25
Apr
12

What a difference a “not” makes!

One of my favorite Bible passages is Romans 4:5.  “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”  The whole context is brimming over with comforting statements reassuring us that God forgives us through faith.  For example, the very next verse says, “Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works.”  It is obvious that righteousness without works is Paul’s theme in this section.

But that is not how Joseph Smith translated it.  His translation, also called the Inspired Version by theLDSChurch, translates verse 5 this way.  “But to him that seeketh not to be justified by the law of works, but believeth on him who justifieth not the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”  Besides having no basis for such a translation, it violates Paul’s line of thought.  In the very next chapter, for example, Paul speaks in a similar way about justifying the ungodly when he writes: “For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.”  (Romans 5:6)

This is not the only time Joseph Smith did that either.  Another beautiful example of how quick God is to forgive us is seen when the prophet Nathan comes to King David to confront him about his adultery.  After he laid in on the line and also told David that there would be earthly consequences for his sin, we read:  “And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD.  And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.”  (2 Samuel 12:13)  It’s striking how quickly Nathan reassures David of forgiveness.

But not according to Joseph Smith.  He translated it, “hath not put away thy sin that thou shalt not die.”  Once again the little word “not” changes the sense completely.  It drains it of comfort for us.  It robs God of great glory.

A lot of Mormons today shy away from statements like the following what Spencer W. Kimball wrote in his classic book, The Miracle of Forgiveness.  “It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when.  It could be weeks, it could be years, it could be centuries before that happy day when you have the positive assurance that the Lord has forgiven you.  That depends on your humility, your sincerity, your works, your attitudes.”  I don’t know why they shy away from such statements.  To me, such statements are accurately reflecting the way Joseph Smith translated the Bible.

The way Mormonism talks about forgiveness and the way the Bible speaks about it are totally opposite.  I rejoice along withSt. Paulthat God justifies the ungodly, that to the one who doesn’t work, his faith is credited as righteousness.

Advertisements

158 Responses to “What a difference a “not” makes!”


  1. 1 choosethechrist
    April 25, 2012 at 2:38 pm

    “A lot of Mormons today shy away from statements like the following what Spencer W. Kimball wrote in his classic book, The Miracle of Forgiveness. “It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when. It could be weeks, it could be years, it could be centuries before that happy day when you have the positive assurance that the Lord has forgiven you. That depends on your humility, your sincerity, your works, your attitudes.” I don’t know why they shy away from such statements. To me, such statements are accurately reflecting the way Joseph Smith translated the Bible.”

    I think they shy away from it because it shows that their gospel is impossible for them to keep. It does reflect the way JS translated the Bible and Spencer Kimball is not the only one who truly understood this:

    Grace consists of God’s gift to His children wherein He gave His Only Begotten Son that whosoever would believe in Him and comply with His laws and ordinances would have everlasting life.” (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pp. 353-354).

    “Complete obedience brings eternal life. But to be exalted one must keep the whole law … to receive the exaltation of the righteous, in other words eternal life, the commandments of the Lord must be kept in all things.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation: Sermons and Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith, 2:6).

    “To enter the celestial and obtain exaltation it is necessary that the whole law be kept…Do you desire to enter the celestial Kingdom and receive eternal life? Then be willing to keep all of the commandments.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, pg. 206).

    “If we obey this law, preserve it inviolate, live according to it, we shall be prepared to enjoy the blessings of a celestial kingdom” (Brigham Young, Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 404)

    “In order to obtain the exaltation we must accept the gospel and all its covenants; and take upon us the obligations which the Lord has offered; and walk in the light and understanding of the truth; and ‘live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God’” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 2:43).

    “live by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God” who can do that? Does this even mean words that were spoken by past prophets who are no longer living? Those words proceeded from the mouth of God. Are any Mormons here living by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God? If not, why not? It is my understanding that Mormonism teaches that this is possible. Do you really believe that you can do this? If so, and you are not doing it now, then why are you not doing it now?

  2. April 25, 2012 at 3:48 pm

    AMEN!

    It amazes me how LDS members continue to claim that there are no contradictions between the Bible and their teachings. Adding the word “NOT” alone creates a complete contradiction.

    I’m waiting for the post to explain that “not” really doesn’t mean “not.” Mark cited one example where not was added where it did belong, but LDS defenders also read “not” out of verses where it is still present. For instance,’

    “4But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
    5 NOT by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;” Titus 3:4-6

    “8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that NOT of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9NOT of works, lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2:8-9

    “Knowing that a man is NOT justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and NOT by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.” Galatians 2:16

    And what did Paul say about those of his time who sought to justify themselves by the law:

    “31But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. “32Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone; 33As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.” Romans 9:31-33

    (Notice Shem what Paul calls the law in that verse, your “two sets laws” theory doesn’t stand up to the truth the scripture)

  3. 3 Echo
    April 25, 2012 at 3:58 pm

    I sure am thankful to Jesus that I don’t have to wait weeks, years or centuries to be forgiven. I was forgiven when Jesus died on the cross. If I sin tomorrow, what Jesus did for me on the cross 2000+ years ago still applies. I am certain of my full forgiveness every day. Nor does my forgiveness hinge on my humility, my sincerity, my works, my attitudes but it hinged entirely on Jesus’ humility, Jesus’ sincerity, Jesus works, Jesus’ attitude because Jesus is my Savior and that is what Savior’s do.

  4. 4 JBR
    April 25, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    I believe it’s Mormons shy away from it is rather obvious …… Romans 4:5 reveals what Joseph Smith’s revelation is and where such false revelation leads if one follows false teachers \ prophets.

    Either Romans 4:5 is the truth or alter it so as to make yourself the truth.

  5. 5 JBR
    April 25, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    should read….I believe Mormons shy away from it is rather obvious

  6. 6 shematwater
    April 25, 2012 at 6:25 pm

    “Not” does make a very big difference. Poor Paul, to have so many misunderstand his teachings because a careless scribe missed a simple negative.
    Oh, and dieing for the ungodly is not the same as justifying them. Christ died for all men so that they could be changed from ungodly to godly. Those who accept the change are justified, while those who remain ungodly are not.

    As to Nathan’s statement, the Hebrew would indicate more a deferment of punishment, not a forgiveness of sins. Nathan simply told David that he was not to die yet, as God was defering judgment.

    Personally, I find very little comfort in this idea of free forgiveness for anything. The very concept destroys justice and scares me to death. I find much more comfort in a God who actually fulfills justice.

    And we don’t really shy away from anything. We simply ask that you understand what is said before try to tell us what we believe. I note Echo’s statement “I sure am thankful to Jesus that I don’t have to wait weeks, years or centuries to be forgiven.” That is very good, because I am thankful for this very same thing. I don’t have to wait weeks, years, or centuries to be forgiven. It may take that long if I do not seek it out, or I drag my feet in the process; but it doesn’t have to. So, while we do avoid your twistings of the meaning of President Kimbal, we do not avoid his actual words. (At least I don’t.)

    DAVID

    First of all, what I said stands up perfectly to anyone who actually reads and understands the Bible. Paul talks of the Covenant of Abraham as being separate from the law, which was added 430 years later (see Galatians). We know from Chronicles 16: 16-17 that part of the covenant made with Abraham was a law given by God. We also know from Paul’s epistle to the Hebrews that the Gospel that he preached was preached to the Israelites in the days of Moses, but was rejected, and thus replaced with the Law of Moses. We see this clearly in the sermon on the mount when Jesus first states what is in the Law of Moses, based in actions; and then replaces that with a higher law, based in thoughts. It is again illustrated when he declares that divorce was given a wider use under the Law of Moses, but before that was more restrictive, which he restored.

    As to the scripture you quote, you may notice that Israel is not chastised for striving to follow the law of righteousness, but for not doing so in faith. From this we see that Paul is actually advocating our obedience to the Law, if it is done in faith, as the proper action.

  7. April 25, 2012 at 6:58 pm

    Praise God that even those who do not seek out forgiveness or drag their feet in the process have already been forgiven by the shed blood of Jesus on the cross!

    2 Corinthians 5:19 “that God was reconciling the WORLD to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.”

    1 John 2:2 “He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. ”

    It’s truly sad that so many reject the free forgiveness Christ already won for us and throw it in the garbage thus forfeiting the Mercy that was freely given to them. They will indeed receive the justice they desired –> One sin = Outer Darkness. For it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Galatians 2:10

  8. 8 joshtried
    April 25, 2012 at 7:26 pm

    “It’s truly sad that so many reject the free forgiveness Christ already won for us and throw it in the garbage thus forfeiting the Mercy that was freely given to them. They will indeed receive the justice they desired –> One sin = Outer Darkness. For it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Galatians 2:10”

    Unfortunately you are correct Echo. There are many that do reject the forgiveness of Christ.

    Choose:
    Are any Mormons here living by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God? If not, why not? It is my understanding that Mormonism teaches that this is possible. Do you really believe that you can do this? If so, and you are not doing it now, then why are you not doing it now?

    I will answer to my place in this question.
    Is it possible for me to follow every word of God? At some point in my life, yes it is possible. Will I sin at least once? yes I will. After i sin, i am free to follow every word of God.
    Do I believe that i can do this? Yes. The power of God is more amazing then any of us can even attempt to fathom. Through God, all things are possible, including following him.
    Why am i not doing it now? The most simple answer is I refuse to. I have very specifically been told “No!” to a question i asked of God before, and i did what i wanted to any way. I refused to listen. God does still have the power to make it happen, and will always have that power.

  9. April 25, 2012 at 7:28 pm

    Well, I was close!

    I said in my first post:

    “I’m waiting for the post to explain that “not” really doesn’t mean “not.” ”

    Shem said:

    ““Not” does make a very big difference.”

    Here is the difference:

    “16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18He that BELIEVETH on him IS NOT CONDEMNED: but he that BELIEVETH NOT IS CONDEMNED already, because he hath NOT believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” John 3:16-18

    The difference doesn’t get any bigger than that Shem.

    Echo:

    “It’s truly sad that so many reject the free forgiveness Christ already won for us and throw it in the garbage thus forfeiting what was freely given to them.”

    It certainly is.

    “23But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
    24But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.” 1 Corinthains 1:22-24.

  10. 10 JBR
    April 25, 2012 at 8:38 pm

    bereandave,
    There was another way Shem was able to advert from being convicted. The reason I wrote what I did earlier is because we do in fact understand the mentality and doctrine of Mormonism and what is written …..

    It must be great to be able to bring out the good ol’ standby that the Bible is incorrectly written:

    “Poor Paul, to have so many misunderstand his teachings because a careless scribe missed a simple negative.” ………

  11. April 25, 2012 at 9:04 pm

    God has justified the ungodly all apart from our works. Salvation, Eternal life, forgiveness are free and are ours all apart from our works or effort, all apart from anything we do.

    So what about Good works then?

    Read this Q& A from the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod website (www.wels.net)…

    “Good works

    Question: What is the relationship between faith and good works? Are good works necessary for salvation, even if it’s only indirectly?

    Answer: Article IV of the Formula of Concord takes up your question in great detail. When Scripture says that God saves people who “do not work” (Romans 4:5), and that he saves us “not by works” (Ephesians 2:8-9), “apart from observing the law” (Romans 3:28), “no longer by works” (Romans 11:6), and “not because of righteous things we had done” (Titus 3:5), etc., the answer becomes clear. Our good works are not “necessary for salvation” in any way, shape, or form—directly or indirectly, wholly or in part, before or after we are saved, etc.

