1. You are Right and the Mormons are wrong
2. The Mormons are Right and you are wrong.
3. You are both wrong.
You can't both be right.
This is the general problem. There are 4,000 religions that hold contradictory beliefs.
Either 3,999 are wrong and ONE is right
or they are all wrong.
I vote for : all wrong.
and we can't prove it either way. But the odds are in my favor.
by at least 3,999 to one.
best
Henry
June 11, 2007 7:00 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 11, 2007 19:00
RTC,
Concerning pre-existence. What does the Bible say?
1 Corinthians 15:46
46The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.
Go ahead and read that in the KJV as well since I know you do not accept any other translations. It says the same thing. I also encourage you to read the whole context so you know I'm not taking this verse out of context but instead know that it is specifically telling us humans that we never pre-existed. This is false doctrine and this is why I do not listen to LDS. I already know what your gonna say. "I believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins and resurrected too". Yeah, but do you have the right Jesus?
This is why I am stricly Biblical in my beliefs. How can you base your beliefs on the Bible and then believe the same divine inspiration inspired another doctrine (BOM) that contradicts itself? Sorry RTC, we differ in our faiths even though we use the same basis for our beliefs, the Bible.
So, if I know your beliefs contradict Biblical scripture, I know not to take heed to your words of description of the afterlife, or heaven. You think you will become a god. Sorry, the Bible says otherwise.
I hope I do not come off as offensive. I truly believe LDS is false teaching.
God bless
June 11, 2007 6:16 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 11, 2007 18:16
Gaby,
I will expand my comment:
Koranic" Muslims, other religious fanatics, Communists, Nazis, Aryan Nationalists, and "KKKers" would like us to be less than human.
June 11, 2007 6:04 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 11, 2007 18:04
Concerned,
"Freedom of religion is a basic human right, right up there with freedom of the press, vote, and to live and die in peace."
Those are our human rights, there are many countries which do not have these same basic rights. By far, not all of them are Muslim!
Take the former USSR, Cuba, Zimbabwe, etc. They aren't (weren't) Muslim, yet they did not have any of those rights either. Any time you have extremists rule, you will find those rights taken away.
June 11, 2007 3:09 PM | Report Offensive Comments