    But this doesn’t make good works “optional” for a Christian. One reason is that God still commands them. The Bible’s teaching of justification by faith alone does not turn the 10 Commandments into the 10 Suggestions. Through our good works, we worship and glorify our Savior God (Romans 12:1-3). We show that our faith is alive and well in front of others, who can’t see our faith but can see the actions that faith produces (Matthew 5:16). And through our good works we love and serve other people.

    As Lutherans like to say, God doesn’t need our works, but our neighbor does. “Good works are necessary for salvation” would be a false statement. “Good works are necessary” is true–not for salvation, but for plenty of other reasons.”

    .
    ——————————————————————————–

  12. April 25, 2012 at 11:53 pm

    JBR

    “It must be great to be able to bring out the good ol’ standby that the Bible is incorrectly written:”

    ““Poor Paul, to have so many misunderstand his teachings because a careless scribe missed a simple negative.”” ………

    And very dangerous. Imagine to just decide to throw in or toss out the word “not” anywhere in the Bible and claim it to be correct because “a careless scribe missed a simple negative.” Thanks for highlighting that. How reckless, how irresponsible, how arrogant (sorry there is no other word for it) is that when it is God’s word that is being negated and one’s eternity hanging in the balance.

    Instead of God’s word what do they put their faith in? A man with a peep stone translating a nonexistant language. It is not “Poor Paul” as Shem writes dripping with sarcasm, but poor Shem and other followers of that false prophet and no sarcasm is intended.

  13. 13 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 12:25 am

    Apparently my request means nothing, but I will ask one more time anyway…

    Can you prove just one prophecy that was false. Until then, please quit proclaiming he is a false prophet.

  14. 14 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 3:21 am

    Also david, you read the Bible that became prevelant after Martin Luther butchered what was originally considered doctrine. Perhaps you should remember that in these discussions. I have proved this point. Need I do it again for you?

  15. April 26, 2012 at 3:37 am

    Josh

    “Can you prove just one prophecy that was false. Until then, please quit proclaiming he is a false prophet.”

    Yes. The first one. He never met Jesus.

    “Also david, you read the Bible that became prevelant after Martin Luther butchered what was originally considered doctrine.”

    I have quoted mainly from the KJV. But any of the few quoted from the NIV I would stand behind. I have also offered on more than one occassion to compare any passage to the orginal Greek or Hebrew text.

    “Perhaps you should remember that in these discussions. I have proved this point. Need I do it again for you?”

    You have proved nothing to support the false prophecies of Joepsh Smith.

  16. 16 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 4:37 am

    To “the first one”: that is not a prophecy. It was either a vision or an actual physical manifestation. Other than your belief that this did not exist, PROVE that it did not happen.

    Second, I dont care what you quote from, other than if you use the original Catholic Bible, with the Apocrypha in tact. If you do not, you are using a corrupt Bible (parts were lost/taken out by Luther). Interestingly, this makes one of the 2 Bibles corrupt. Was the Catholic Bible corrupt, and Martin Luther fixed the corruption, or was the Catholic Bible correct, and Martin Luther corrupted it by removing books? The Apocrypha was “standard” from ~397 AD, Martin Luther was not born until 1438 AD? So, which Bible is the corrupt version David?

    Third: I have proven at least one prophecy that was thought to be false as true. It was the prophecy regarding the building of a temple in the “new Zion”. The gist of the message was this: all prophecy regarding Zion must be taken into account when reading the scripture stating a Temple would be built. If you wish for me to pull up this post from old, i can. It was pretty long. In any case, i feel that i have proven at least one “false” prophecy to be true. If you have a specific prophecy you would like me to speak on, then lets do it. I will be glad to correct your understanding of anything you perceive to be wrong.

    Finally, i love how even in such a small response, you twist what i say.. I said i proved the point that the bible either is or was corrupt, and you then say i proved nothing to support the false prophecies.. Do you think i am to stupid to catch this? do you think the other readers are? What is your reason for twisting these questions? I seriously want to know.

  17. 17 choosethechrist
    April 26, 2012 at 1:09 pm

    Josh said, “Is it possible for me to follow every word of God? At some point in my life, yes it is possible. Will I sin at least once? yes I will. After i sin, i am free to follow every word of God.
    Do I believe that i can do this? Yes. The power of God is more amazing then any of us can even attempt to fathom. Through God, all things are possible, including following him.
    Why am i not doing it now? The most simple answer is I refuse to. I have very specifically been told “No!” to a question i asked of God before, and i did what i wanted to any way. I refused to listen. God does still have the power to make it happen, and will always have that power.”

    In light of this (from http://www.lds.org/liahona/1988/12/redemption-through-jesus-christ-after-all-we-can-do?lang=eng):

    By his grace, and by our faith in his atonement and repentance of our sins, we receive the strength to do the works necessary that we otherwise could not do by our own power.

    By his grace we receive an endowment of blessing and spiritual strength that may eventually lead us to eternal life if we endure to the end.

    By his grace we become more like his divine personality.

    Yes, it is “by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.” (2 Ne. 25:23.)

    After All We Can Do

    What is meant by “after all we can do”?

    “After all we can do” includes extending our best effort. It includes living his commandments.

    I am confused as to why Josh would refuse to listen to God, if by God’s grace and Josh’s faith, Josh has been given the strength to do the works God has asked Josh to do, why doesn’t Josh keep ALL of the commandments?

    What is missing for Josh? Is it that Josh does not have enough faith? Is it that Josh is not repentant enough? What is missing for Josh that keeps God from giving Josh the spiritual strength that Josh needs to keep ALL of God’s commandments? What does Josh need to change or do to help him endure to the end so that God will give him the strength he needs to be perfect?

  18. 18 shematwater
    April 26, 2012 at 1:21 pm

    DAVID

    “Imagine to just decide to throw in or toss out the word “not” anywhere in the Bible and claim it to be correct because “a careless scribe missed a simple negative.”

    I claim this to be correct because God himself has declared this to be correct. It is very dangerous to deny his words, and yet you continue to do so every time you post here. Of course you have stripped God of all power to speak to men in this age, believing that he is not able to make it known that he is the one talking and not Satan. You prefer to trust your own reasoning and capabilities rather than lean on the Lord. So, I am not surprised that you would reject his words when the do not mesh with your beliefs.

    ECHO

    If everyone is forgiven than justice is destroyed by anyone being condemned. In other words, if I have a debt to a bank, and a friend pays it for me, that Bank cannot sue me for payment. If Christ has already paid the debt in full, then no one can be made to pay it again, or justice is thrown out the window.

  19. 19 shematwater
    April 26, 2012 at 1:24 pm

    CHOOSE

    Enough with personal attacks. If you cannot discuss the doctrine without resorting to blatant defamation than you shouldn’t be posting.
    And stop trying to twist our doctrine to suit your whims.

  20. April 26, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    Josh

    “Second, I dont care what you quote from, other than if you use the original Catholic Bible, with the Apocrypha in tact.”

    Then I won’t answer your questions because my proof is from the BIBle and you will not bind me to a BIble your own church doesn’t use. You have made it abundantly clear, the original text and even the KLV is unacceptable to you. So I’m not going to waste my time responding to someone who has told me in advance they are going to ignore everything I say.

    If you wish to rely on words of a nonexistant Egyptian language, which even the Egyptians have never heard of, translated (in old English prose) from a peep stone than that is your choice. You obvioulsy feel compelled to believe that over the “inperishable” and “enduring” Word of God.

    “3But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. . . . 13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
    15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their WORKS.” 2 Corinthians 11:3-4; 13-15.

    This passage was not written by any “anti-mormon” and it should make the hair stand up on the back of your neck. (of course that is my opinion) but you refuse to believe it.

    I can’t stop you from relying on Joseph SMith and his peep stone more than God’s Word, but I can tell you the truth.

  21. April 26, 2012 at 1:40 pm

    Shem

    “I claim this to be correct because God himself has declared this to be correct.”

    Shem – you are not a prophet. God spoke to the prophets and He gave us His word and declared it to be true, enduring for all generations, imperishable and uncorruptible. God has chosen to speak to us through His Word. You have chosen to listen to someone else. What is dangerous to recklessly though the word “not” around in the Bible anytime it doesn’t say what you want it to say.

    “21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” Galatians 2:21

  22. 22 choosethechrist
    April 26, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    Shem said, “Enough with personal attacks. If you cannot discuss the doctrine without resorting to blatant defamation than you shouldn’t be posting. And stop trying to twist our doctrine to suit your whims.”

    I am trying to understand what one has to do to get the strength from God’s grace to keep ALL of the commandments. I’m not attacking Josh, Josh is the only one who has admitted, that I know of, not being able to keep ALL of the commandments. I have presented YOUR doctrine in black and white from LDS sources. I have not changed or “twisted” the wording. Do you or do you not have to keep ALL of the requirements? Do you or do you not have to abandon ALL sin and NEVER repeat that sin again? If I am twisting your doctrine, please provide evidence of who’s quotes I have “twisted”.

    Since you feel that I am attacking Josh, perhaps you would like to help us understand what the LDS person must do to claim 100% of God’s grace and strength in keeping ALL of the comandments? This is MAJOR LDS doctrine yet the LDS here don’t seem to want to discuss it. Are you afraid to admit that your doctrine is impossible? If it is possible, could you please give some examples of LDS folks who have managed to endure to the end by keeping ALL of the commandments. If as an LDS person, you are fully aware of God’s plan for you that you are here to prove your faithfulness by keeping God’s commandments, then why can’t you keep ALL of them? Are you really doing your best if it is possible by the strength of God to keep ALL of the commandments and yet you do not keep them?

  23. April 26, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    Josh

    You don’t want scripture? Then how about some historical fact.

    Not one city mentioned in the book of mormon has ever been found in South America where is supposedly took place….NOT ONE!

    You have nonexistant a language, golden tablets that have been “lost,” and entire cities disappear without a trace from the face of the earth.

  24. 24 shematwater
    April 26, 2012 at 2:09 pm

    DAVID

    You miss Josh’s point entirely. The question is do you accept the Apocrypha as inspired and the word of God.
    If you do than Martin Luther had it wrong, as he rejected them as such. In this case, as you are Lutheran and use that Bible (I assume) than you are using a bible that you admit is corrupted, as it has removed several books of scripture.
    If, on the other hand, you reject the apocrypha than you admit that the Catholic church uses a corrupt bible, because they still have these books and believe in them as scripture.
    That is the point, and the question that Josh was trying to get at. For the purposes of that discussion it doesn’t matter what scriptures you site, only what Bible they are taken from.

    “Not one city mentioned in the Book of Mormon has ever been found in South America where is supposedly took place….NOT ONE!”

    You point? You say this as if it proves something. You ignore the fact that the languages of the Ancient American people are extremely foreign to us, and that no one living today actually knows how they were pronounced. Some may have deciphered meaning, but without being able to hear it spoken they cannot decipher pronunciation. As such they may have actually found several of the cities of the Book of Mormon, but not knowing how to pronounce the names they assigned a name to them for easy reference.
    This is actually a very common practice in archeology throughout the world. It just seems to be ignored by those seeking to prove the Book of Mormon wrong.

  25. 25 shematwater
    April 26, 2012 at 2:13 pm

    CHOOSE

    Yes, that was a personal attack. Your purpose was to create an impression regarding Josh as proof against our doctrine.
    Again, you refuse to understand the doctrine. You always try to focus on one aspect, ignoring everything else, in order to try and prove your point.
    Do we have to keep all the requires? If you don’t know the answer to this than you have not listened to a word we have said, or actually paid attention to anything you read. Just consider the reasons why repentance is made available, and just maybe you will understand this doctrine a little better.

  26. 26 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 2:16 pm

    David, I do not care about specific scripture when I am asking you which book is corrupt. You did not answer this question.
    Choose, I did not say I cannot keep the commandments. I said I am not keeping them. There is a difference. This is a personal choice for more reasons than I am willing to share with any of you. If I woke up tomorrow and decided to follow every tittle in the law, I would be able to through faith. Nobody can follow every commandment from birth save Jesus Christ. IF they could, then Christ died for nothing.
    Finally david, do you know how much of brazil is still unexplored? And thats just one country. Someone from scientific america has not set foot on the entire face of the earth. If they had we would know where atlantis is by now. This is another case where people know it did exist, but cannot find proof. As to the bible, there is proof that what was in it has changed. If it is not corruptable, why has then been any change at all?

  27. 27 shematwater
    April 26, 2012 at 2:16 pm

    Oh, yeah. A list of perfect people from the LDS church.

    Joseph Smith Senior.
    Joseph Smith Junior.
    Alvin Smith
    Hyrum Smith
    Edward Partridge
    William W. Phelps
    Brigham Young
    David W. Patten
    Wilford Wudruff
    John Taylor
    Gordon B. Hinkley
    Thomas S. Monson
    Lucy Mack Smith

    I could continue, but it would take a little research, as names escape me at this moment.

  28. 28 choosethechrist
    April 26, 2012 at 2:46 pm

    To start:

    Joseph Smith Senior:

    Jacob 1:15
    And now it came to pass that the people of Nephi, under the reign of the second king, began to grow hard in their hearts, and indulge themselves somewhat in wicked practices, such as like unto David of old desiring many wives and concubines, and also Solomon, his son.

    Jacob 2:24
    Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

    Jacob 2:27
    Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none.

    Mosiah 11:2
    For behold, he did not keep the commandments of God, but … he had many wives and concubines.

    Ether 10:5
    Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines.

    Joseph Smith Senior did NOT obey the word of god, the MOST correct book on Earth.

    Joseph Smith Senior = Sinner

    Shall I go on?

    Shem said, “Just consider the reasons why repentance is made available, and just maybe you will understand this doctrine a little better.”

    “Through Christ’s Atonement we are able to repent and be cleansed from our sins. I know that each of us can be forgiven and receive peace, because I have followed these steps of repentance and have felt the glorious feeling of peace that comes with sincere repentance. ”

    “If we repent, Christ has taken upon Himself the suffering for our sins (D&C 19:16–17, 20).”
    “If we repent, the Lord forgives us and remembers our sins no more (D&C 58:42).”

    “President Kimball outlined the steps for repentance and forgiveness very carefully in the Miracle of Forgiveness:
    1. We must awake to the fact that we have committed sins. Read 2 Corinthians 7:9–10.
    2. We must abandon sin. Read James 4:7.
    3. We must confess our sins: (1) to persons we have offended, (2) to the Lord himself, and (3) to the Lord’s authorized representatives if the sins are of a serious nature. (See Doctrine and Covenants 58:43: “By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins—behold, he will confess them and forsake them.”)
    4. We must make restitution where we can. (See Miracle of Forgiveness, p. 194: “The repentant sinner is required to make restitution insofar as it is possible.”)
    5. We must thenceforth keep the commandments of God. (See Doctrine and Covenants 1:32: “Nevertheless, he that repents and does the commandments of the Lord shall be forgiven.”)”

    Part of your repentance is keeping the commandments of God. If you are not keeping the commandments of God and that means ALL of them, then you are NOT forgiven according to this. YES or NO? And Jesus will only cleanse you of your sins IF you keep ALL of the commandments. YES or NO?

    http://latterdaysaintwoman.wordpress.com/lds-process-of-repentance/

  29. April 26, 2012 at 3:06 pm

    Shem

    “than you are using a bible that you admit is corrupted,”

    That is false.

  30. April 26, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    Josh and Shem

    You use (or claim to use) the KJV of the Bible. I will not be drawn into a pointless discussion about books in the Apocrypha none of which claim to be inspired or prophetic.

  31. 31 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    This is not a pointless discussion. We claim that the Bible was corrupt. Your side said prove it. I proved it. As yall have pointed out, we use the JS corrected KJV of the Bible. Now, did Cathloics corrupt the Bible by adding to Apocrypha and claiming it was doctrine and “authoritative”, or did Martin Luther corrupt it by removing the Apocrypha.

  32. 32 choosethechrist
    April 26, 2012 at 3:34 pm

    “Part of your repentance is keeping the commandments of God. If you are not keeping the commandments of God and that means ALL of them, then you are NOT forgiven according to this. YES or NO? And Jesus will only cleanse you of your sins IF you keep ALL of the commandments. YES or NO?”

    The mormon silence on this issue only leads me to conclude that Christ is NOT sufficient for the mormon unless they are keeping ALL of the commandments which leads me to conclude that since they choose not to keep ALL of the commandments that everything they are doing in the temple is meaningless since they are unlcean in their sin. Christ can’t cleanse them with his forgiveness because they choose NOT to keep ALL of the commandments. If they are unclean, the temple means nothing since no unlcean thing can go before God. YES or NO?

  33. April 26, 2012 at 3:46 pm

    Josh

    “Now, did Cathloics corrupt the Bible by adding to Apocrypha and claiming it was doctrine and “authoritative”, or did Martin Luther corrupt it by removing the Apocrypha.”

    Joseph Smith corrupted the Bible by adding “not” and other words that God did not say.

  34. 34 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 3:48 pm

    Must we keep every commandment to the t from the beginning of time forever? No, this is not required.
    Must we repent once we realize something is wrong? Yes. There is no once saved always saved.
    Once I become “perfect”, keeping every commandment, do I have to stay this way forever and ever? It would be great, but is not required. It is what we are to strive for. God commands everyone to be perfect, including you. Does this mean that you will not be forgiven because you are disobeying God? You can only be forgiven once you disobey. Whether I am or am not living the commandments is not the question. What has GOD commanded you to do?

  35. 35 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 3:51 pm

    you answered a question I did not ask. Did the Catholics corrupt the bible, or did luther? My claim the JS corrected it is correct no matter who corrupted it. The question is then define corruption. Taking enture books out or adding whole books is corruption. Correcting what was erroneously added by either addition or subtraction is still resoration.

  36. 36 JBR
    April 26, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    No proof that Joseph Smith was a false prophet ….. ? When there is

    1) no linguistic record of the languages mentioned in the BoM
    …vs there are in the Bible (despite being much older than any civilization in the BoM)

    2) no archeological findings of the two great civilizations mentioned in the BoM in the America’s
    … vs we do that are mentioned in the Bible

    3)no anthropology evidence is found

    Why is there no real world settings for the BoM lands mentioned \ illistrated …?

    A: Because either you have to alter the real world geographically or alter the text of the BoM

    Thr reason no evidences are present is obvious … the accounts in the BoM never took place.

  37. 37 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 4:14 pm

    No one can prove that the jesus we know in the bible actually walked the earth. No one can prove the flood actually happened. Yet you seem to accept these facts.
    How do you find artifacts in south america older than the artifacts in alaska? This should be impossible. These have been found, and are enough evidence for me. There are also gold plates from Bolivia that prove that gold plates bound in similar style do exist. Also, like shem pointed out, names of places change. Do I know if this happened? No, I dont. We use this to say we dont know the entire.history of every person that walked the earth. We dont have every language preserved on video. We dont know everything. How long has it taken us to even theorize what stonehenge was used for? This thing has been around forever and we dont know. Humans are stupid as a whole. Recognizing we dont know the history of every stone on earth allows us to think outside of your box.

  38. 38 JBR
    April 26, 2012 at 4:14 pm

    should be…
    …vs there are in the Bible (despite being much older than the civilization in the America’s mentioned BoM )

    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

    Did the Catholics corrupt the bible, or did luther? …..

    A: Neither.

    Jesus himself defined what the scriptures were … the Apostles declared that what they wrote were scriptures.

    So the Bible itself declares itself as scriptures.
    The Bible itself declares itself to be without error.

    False teachers \ false prophets \ false religions \ cults always… always …. always start from a postion of discrediting the Bible in some way shape or form.

  39. 39 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    JBR, if Catholics are claiming that the Apocrypha is scripture and authoritative, and you claim it is not authoritative, then one of you is wrong. This is not a place where you both get to be right. Is the Apocrypha scripture or not?

  40. 40 JBR
    April 26, 2012 at 4:54 pm

    Josh ….
    side stepping the obvious that non-existant places \ events \ languages \ geographical real settings of supposed events that occured in the new world America’s while one can verify older civilizations mentioned in the Bible from a purely non-spiritual perspective would be proof enough that the BoM is no where near comparable.

    Fact is the BoM is not used by archeologists when in attempting to find anything in real world for one simple reason ….

    rather they refer to Bible for locations of ancient cities \ rivers ect for a reason…..

    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

    Maybe Josh you need to stop refering to sound bites from the argumentative comebacks playbook… so please to try to follow this:

    1) Jesus identified what “scriptures” were; starting with the books of Moses, the Pslams, the OT prophets
    .. thus the OT that we have today (verified by the Dead Sea scrolls) was well established by Jesus’ time

    2) The Apostles identified that their writings ( theirs alone) were “scriptures”

    3) The NT writers claimed they are not responsible for their writings but God is

    4) the NT writer wrote that despite the limited info that was provided in their writings … it was sufficient.

    Catholics can claim whatever they want …
    Jesus and the Apostles have identified what is scripture.

  41. April 26, 2012 at 4:56 pm

    Despite the fact that Mormonism claims there are errors in the Bible, the fact that they are arguing that the Apocrypha should be included in the Bible when all the while they use the KJV which doesn’t contain the Apocrypha, is astonishing. That falls into the category of blasphemy.

  42. April 26, 2012 at 5:26 pm

    Shem said: “If everyone is forgiven than justice is destroyed by anyone being condemned. In other words, if I have a debt to a bank, and a friend pays it for me, that Bank cannot sue me for payment. If Christ has already paid the debt in full, then no one can be made to pay it again, or justice is thrown out the window.”

    Shem, if someone gives YOU the money and you throw it in the garbage instead of using it to go pay your debt. you will pay the full amount of the debt yourself. And the full debt needs to be paid back.

  43. 43 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    JBR, I am taking your statement as meaning that the Apocrypha was not scripture and should not have been included. It was included in the Bible for 1050 years before Martun Luther came around to correct this. The Bible was corrupt for 1050 years. Martin Luther did his best to get rid of the corruption. He did not get all the corruption.
    Echo, I claim nothing specifically at this point, other than only Catholic OR Luther Bible must be correct. One of them must be corrupt if they are not the same. Only 1 can be correct if several books were removed. I am asking for YOUR belief on which was corrupt. Yalls stance was that the Bible was never corrupted and could not be corrupted. If it can not be corrupt, then the books are truth, which means your version is not correct. I have thus proven one way or another the Bible was corrupt at some point.

  44. April 26, 2012 at 6:11 pm

    Josh

    This may be a poor analogy but I’ll give it a try. Does the fact that the Federalist Papers were written mean that the Constitution of the United States was incomplete before they were written or corrupted after they were written? Do they alter what was written in it?

  45. 45 joshtried
    April 26, 2012 at 6:22 pm

    Were the federalist papers declared part of the constitution?
    The Apocrypha was declared part of the Bible.

  46. April 26, 2012 at 6:32 pm

    All of these conversations are pointless. As you can see, there will never be a “good debate” about beliefs, because they continue to bear false witness about what we believe…and we know what the Bible says about bearing false witness. It’s appalling the judgement they make against us continually based on lies. It would be nice to actually be able to come on here and discuss doctrine and beliefs in a “real” way. I am sure Mark, Echo, David, choose, JBR, and Kent (and any I may have missed who has join in the lies) will have to someday regret all of this that they are doing. It is very sad.

  47. April 26, 2012 at 9:03 pm

    Paul and a trustworthy saying:

    “15This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.” 1 Timothy 1:15

    Which is consistant with Romans 4:5:

    “For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.” (Romans 5:6)

    “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”

    Then Joseph Smith comes along claiming he was “restoring” the gospel and said that Paul really said in his own revision of Romans 4:5

    “But to him that seeketh not to be justified by the law of works, but believeth on him who justifieth NOT the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”

    All of sudden – Joseph Smith and His so-called “restored” gospel creates a contradiction. One of many indefensible contradictions that demonstrate the blatant fraud carried out by Joseph Smith.

    ” 2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Romans 8:2-4

  48. April 26, 2012 at 9:05 pm

    Correction

    “All of sudden – Joseph Smith and his so-called . . .”

  49. 49 shematwater
    April 26, 2012 at 11:43 pm

    CHOOSE

    Joseph Smith Senior never had more than one wife. He died before the practice was ever established. Try and be accurate.
    Also, the Book of Mormon never condemns having multiple wives. Try not to ignore the full discourse on the topic in favor of a few verses that help you.
    Jacob 2: 30 “For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.”
    The Book of Mormon condemns men for seeking multiple wives during times when it has been prohibited, but reserves to God the right to issue the command when he sees fit. David and Solomon are condemned for seeking wives that God had not given them, which is what Mosiah and Ether are talking about.
    Personally I think you should stop here, as you clearly don’t know our doctrine or understand what the Book of Mormon means.

    As to repentence, you are still not getting it. You are first being way to litteral; but I think your biggest problem, which is shared by most non-LDS on this blog, is that you fail view things from an eternal perspective. To you earth life and eternity are two separate things, and we have no part in eternity until after this life, and there is no progression after this life. You have to expand your view if you are to understand our doctrine, because we are not concerned with this life only, but with all existence.
    To answer your question, complete and total obedience is required, but not in this life. All that is required in this life is faith in Christ and an honest striving for perfection (including repentence when we sin). If we can endure in this way until the end of this life we will gain exaltation, and will continue to progress until we are perfect in this way. I don’t claim to understand it all, but I do know this much.

    JBR

    “no linguistic record of the languages mentioned in the BoM”

    Funny thing. There are not many languages mentioned in the Book of Mormon. There is, of course, Hebrew, which is definitely varified. These is also egyptian, which is varified. Then there is a corrupt version of Hebrew that the Mulekites spoke, which is what happens to language over time (especially when there are no written records). The same thing can be said of the alter versions of Hebrew and Egyptian that are mentioned by Mormon. Take, for comparrison, Old English and Modern English. It isn’t just the pronunciation that has changed, but the actual characters are frequently unrecognizable between the two. So, I am not surprised that with no direct contact with others that spoke these languages they would become corrupt, or altered into what we now have as the languages of the ancient American people.
    The only other language is that of the Jaredites, which is the same language spoken before the flood, which has just as much support as that concept in the Bible.

    As with all your evidence you have no thought behind it. You do not consider things, but simply say that since we do not have complete knowledge yet it cannot be true. All your evidence is of this nature. We have no evidence to prove it true so it has to be false. This is poor reasoning, and has been proven faulty by the many discoveries that have been made to contrict this argument in many fields.
    For example, no one believed that the Indian Civilization was very old. All the Europeans believed it was a fairly newly settled area. It was not until about 100 years ago that ancient cities were discovered in the Hindi valley that proved a civilization at least as old as Egypt, if not older.
    Another example are the many claims of the Book of Mormon that have been varified. Such as the use of cement being discovered. More recently the firmly held belief that the Yucatan Penisula never had a complex society has been refuted with the discovery a several large cities and evidence of well organized irragation systems in the area.
    You can claim that not having direct proof for is evidence that it is false, but you will only be proved wrong, just as all this was so proved.

    DAVID

    ““For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.” (Romans 5:6)

    “But to him that seeketh not to be justified by the law of works, but believeth on him who justifieth NOT the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”

    There is not contradiction here. Dieing for the ungodly is not the same as justifying them. Christ died for all men, or for the benefit of all men. Through his death all men may come unto him, repent, and be made holy and godly people. If they do this he will justify them. However, if they remain ungodly they will not be justified. No Contradiction.
    So much for you claims regarding it.

    ECHO

    “the fact that they are arguing that the Apocrypha should be included in the Bible when all the while they use the KJV which doesn’t contain the Apocrypha, is astonishing.”

    The fact that you actually think this is astonishing. No one here has said the Apocrypha should or should not be included. We ahve simply made the point that it was once included, but was later thrown out, thus proving that at one point (either the inclusion or exclusion) the Bible had been corrupted.
    What we actually believe is stated very clearly in D&C 91. Anyone claiming anything else in regards to this is wrong.

    “if someone gives YOU the money and you throw it in the garbage instead of using it to go pay your debt. you will pay the full amount of the debt yourself.”

    I couldn’t agree more, and this only proves that we are required to do something. If you take this analogy than Christ has not paid our debt, but has given us the means to do so; which is exactly what the LDS teach.

  50. 50 JBR
    April 27, 2012 at 12:44 am

    Josh,
    You do realize that their is a difference between something being “corrupt” and something being “inspired”.

    The Apocrypha did not make the balance of the NT and OT corrupt.
    The Apocrypha was come to be considered not “inspired” … not “scripture”

    The significance to that is we have always had access to non-corrupt scriptures.
    That is what Jesus promised … it will never pass away.

  51. April 27, 2012 at 1:18 am

    Shem said: “I couldn’t agree more, and this only proves that we are required to do something. If you take this analogy than Christ has not paid our debt, but has given us the means to do so; which is exactly what the LDS teach.”

    The difference Shem is that you now have a creditor to whom you have to pay back your debt….

    “The mediator [Jesus] turned then to the debtor. “If I pay your debt, will you accept me as your creditor?” “Oh yes, yes,” cried the debtor. “You save me from prison and show mercy to me.” “Then,” said the benefactor [one who helps], “you will pay the debt to me, and I will set the terms. It will not be easy, but it will be possible. I will provide a way. You need not go to prison.” Boyd K Packer LDS

    I on the other hand am debt free. My debt has not been refinanced like yours, it has been cancelled. I am debt free. I don’t mean to be hurtful, just truthful, when I say: your Jesus isn’t any where near as generous and kind as mine. Not even close. GOD IS LOVE. It should be obvious to you now which Jesus is truly the God of Love. It’s the Jesus who has cancelled our debt and made us debt free.

    What you don’t know is that outer darkness is where everyone goes who has not paid back their debt IN FULL. That’s what the Bible teaches.

  52. 52 JBR
    April 27, 2012 at 1:24 am

    Shem ,
    That was about as hollow that you could possibly be.

    If there was any evidence of the peoples \ events \ geographical real settings of supposed events that occured in the America’s … Mormonism would have trumpeted it (with you probably in the front row).

    Fact is that for a civilization that was suppose to the greatest in existance to leave absolutly no traces of any kind can only occure for one reason ……
    they never existed.

    The peoples, geographical locations, the supposed migration of Hebrews, animals appearing in the Americas prior to the known intoduction by the Europeans cumulatively together make either the real world conspirators against the BoM or the BoM is based on fiction.

    Who knows … maybe you really do believe that there is also a Klingon and Vulcan
    languages. (just like there was Nephite \ Lamanites language in the America’s)

  53. April 27, 2012 at 1:41 am

    Shem

    “There is not contradiction here.”

    Each defense you make of this requires you to step farther and farther into the ridiculous. You say “Dieing for the ungodly is not the same as justifying them.”

    Christ’s dying on the cross was part and parcle of what was required for our justification.

    “31And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.” Mark 8:31.

    Shem – What then is the point of Christ dying for the ungodly?? You are saying He would suffer and die for the ungodly and yet NOT justify them. Are you saying Christ died for some without finishing His work? Are you saying He died in vain? Are you saying that John 1:29 is wrong when it says “The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” Are you saying Jesus died for some but His resurrection didn’t count “for the sins of the world?”

    First you say “not” is not a big difference” now you say something that shows how lost and confused you really are. Jesus took away the sins of the world. And your LDS faith has you so blind you don’t even see that fundamental truth.

    “4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: 6Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. 7For he that is dead is freed from sin. 8Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: 9Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. 10For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6:4-10

    21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” Galatians 2:21

  54. 54 choosethechrist
    April 27, 2012 at 1:48 am

    “To answer your question, complete and total obedience is required, but not in this life. All that is required in this life is faith in Christ and an honest striving for perfection (including repentence when we sin). If we can endure in this way until the end of this life we will gain exaltation, and will continue to progress until we are perfect in this way. I don’t claim to understand it all, but I do know this much.”

    ALMA 34:33-35: “And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed. Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful crisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world. For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he doth seal you his; therefore, the Spirit of the Lord hath withdrawn from you, and hath no place in you, and the devil hath all power over you; and this is the final state of the wicked.”

    Shem, could you please show me where this is taught: “honest striving for perfection”, total obedience is not required in this life and what is this about then: “if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.” I have seen it taught by LDS leaders that there is no chance at “improving” in the next life.

    Why did Spencer Kimball teach that trying is not sufficient?

    Pages 164-165: “Trying is Not Sufficient. Nor is repentance complete when one merely tries to abandon sin… It is normal for children to try. They fall and get up numerous times before they can be certain of their footing. But adults, who have gone through these learning periods, must determine what they will do, then proceed to do it. To “try” is weak. To “do the best I can” is not strong…
    Page 170: Those who feel that they can sin and be forgiven and then return to sin and be forgiven again and again must straighten out their thinking. Each previously forgiven sin is added to the new one and the whole gets to be a heavy load.”…

  55. 55 shematwater
    April 27, 2012 at 5:49 am

    DAVID

    Since you refuse to actually listen there is little point in continuing the discussion. However, I will try one last time.

    You said “You are saying He would suffer and die for the ungodly and yet NOT justify them.”

    Wrong. I am saying that by dieing for them he made it possible for them to become godly, and thus be justified. However, they do not accept this chance and become godly, but choose to remain ungodly than he does not justify them.
    It is like a teacher that give the students the study guide. A student that studies will pass, but one that doesn’t will fail. The teacher does not pass all the students, but he has made it possible for all to pass if they did the work.

    You also say “you say “not” is not a big difference”

    I never said that ‘not’ does not make a big difference. I agreed that the difference is very big. Please do not misquote me.

    ECHO

    “My debt has not been refinanced…it has been cancelled.”

    And thus you destroy justice by favoring mercy. Cancelling a debt does not satisfy justice. Nor does it make you debt free.

    “your Jesus isn’t any where near as generous and kind as mine.”

    Christ is more generous than you will ever understand as long as you confuse what true justice is. No, I do not have my debt cancelled. Instead I have been given the opportunity and the power to repay that debt, so that I can hold my head up and say that I am debt free.
    It reminds me of the debt free scream on the Dave Ramsey show. People who have worked and scrimped and saved for four or five years call in to finally anounce that they are debt free. None of them talk about how the debt was just cancelled so that they didn’t have to pay. They all have the satisfaction that it was not cancelled, but was actually paid in full.
    Christ does not cancel debt; he makes it possible for us to pay it off in full, which is so much more generous than simlpy cancelling it.

    “It should be obvious to you now which Jesus is truly the God of Love.”

    It has always been abundantly clear to me who truly teaches a God of love, and it is so clearly the LDS church that all other pale in comarison. God is love, and in no other church will you find the true, deep, and abiding love that is known to the member of the LDS church.

    CHOOSE

    Again, you do not consider all things.
    Alma is talking to his son who has recently committed a grave sin in going to sleep with a harlot. If he did not repent he would cast out. You cannot say that you will repent in the spirit world, for such progress is impossible there. That is true. But one who has already repented, though he has not lived a perfectly sinless life, will be given the power in that life to live perfectly. Maybe I gave a bad wording.
    The righteous, when they die have the vail removed from them and they regain all the power and ability they had as spirits before being born into the world. When they are resurrected they add to this the powers of a physical body, as well as the powers of a glorified body. With this additional power they are then able to live as they wanted to, but were unable to in mortality. I apologyze for the confusion. When I said progression I was refering to a progression in power that would enable them to live perfectly in the next life. This progression in power is made possible by their continual striving in this life, for they have lived the Celestial Law and are thus given the Celestial glory.
    You can read this in Mormon Doctrine, but for more specific references I would need more time.

    JBR

    “Mormonism would have trumpeted it”

    I highly doubt it actually. We are people of faith, and we do not need mortal reasoning to support this faith. While it appears you do need mortal evidence to believe in God’s word.

    “Fact is that for a civilization that was suppose to the greatest in existance to leave absolutly no traces of any kind can only occure for one reason”

    Well, it was never written that they were the greats in existence. Actually, the greatest in existence would be the City of Enoch that was taken from the Earth for their perfect righteousness. Close to this would be the civilization of Adam and the Ancient Patriarchs. While the Nephites were a great nation, they were not any better than any other righteous people that ever lived.
    However, your inaccuracies mean little, as there is plenty of evidence that you just want to ignore. The many cities, complex irrigation systems, weapons and artifacts, metal plates used for records, and a host of other things. The only proof you have is that our understanding of the language is not perfectly in line with what Joseph Smith translated in the Book of Mormon, and that is the hollow argument to anyone who has a mild understanding of language.

  56. 56 joshtried
    April 27, 2012 at 6:09 am

    Who knows … maybe you really do believe that there is also a Klingon and Vulcan
    languages.

    There are people on this earth that speak both.

  57. 57 joshtried
    April 27, 2012 at 6:19 am

    David: “Are you saying Jesus died for some but His resurrection didn’t count “for the sins of the world?”
    you say this every time you say that Christ accepts himself for us… If he only accepts some of us, then he only died for some of us

  58. 58 joshtried
    April 27, 2012 at 6:41 am

    Josh,
    You do realize that their is a difference between something being “corrupt” and something being “inspired”.
    The Apocrypha was come to be considered not “inspired” … not “scripture”

    Who was it inspired by? If it was inspired by God, then it should be scripture. If it was inspired by man, then it should have never been considered authoritative on anything.

    I love that now that i come to a legitimate point, it is only inspired… Well, i hate to tell you this, but that is not what the people that were alive during 397 AD thought or taught. I dont care what the thinking is now. I care what the thinking was then. You state that the Bible cannot be corrupted. I state it can be, and has been. The Apocrypha was added to the Bible in the way that you claim our BoM is which is one of the things you claim corrupts our teachings. It was there for over 1000 years.
    So, now we have several things saying the Bible is corrupt.
    1. The Apocrypha either being added or taken away (if they did not stay in from the time they were put in, then something is wrong)
    2. Jeremiah 8:8 How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain.
    3. Martin Luther added the word alone to Romans 3:28. Whether it was context or not based on German translation, if “thou shalt not added to the bible or be cursed”, then Luther is wrong, and corrupted the Bible.
    A few of the reasons?
    a. German language demanded it
    b. “thus I will have it, thus I order it, my will is reason enough . . . Dr. Luther will have it so, and . . . he is a Doctor above all Doctors in the whole of Popery.”
    c. “Furthermore, I am not the only one, nor the first, to say that faith alone makes one righteous. There was Ambrose, Augustine and many others who said it before me.” (another words, others did it, so it is okay if i do it.)

    Your Bible is able to be corrupted. It was corrupt. You had someone try and weed out the corruption, but he did not fully succeed, and even wound up corrupting it himself.

  59. April 27, 2012 at 6:45 am

    Shem said: “And thus you destroy justice by favoring mercy. Cancelling a debt does not satisfy justice. Nor does it make you debt free.”

    We see both 100% justice and 100% mercy in the cross of Christ. We are indeed debt free. To God be all the glory.

  60. 60 choosethechrist
    April 27, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    Josh, are you aware that we have around 5600 early NT manuscripts that show that the varients found in the Bible do not shake any article of our doctrine and that in the footnotes of our Bibles we are provided with any different word usage other than those that were used in the early manuscripts? Those word changes are made evident to us and are not hidden in some kind of conspiracy or trickery. Those early manuscripts go back way before Martin Luther and are the reason we know about any word changes Luther may have used. It simply does not change our theology. We do not use the Apocrypha for the same reasons we do not use the Didache, Shepherd of Hermes, BOM or any other writings in our canon. They do not pass the 4 main tests that we use to determine what is acceptable. The main one in my mind being that the books had to be of Apostolic origin. The Apostles and their disciples were consistent in their teachings about and revelations from Christ and were universally accepted and used by the Church.

    In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is spiritual or moral impurity or deviation from an ideal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption

    The ideal was set by the Apostles. We have copies of their writings dating back to 45-95 AD. We have many early writings from our early church fathers that show the scriptures, creeds, theology, and practices that were accepted by the church that emphasize the same core beliefs that we still hold to today. There has been no deviation from the ideals (core beliefs) that are presented in the Bible by our Church. Our scripture is not corrupt, what some people choose to do with it is corrupt when they deviate from the ideals revealed to us by God in the Bible.

  61. 61 choosethechrist
    April 27, 2012 at 3:42 pm

    Shem said, “Again, you do not consider all things.”

    I am considering the writings and teachings of the LDS church on what the atonement does for the LDS person and what I am seeing, is that the atonement for the LDS is conditional. It is dependent on the LDS person keeping ALL of the commands, and completing a process of repentance for sins which includes never repeating the sin in order for the LDS to receive forgiveness of sins and that the LDS person can not go before God unclean, but the LDS person has to be 100 percent free from sin in order to be cleansed by Christ to go before God. A person can’t repent after they die, but will be made perfect after they die which implies they were not perfect when they died. If they were not perfect when they died, then they were still in their sin at death which means they were not able to resist ALL temptation before they died which means they were not forgiven or cleansed by Christ’s atonement when they died which brings the following questions to mind:

    1. What exactly am I not understanding about this?

    2. If you commit 1 sin, you are not forgiven and are not clean. You will not be able to be with God. What exactly did Christ do for you if His atonement only works if you can keep ALL of the commandments and never sin or repeat sin?

    3. Since you can’t repent after you die, Christ can’t cleanse you after you are dead. How do you plan on getting into the Celestial Kingdom to go before God unclean? What is Christ going to do for you after you are dead?

    4. If you can die unclean and in sin and still be made perfect after you are dead, doesn’t that just mean that you really don’t have to keep the commandments? After all, the majority of us are sincere, trying not to sin and are sinning anyway so do we need to keep the commandments or not if we are just going to be made perfect when we die?

  62. 62 joshtried
    April 27, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    Choose, if nothing was corrupt, the why in the world did Martin Luther go against the Catholic Church?
    “There has been no deviation from the ideals (core beliefs) that are presented in the Bible by our Church.”
    This is true AFTER Catholics perverted everything. Remember buying your forgiveness, buying your way into heaven? There were a lot of reasons Luther pulled away from Catholics. All of these HE felt were perversions of the truth. For 1300+ years, perversion was taught. For 1000+ years, your Bible was corrupt (by corrupt, i mean something that should not have been in it was included). Yall have taken the warning in Revelations to mean that nothing can ever be added after the Bible, correct? Well, here you go. Numerous books were added, and you have no problem with it. Goes to show the hypocrisy with which you speak, and how much you really care about getting to the truth of any given matter. It is only the Truth if YOU believe it. YOU are right 100% of the time, and anyone that doesnt hold your belief is 100% wrong. Not because anything they present is wrong, but because you dont want to believe it.

    You say the BoM does not meet your standard of scripture, but you obviously do not understand 85% of the time frame. Basically, the BoM is Old testament, which means “that the books had to be of Apostolic origin” does not apply to them. If none of the Old Testament is of this origin either, then it goes to show that being of “Apostolic Origin” is not a requirement to being scripture.

  63. 63 joshtried
    April 27, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    Choose, GOD commanded us to be perfect. God also knows that we cant, which is why Jesus Christ came to this earth. The Command stays the same. BE PERFECT. God has never changed this. God will never change this. We know that we cannot be 100% perfect in this life, which is where we know that Jesus Christ comes in. How short am I going to come up on being perfect? 100%. Does that mean that I quit trying? No. Does that mean that i quit doing that which i know is right? No. It means that we accept Christ and move on. It is people like you twisting what LDS say about the atonement that makes people think this religion preaches unattainable goals. I am sure that is your goal. So, good job. You continue testifying your willful ignorance of our true doctrine.

  64. 64 joshtried
    April 27, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    Apostolic Origin — attributed to and based upon the preaching/teaching of the first-generation apostles (or their close companions).
    Universal Acceptance — acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the ancient world (by the end of the 4th century) as well as accepted canon by Jewish authorities (for the Old Testament).
    Liturgical Use — read publicly when early Christian communities gathered for the Lord’s Supper (their weekly worship services).
    Consistent Message — containing a theological outlook similar to or complementary to other accepted Christian writings.

    If i am not mistaken, these are the 4 tests.
    Apostolic origin: does not apply, because most of the BoM was before Christ, and the parts that were after, the writers claim to have met Christ, and been told by him to preach a given message. Thus, for the parts that would be “New Testament”, Christ has commanded the message.
    Universal Acceptance: The BoM is not universally accepted (that being all major christian communities). Honestly though, i dont care what they think of my scripture, i care what God thinks. There were 14.1 million people in the world that do accept it as scripture as of 2010. I consider this universal enough. Martin Luther’s Bible was not universal when he first wrote it, neither was any book.
    Liturgical use: I have no idea if the people on this continent used the scriptures thusly.
    Consistent Message: Works perfectly with the Bible, if you understand the Bible.

  65. 65 choosethechrist
    April 27, 2012 at 5:19 pm

    Josh, you are missing it. I don’t think you really read what I wrote. I said: “Our scripture is not corrupt, what some people choose to do with it is corrupt when they deviate from the ideals revealed to us by God in the Bible.”

    Josh said, “Yall have taken the warning in Revelations to mean that nothing can ever be added after the Bible, correct?”

    When did I say that? I am under the impression that the warning to not add in Revelations applies to Revelations because Revelations was (as all the books were) written as an individual book before the canon was decided upon. I explained to you why the BOM can’t be considered. It does not pass the 4 tests.

    The BOM was authored by Joseph Smith not one of the Apostles or one of the disciples of the Apostles which is the point. It makes no difference what the time frame was. We are not talking about who we believe the ultimate author to be (meaning God himself). We are talking about the men who actually put the thoughts into written words. We are talking about the credibility and acceptability of the teacher or author and how Christians decide on what goes into the Biblical canon. It doesn’t matter to us that you don’t like it. I know you don’t like it, it’s not what you believe and your statements show that you don’t care to understand it.

    Josh said, “It is only the Truth if YOU believe it. YOU are right 100% of the time, and anyone that doesnt hold your belief is 100% wrong. Not because anything they present is wrong, but because you dont want to believe it.”

    Isn’t this what the LDS church teaches? You know, the ONE true church? The LDS church is the ONLY way to God. I’m sorry to break it to you, but God said Jesus is the only way to God and it’s not about us being 100% right it is about believing what God has said to be 100% right.

    Josh said, “Remember buying your forgiveness, buying your way into heaven? There were a lot of reasons Luther pulled away from Catholics. All of these HE felt were perversions of the truth.”

    “Obedience to all the commandments. Full obedience brings the complete power of the gospel into your life with strength to focus on the abandonment of specific sins. It includes things you might not initially consider part of repentance, such as attending meetings, *****paying tithing******, giving service, and forgiving others. The Lord said: “He that repents and does the commandments of the Lord shall be forgiven.” ~http://www.lds.org/ensign/1995/05/finding-forgiveness?lang=eng

    You go on and on about the Catholic church and completly ignore my points about scripture not being corrupt, footnotes being made available with references to the original manuscripts, and proof of scriptural accuracy from early manuscripts. The Bible is NOT corrupt just because you want to believe it is Josh. Churches and men are corrupt. What the Catholic church did does not change the scripture present in my Bible.

  66. 66 choosethechrist
    April 27, 2012 at 5:46 pm

    Josh said, “It is people like you twisting what LDS say about the atonement that makes people think this religion preaches unattainable goals. I am sure that is your goal. So, good job. You continue testifying your willful ignorance of our true doctrine.”

    I have simply provided quotes from your leaders that show what your church teaches. Are you now telling me that what your leaders have said is wrong or is it you who does not want to believe what your leaders teach? Have you heard this one from your fellow brothers and sisters: It’s ok to believe anything you want as long as you don’t teach it? Are you teaching what you believe here Josh or are you presenting accurate official teachings from the LDS church? Again, if your beliefs are accurate, then please provide me with proof of what you are saying from official LDS church publications. Have my quotes from your LDS leaders shown that the LDS religion preaches unattainable goals because I didn’t say that you did?

    Am I understanding correctly that you were not raised in the SLC LDS church and that you don’t come from a long line of practicing SLC Mormons? Your ideas of LDS theology sounds like what is being taught by the boys at BYU and the LDS apologists who try and blend traditional Christian terms and ideas with Mormonism in order to make it appear acceptable. The problem is, it doesn’t really jive with what is written by LDS leaders.
    If I have twisted your doctrine, then please back up your claims with LDS doctrine which disproves what I have presented from your LDS church leaders.

    BTW, you didn’t really answer my questions which were asked in reference to what your LDS leaders have said and by not answering, you are contributing to my “ignorance”. Simply stating that Christ is going to do it for you without explaining it to me does not answer my questions.

  67. 67 choosethechrist
    April 27, 2012 at 6:58 pm

    What does the atonement of Christ do for the Mormon?

    Josh said, “How short am I going to come up on being perfect? 100%. Does that mean that I quit trying? No. Does that mean that i quit doing that which i know is right? No. It means that we accept Christ and move on.”

    What does Josh mean by he is going to be 100% short on being perfect, but “we accept Christ and move on”?

    What does it mean to be 100% short of being perfect and yet still be “doing” that which is right? If you are short on being perfect then are you really doing that which you know is right?

    “I would add a sixth step: Recognition of the Savior. Of all the necessary steps to repentance, I testify that the most critically important is for you to have a conviction that forgiveness comes because of the Redeemer. It is essential to know that only on His terms can you be forgiven. ~I would add a sixth step: Recognition of the Savior. Of all the necessary steps to repentance, I testify that the most critically important is for you to have a conviction that forgiveness comes because of the Redeemer.” ~ http://www.lds.org/ensign/1995/05/finding-forgiveness?lang=eng

    “It is essential to know that only on His terms can you be forgiven.”

    “What are His terms”? Do those terms include keeping ALL of the commandments?

    I can’t find anything in the LDS teachings that talk about “accept Christ and move on” when falling short of what is required.

  68. 68 choosethechrist
    April 27, 2012 at 7:10 pm

    Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 292-298

    Forgiveness, which includes divine pardon and complete remission of sins, is available, on conditions of repentance, for all men except those who have sinned unto death. …To accountable persons in the world, remission of sins comes by repentance and baptism of water and of the Spirit. For those who have once been cleansed in this way and who thereafter commit sin–but not unto death–(and all members of the Church are guilty of sin, in either greater or lesser degree) the law of forgiveness embraces the following requirements:

    1.GODLY SORROW FOR SIN…

    2.ABANDONMENT OF SIN–This means to stop doing what is wrong, to cease completely from one’s evil acts,…

    3.CONFESSION OF SIN–To gain forgiveness all sins must be confessed to the Lord. …

    Further, those sins which involve moral turpitude–meaning serious sins for which the court procedures of the Church could be instituted so that a person’s fellowship or membership might be called in question–such sins must be confessed to the proper church officer. … It follows that it is the order of the Church for confession to be made to the bishop,…

    Normally a period of probation is involved before the earthly agent determines to refrain from instituting the procedures whereunder church penalties are imposed.

    4.RESTITUTION FOR SIN–Restitution means restoration; it is to return the stolen property, to make amends for the offense committed,…

    5.OBEDIENCE TO ALL LAW–Complete forgiveness is reserved for those only who turn their whole hearts to the Lord and begin to keep all of his commandments–…

    Initially and primarily, accountable and worthy persons gain forgiveness of their sins when a valid and authoritative baptism is performed for them…. Their sins are washed away in the waters of baptism;… Those sins committed after baptism are forgiven whenever members of the Church, by full compliance with the law of forgiveness, again get themselves in the same state of righteousness and purity previously attained in connection with their baptisms.

    Are the above quotes the “terms”?

    If so, 5.OBEDIENCE TO ALL LAW–Complete forgiveness is reserved for those only who turn their whole hearts to the Lord and begin to keep all of his commandments–…

    I looked it up and found out that ALL means ALL (the whole quantity or amount, everything) which means every single commandment. ALL of them.

    If Jesus is not helping you keep ALL of them right now, when do you reckon He is going to start giving you the strength to keep ALL of them. Hopefully before you die or you remain unclean and unable to be with God.

    Is anybody in the Celestial Kingdom besides God and Jesus? Sounds impossible to me. If the Celestial Kingdom is your goal, how do you plan on getting there?

  69. 69 joshtried
    April 27, 2012 at 9:14 pm

    When I say I come up short, I am saying this. There is heaven or no heaven. By myself, there are no works that get me to heaven. There is no 90% of heaven, no I made it 90% of the way there. 1 sin makes you 100% disqualified from heaven.
    As to the accept Christ and move on thing, I am not saying accept christ and dont change a single thing about your life. I am also not saying every person changes 100% to what God wants the first time they accept him. This process can take time. It does not have to take time, but in most cases it will. For instance, after reading it is adultery to even lust after a woman in your heart, I knew this was wrong and did not want to do this any more. The next time I looked at a woman that I lusted over, I remembered what I read, and tried my best to stop the thought. The next time, stopping the thought was easier, and so on. Eventually the thought is barely existent, and even non existent. Am I perfect now? No, I am not. I am working on it. We as humans are prideful, and I am no different. I do not ask for Gods help in all things like I should. I do not ask that “the cup be taken from me”, I ask that I recieve help in beating these things. I ask for the want to not lust, for the help to overcome it when it does happen. I dont personally ask to never lust again. Can I ask this and be given it? Yes I can.

  70. 70 choosethechrist
    April 27, 2012 at 10:15 pm

    Josh said, “1 sin makes you 100% disqualified from heaven” and “this process can take time.” and “Am I perfect now? No, I am not. I am working on it.”

    Josh, if you die today, you will not go to heaven? That is not good news Josh.

    You have heard enough from those of us here to know that it doesn’t have to be that way. Because of the work of Jesus Christ on the cross you can have the assurance that the blood of Christ has cleansed you of ALL your sins. The Bible says that because of the Blood of Christ you are perfect right now in the eyes of God if you would just believe it my friend. No step by step process of repentance required for your forgiveness. God will forgive you and remember your sins no more, if you will just believe what God has said. If you ask, your salvation will be given and you will be with God in heaven for eternity. Jesus did the work. You don’t have to do the work to be with God. The work is done, it is finished. Praise God! Believe it and then follow Him by keeping His commandments.

    Romans 10:9
    9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

    I pray that some day you will truly accept Christ alone as your savior.

  71. 71 joshtried
    April 27, 2012 at 11:17 pm

    Again, you take what I say out of context. I am not perfect. I am perfect through Christ. I still work on this myself though. It is a conscious effort to remain in christ. It is also a job to have faith… Do I understand the perfection that I have through Christ? Yes and no. Do I have the faith I want? Definitely not. If faith the size of a mustard seed can move a mountain, then how little is the faith I have? Have you ever moved a mountain? Is your faith perfect? One is not required to have perfect faith, but this is one of the things I strive for. This is something I work on, for years if necessary. I may never perfect it, but I will not stop working on it.

  72. April 28, 2012 at 12:22 am

    Josh, you are awesome. So is Shem. I am so tired of watching these guys trash everything you say. No matter how right you are…no matter how true the Gospel is, they will continue to twist and lie to make everything look bad. I have to stop even reading on this blog because it causes feelings of anger that I don’t want to have. I feel sorry for these guys actually. They are missing so much joy that the Lord offers and they don’t even know it. It is Satan that fools them into believing that they shouldn’t do what Christ told us to do…which helps us to progress and truly become like Him. And with that progression comes unspeakable joy. It life all joyful? No it’s not, but then, it wasn’t for Jesus either. They spat on him and told Him that He was of the devil too. So, good luck with this.

  73. 73 joshtried
    April 28, 2012 at 12:28 am

    Sorry to see you go Kate. I wish I had your overall knowledge of scripture and scripture history. It will be missed here.

  74. 74 shematwater
    April 28, 2012 at 1:46 am

    CHOOSE

    You quoted it yourself, and yet you did not see it.
    Mormon Doctrine, page 295, third full paragraph.
    “At what times and under what circumstances do men gain forgiveness of thier sins? Manifestly, they attain this reward AT ANY TIME when they are in complete harmony with the divine will, that is at any time when they have complied with the Lord’s law whereunder they are enabled to become pure and spotless before him.”

    At any time. Forgiveness is not free, but it is not a one time deal. We do not have to wait to be completely perfect to be forgiven. When we bring our lives into accordance with God’s law we are forgiven of all sins made previously. We will likely sins again, but if we bring ourselves back to that law we are again forgiven.

    On page 296 we read this “When converted persons are baptized for the remission of sins, the sacred baptismal ordinance is designed to free them from past and future sins. Those sins committed after baptism are forgiven whenever members of the Church, by full compliance with the law of forgiveness, again get themselves in the same state of righteousness and purity previously attained in connection with their baptism.”
    On page 297: “…as a result of worthy baptism men stand clean before him if they fulfill the full law involved in the prataking of the sacrament, for in each instance they are rewarded with the companionship of the Spirit, which companionship they cannot have unless they are cleansed and purified from sin.”

    Every Sunday, when we worthily partake of the Sacrament bread and water we are cleanses and purified from sin. As long as we remain worthy to partake of this ordinance we will be perfected in Heaven when Christ comes. This is what Brother McConkie is teaching, and what the doctrine of the Church has always been. Can we be perfected now? As much as is possible for a mortal body, yes. Will we be perfected them if we keep ourselves worthy under the law to partake of this ordinance? Yes.

    As to corruption, the real question would be if what yuo consider those ideals to be is what the intention of the writers was. You admit that some people use the scriptures for things that deviate from the ideals. But whose Ideals, and how do you determine who has deviated and who is remaining faithful?
    All your tests for canonizing scripture mean very little. Your tests are those devised by men. I find it much simpler to just let God declare what his word is, and not rely on men to make the determination.

    As to all the manuscripts you have, you do know that none are actually the originals, right. You also know that there are many books that the Bible itself calls scripture that we have no copies of.

    Also, the Apostolic origin one makes no sense, as nothing in the Old Testament was penned by an Apostle. Your reasoning is also flawed, as it limits who God can speak to, and thus puts a man-made limitation on his power.
    Isn’t this the same argument that Pharisees used to reject Christ and the Apostles: They didn’t write in the time of the prophets, and so they couldn’t be scripture.

    ECHO

    A concelation of debt cannot be justice. It is mercy, but it is not justice.

  75. April 28, 2012 at 1:51 am

    Shem

    “Wrong. I am saying that by dieing for them he made it possible for them to become godly, and thus be justified. However, they do not accept this chance and become godly, but choose to remain ungodly than he does not justify them.
    You also say “you say “not” is not a big difference”

    “I never said that ‘not’ does not make a big difference. I agreed that the difference is very big. Please do not misquote me.”

    My apologies for getting the quote wrong. It seems I saw a “not” where you did not write one. My mistake. I have to ask. How does it feel to be misquoted by adding “not” where it doesn’t belong? Imagine Paul’s reaction (God’s too for that matter) when Joseph Smith added his “not” where it didn’t belong in Romans.

    I understand what you are saying, it just doesn’t save it from the blatant inconsistencies it presents to other scriptures. Hebrews 10: 10-18 for instance which I have quoted many times. Your explanation however, does force you to explain your salvation as being “AFTER” YOU have done all you can which you have previously denied when we have discussed the conflict between 2 Nephi 23-25 and Ephesians 2: 8-10.

  76. 76 joshtried
    April 28, 2012 at 3:31 pm

    David, we have explained “after all you can do”, you simply choose to deny that we know what we are talking about. If you listened to the explanation, you would see how this all fits together. Instead, we argue over bits and pieces, then you deny each individual piece, and then wonder why no piece of the puzzle fits together. We have pieces of the same puzzle, you are throwing your pieces in with our pieces to make your own puzzle that both confounds you and leads others astray.

    Just curious, but i left the offer open to discuss other “false” prophecies. Did you have any real intent to discuss these and find out if JS was in fact a false prophet?

  77. 77 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    Shem said, “When we bring our lives into accordance with God’s law we are forgiven of all sins made previously. We will likely sins again, but if we bring ourselves back to that law we are again forgiven.”

    Baptism frees you from sin. Sacrament frees you from sin. The process of repentance frees you from sin. Following the law frees you from sin. IF you DO these things, Christ will forgive you. Every single Sunday you have to go renew your covenants because you could not follow the law. You were given the power to change when you were given the Holy Ghost at your confirmation, yet every week you deny the power or strength you think you were given to achieve the impossible. You sin all week long and crawl back to Christ on Sunday to renew your broken promises. It’s a process you say. Someday you will be able to walk out of sacrament meeting and keep your promises. Someday, you will be perfect in keeping the law, but until you do, your law says that you are unclean and can not go before God. You are stuck in a form of OT law. They couldn’t do it and neither can you.

    From the mouth of Spencer Kimball, who knew exaclty what the LDS gospel is about:

    “There are even many members of the Church who are lax and careless and who continually procrastinate. They live the gospel casually but not devoutly. They have complied with some requirements but are not valiant.”

    “All sins but those excepted by the Lord—basically, the sin against the Holy Ghost, and murder—will be forgiven to those who totally, consistently, and continuously repent in a genuine and comprehensive transformation of life… This earth life is the time to repent. We cannot afford to take any chances of dying an enemy to God.”

    “The reason is forthrightly stated by Nephi-” ‘. . . There cannot any unclean thing enter into the kingdom of God . . .’ (1 Ne. 15:34.) And again, ‘. . . no unclean thing can dwell with God . . .’ (1 Ne. 10:21.) To the prophets the term unclean in this context means what it means to God. To man the word may be relative in meaning-”one minute speck of dirt does not make a white shirt or dress unclean, for example. But to God who is perfection, cleanliness means moral and personal cleanliness. Less than that is, in one degree or another, uncleanliness and hence cannot dwell with God.”

    “True repentance is not only sorrow for sins, and humble penitence and contrition before God, but it involves the necessity of turning away from them, a discontinuance of all evil practices and deeds, a thorough reformation of life, a vital change from evil to good, from vice to virtue, from darkness to light.”

    “There is one crucial test of repentance. This is abandonment of the sin. … In other words, it is not real repentance until one has abandoned the error of his ways and started on a new path… The saving power does not extend to him who merely wants to change his life.”

    “Let me ask you:

    Are you fully obeying every law God has given you?

    Are you living by every word that proceeds from God’s mouth?

    Are you preserving the law inviolate (unbroken)?

    Finally, if you desire to obtain exaltation in the celestial kingdom, are you keeping all the commandments?”

    “If you are not doing these things, you cannot know if you will ever make it to your desired goal. In fact, if you are not keeping the celestial law, at best you are only keeping a terrestrial law.”

    “there is no progression between kingdoms.”

    “Trying is not sufficient. Nor is repentance complete when one merely tries to abandon sin.”

    Every time you repent, you do nothing more than admit your disobedience and how short you have fallen of the requirement for exaltation.

    Every time you go to sacrament meeting to renew your promises you are admitting that you can’t keep the commandments.

  78. 78 joshtried
    April 28, 2012 at 3:41 pm

    Choose, you simply do not understand, and i do not see a genuine want to understand. I see a want to argue. I can answer your question, and i have before. At this time, I refuse to answer based on my perception of your intent. I understand my scriptures, I understand their meaning, i know where i stand before God.

  79. 79 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 3:43 pm

    If you are honest, you know you will never live up to the LDS requirements. It is impossible!

    Those who try to appease God by following the law are guilty before God (Romans 3:19)

    The Bible declares that we are all sinners. Jesus did not die just to make our resurrection possible. He came to take away ALL of the believer’s sins (Col. 2:13). It is our sin which separates us from God. Once the sin barrier has been removed, those who believe are declared righteous before God. It is Christ’s total obedience, not our partial obedience, that saves true Christians in God’s sight (Rom.5:19). When we come to Him by faith, His righteousness is “imputed” to our account (Rom. 4:1-8). Only the righteousness of Christ will satisfy the demands of an all-Holy God. It is only when we rely on this biblical fact that we can have the assurance of God’s forgiveness.

    As long as you insist that your exaltation is dependent on your good works and individual righteousness, you will continue to be frustrated and bear the heavy burdent of guilt.

    You already know you aren’t living up to the requirements of Mormonism. Place your trust in Jesus Christ alone. Come to Him in faith.

  80. 80 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 3:45 pm

    Josh, you can’t stand before God in your sins.

  81. 81 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 4:10 pm

    D&C 1:31 For I the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance;

  82. 82 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    James 2:10
    For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.

  83. 83 joshtried
    April 28, 2012 at 4:19 pm

    I am sure the point of this is to irritate me as I have proven your bible corrupt. I have accepted Christ. End of story.

  84. 84 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 4:23 pm

    BAPTISM is the means of acceptance of “all of the terms and conditions of the eternal gospel covenant.” “Man covenants to abide by all (!) of the laws and requirements of the whole gospel.” (Mormon Doctrine, topic Baptism). “If men will do these things then the Lord will give them the companionship of the Holy Ghost.” and they will be on the road to eternal life. You break your covenant, you lose the Spirit, and you don’t gain eternal life .

    IF/THEN CONDITION. You break the law, you loose the spirit, you no longer have the strength to help you keep the law, you are on your own.

    Romans 8:9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

    Mormons can’t belong to Christ when they are in their sins because their church teaches that the Spirit leaves them when they sin.

    Accept the Biblical gospel and the Spirit will not leave you because you will no longer be in your sins.

    1 Corinthians 3:16 Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you?

  85. 85 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 4:24 pm

    Josh, you have broken the law, you are not in Christ. The point of this is to save your lost soul.

  86. 86 joshtried
    April 28, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    I know where I am, you do not. I would seriously appreciate it if you stopped trying to say whether Christ has accepted me or not. That is for him to decide. If you really want me to quit this discussion, keeping telling me Christs judgement of my life. The topic of the discussion was how JS corrupted the Bible by adding not. I proved the Bible was already corrupt,and.therefore needed correction. If you wish to refute this, let me know. I add personal stuff as example, and you use it as attack. I am done with this personal conversation.
    I am sorry that your Bible is corrupt, and you therefore see the need to try and judge me. You passing judgement on me will least of all Make me want me to join you.
    Are there no takers on the serious discussion of these “False prophecies”?

  87. 87 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 5:20 pm

    Commandment-keeping has NEVER been God’s plan of salvation. In the Old Testament, the laws were given to regulate their Earthly lives, but their salvation (forgiveness) came thru shed blood.

    Forgiveness does not come to the mormon until they have kept ALL the laws 100%. This is NOT possible. Mormons say it is possible, but they are NOT doing it and they have no real idea of how they are going to do it. This is false hope!

    JUSTIFICATION, according to the book, Mormon Doctrine (topic Justification) is gained by performing “in righteousness” all covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations. (page 408)

    THE ATONEMENT (Mormon Doctrine, page 62) brings spiritual life “in all who believe and obey the gospel law.” Eternal life is the reward for OBEDIENCE to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel (3rd article of faith).

    FORGIVENESS (Mormon Doctrine, page 292) comes to those who (1) have a Godly sorrow for sin, (2) Abandon the sin, (3) Confess the sin, (4) Make restitution for the sin when necessary and (5) “Obedience to ALL law” “Complete forgiveness is reserved for those only who turn their whole hearts to the Lord and begin to keep ALL of his commandments – not just those commandments disobeyed in the past, but those in all fields.” D & C 1:31-32 says, God will not make the least allowance for sin, but “he that repents and does the commandments of the Lord shall be forgiven.”

    Mormon salvation (forgiveness) is given after they have kept ALL the commandments. If you are mormon, and you are not keeping all of the commandments. You are not saved. You may think you have accepted Christ, but according to the mormon gospel, Christ has not accepted you.

    God has given His laws to regulate my Earthly life. Those laws were given because they are what is BEST for me. My salvation (forgiveness) comes through the shed blood of Christ. I am saved, I am forgiven, AMEN!

  88. 88 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 5:35 pm

    Josh, I already refuted your delusions about the Bible. My post tie into what Mark had said regarding Spencer kimball and the Miracle of Forgiveness which is applicable to this discussion. I am sorry to hear that you don’t want Jesus to save you today and that you would rather try to overcome the sin in your life on your own :(
    However, there could be someone reading who does want Jesus to save them so feel free to assume that my posts are for them and not for you. You are under no obligation to read what I write. God Bless, Josh.

  89. 89 shematwater
    April 28, 2012 at 8:23 pm

    DAVID

    “it just doesn’t save it from the blatant inconsistencies it presents to other scriptures.”

    Again, there are no inconsistencies. In Hebrews 10: 10-18 Paul is describing the effect of the Atonement, but he also states that this effect will only be for those who are sanctified (verse 14). It was you who said that sanctification is a process, and it is Paul that states that only the sanctified are perfected by the atonement. In this same chapter, after the explanation of the effects of the Atonement, Paul then tells us how we lay hold on those effects.
    “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. (aka baptism)
    Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
    And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
    Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.” (22-25)

    Notice the wording of these verses. If doing this was not to secure the promise than what was the point in giving that motivation in verse 23? Previously he said the sanctified are perfected, and now he tells us that we are washed with pure water; and obvious allusion to the fact that it is baptism that sanctifies, and thus opens the way for the perfecting of the people.
    Verse 10-18 do not indicate that the sinner is justified, but that through the atonement such is possible, if they sanctify themselves in the way that he describes in verse 22-25.
    Nothing is inconsistent.

    “Your explanation however, does force you to explain your salvation as being “AFTER” YOU have done all you can which you have previously denied when we have discussed the conflict between 2 Nephi 23-25 and Ephesians 2: 8-10.”

    Again you misquote me. I never once denied that salvation comes only after we do all we can. What I said is that Grace comes first, which makes it possible for us to do all we can, and thus have salvation. You again fail to show any contradiction.

    CHOOSE

    Josh is right. You are not here to learn anything, but are here to antagonize and irritate. You never miss a chance to twist our words, and never actually want to hear what we have to say regarding our own faith.

    To illustrate your underhanded tactics, let us look at how you dealt with Josh.
    He stated that “It is people like you twisting what LDS say about the atonement that makes people think this religion preaches unattainable goals.”
    You replied by trying to justify yourself with the argument “but I am just using quotes from your leaders” with is a load of crap, and you know it. But you end this with “Have my quotes from your LDS leaders shown that the LDS religion preaches unattainable goals because I didn’t say that you did?”
    Take note of that. Josh didn’t say anything was unattainable, he said that you were trying to make it look that way, but you twisted his words to suit your needs.
    Later you post that “If you are honest, you know you will never live up to the LDS requirements. It is impossible!” Thus you prove his point that it was your intention from the beginning to paint a concept of our doctrine, even though you tried to deny it earlier.

    After reading your words one can’t really blame Kate for leaving. It is like congratulating a woman for finally having the courage to leave an emotionally abusive relationship.

  90. 90 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 9:27 pm

    I present the LDS gospel as quoted by leaders of the LDS church and look at what happens. The LDS gospel has abused Kate, personally attacked Josh, and offended Shem. And what the LDS leaders have said is irritating and emotionally abusive.

    The whole point is that the statements I presented were NOT my words. They are the words of YOUR leaders that represent the true gospel of mormonism that even YOU do not want to believe.

    Kate is running away from what she can not handle: TRUTH which to me shows how weak her faith really is. People who have stong faith do not view discussions like we have here as “abuse”, “irritation”, or “personal attack”.

  91. 91 choosethechrist
    April 28, 2012 at 11:36 pm

    Romans 4
    4 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

    4 Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

    7 “Blessed are those
    whose transgressions are forgiven,
    whose sins are covered.
    8 Blessed is the one
    whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”

  92. 92 joshtried
    April 29, 2012 at 5:00 am

    Choose, you are wrong in saying that our works are our own. We have explained this to you countless times. I want to ask the others that have been a part of this discussion, have we not made this point before?

    No personal attacks? “Josh, you can’t stand before God in your sins.” Since i have admitted this before, as has any other person that claims to accept Christ, i take it as an attack, or an assertion of stupidity. Either way, it was not meant as worthwhile discussion. “I am sorry to hear that you don’t want Jesus to save you today and that you would rather try to overcome the sin in your life on your own ” Again, you twist what i say to mold into your preformed view of the LDS church. While Christ does have the power to exemplify my faith, if he did, it would no longer be faith.

    However, there could be someone reading who does want Jesus to save them so feel free to assume that my posts are for them and not for you.
    This is an all out lie when it comes to Lutheran doctrine. If people dont get to choose God, then you are all hear talking for nothing. This is becoming extremely redundant. From what i have witnessed, when an LDS comes to the table with a “new” point, it doesnt matter because we are wrong.. Lets really look at this Apocrypha thing again, shall we?

  93. 93 joshtried
    April 29, 2012 at 5:19 am

    I said: Apocrypha authoritative in 397 AD, Martin Luther Later removed, Bible was hence corrupted at one of these points (discussion above…)

    You said: (JBR) “Catholics can claim whatever they want … Jesus and the Apostles have identified what is scripture. (my words now… CATHOLICS held the bible you pulled your text from, ADDED books, yet you continue to believe they would not alter anything else?)

    I said: It was included in the Bible for 1050 years before Martun Luther came around to correct this.

    You said: (JBR) The Apocrypha was come to be considered not “inspired” … not “scripture” The significance to that is we have always had access to non-corrupt scriptures.

    I said: Who was it inspired by? If it was inspired by God, then it should be scripture. If it was inspired by man, then it should have never been considered authoritative on anything. 1. The Apocrypha either being added or taken away 2. Jeremiah 8:8 3. Martin Luther added the word alone to Romans 3:28.

    You said: (choose) those word changes are made evident to us and are not hidden in some kind of conspiracy or trickery. Those early manuscripts go back way before Martin Luther and are the reason we know about any word changes Luther may have used. It simply does not change our theology. In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is spiritual or moral impurity or deviation from an ideal

    I said: Choose, if nothing was corrupt, the why in the world did Martin Luther go against the Catholic Church?
    I also pointed out in many more words that our belief is that the BoM is not corrupt as it does not lead to your “corruption is spiritual or moral impurity or deviation from an ideal”

    You said: (choose) “Our scripture is not corrupt, what some people choose to do with it is corrupt when they deviate from the ideals revealed to us by God in the Bible.” (my words again now, but if there are many different religions in the world based on the Bible, dont you think that some are getting these “ideals” wrong? maybe it is you, but of course i really dont expect you to admit this.)

    Our communication then broke down, and you decided to tell me that i am not going to heaven because i dont prescribe to your way of dealing with God. My personal life and dealings with God should not be on trial here. Fortunately, this is a place where “do as i say, not as i do” works perfectly. We are discussing pure doctrine, not whether i practice it properly. I give my life as example, you use it to attack. I want to state for the record, i do feel the same way about you. At this point in your life, you will not get to heaven. You may go to “Abraham’s bosom” and wait until someone is baptized for you properly, but in your current state, you will not go to heaven.

  94. 94 joshtried
    April 29, 2012 at 5:51 am

    Lets add to this list of corruption, shall we?
    #1 continued… Also, many do not know that the Apocryphal books were actually included in the King James translation until the Synod of Dordrecht removed them in 1618.

    #2 and #3 i dont feel need any more elaboration

    4. Where are the other books that the Bible states should be there?
    apparently there were originally around 600 books that were considered scripture. For the sake of space (and to actively keep truthful, i admit that i have not studied all 600 of these), i post a link to the books listed
    http://www.thelostbooks.com/list.htm

    5. Language barriers (this kind of hits back to #3). This hits in 2 parts. Here we have the “thought for thought” vs “word for word” argument. Which is correct? To me, a word for word argument is more sound. There is no guessing at all what was originally said. Thought for thought really opens a can of worms. Much like “there are no other god”. If Elohim is the original text where “god” is, and Elohim can also mean “judge”, then which is it, god or judge? Once you get one “thought for thought” even slightly wrong, then every other work you ever translated come into question.

    6. I touched on this a little bit in the post above, but i want to hit on this. It is kind of a combination of #’s 1&2. You said: (JBR) “Catholics can claim whatever they want … Jesus and the Apostles have identified what is scripture. (my words now… CATHOLICS held the bible you pulled your text from, ADDED books, yet you continue to believe they would not alter anything else?)
    If Catholics were in sole control of your Bible for 1000 years before someone STARTED to question it, then why havent you questioned it? Martin Luther definitely did, and rightly so. It WAS corrupt. If only the PEOPLE that were teaching from it were corrupt, he would not have altered ANYTHING in the Bible. He would not have moved some books around in order. He would not have removed entire books. He would not have done a single thing with it. He would have taken the Bible AS IS and began teaching from it. He would have taught the correct principles because they would have been accessible, because as you say, the Bible was not corrupt. Why did ANYTHING CHANGE AT ALL if it was NOT CORRUPT? How do you look past this? How do you respond to this? I have not yet studied the Apocrypha, as before this discussion i barely knew they existed. How many other books from the ~ 600 original did Martin Luther decide were not scriptural? How many even made it to his time for debate? Why dont you have or use the other 600 listed? Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John would all have been talking about every available scripture during their time when they said “what you have is sufficient”. Or, do you take their words to mean that their words alone are sufficient? There is so much we dont have for a variety or reasons. So many changes in the global make up of power. In personal discussion with someone on here, we discussed liberal to conservative Lutherans. You have the exact same Bible, why the difference in even relative belief? Why the liberal stance, and the conservative stance at all? Why would these people not commune in the opposites church? And this is JUST Lutherans… This doesnt even get into Baptist, Catholic, Evangelical, Methodists…… There are so many denominations based off of ONE book. So many different view points. Do you think these different view points were intended originally? Do you think the Apostles were writing books going “Man, i hope someone puts my name on a church one day and follows more specifically what i teach vs. what the other apostles taught”? They taught one accord. One way. One Truth. One Light. There are only 2 things any of these churches really have in common. They use the same corrupt book, and none of them understand it, mostly i am sure because they dont realize that it is corrupt.

  95. 95 joshtried
    April 29, 2012 at 5:53 am

    Lets add to this list of corruption, shall we?
    #1 continued… Also, many do not know that the Apocryphal books were actually included in the King James translation until the Synod of Dordrecht removed them in 1618.

    #2 and #3 i dont feel need any more elaboration

    4. Where are the other books that the Bible states should be there?
    apparently there were originally around 600 books that were considered scripture. For the sake of space (and to actively keep truthful, i admit that i have not studied all 600 of these), i post a link to the books listed

    5. Language barriers (this kind of hits back to #3). This hits in 2 parts. Here we have the “thought for thought” vs “word for word” argument. Which is correct? To me, a word for word argument is more sound. There is no guessing at all what was originally said. Thought for thought really opens a can of worms. Much like “there are no other god”. If Elohim is the original text where “god” is, and Elohim can also mean “judge”, then which is it, god or judge? Once you get one “thought for thought” even slightly wrong, then every other work you ever translated come into question.

    6. I touched on this a little bit in the post above, but i want to hit on this. It is kind of a combination of #’s 1&2. You said: (JBR) “Catholics can claim whatever they want … Jesus and the Apostles have identified what is scripture. (my words now… CATHOLICS held the bible you pulled your text from, ADDED books, yet you continue to believe they would not alter anything else?)
    If Catholics were in sole control of your Bible for 1000 years before someone STARTED to question it, then why havent you questioned it? Martin Luther definitely did, and rightly so. It WAS corrupt. If only the PE that were teaching from it were corrupt, he would not have altered ANYTHING in the Bible. He would not have moved some books around in order. He would not have removed entire books. He would not have done a single thing with it. He would have taken the Bible AS IS and began teaching from it. He would have taught the correct principles because they would have been accessible, because as you say, the Bible was not corrupt. Why did ANYTHING CHANGE AT ALL if it was NOT CORRUPT? How do you look past this? How do you respond to this? I have not yet studied the Apocrypha, as before this discussion i barely knew they existed. How many other books from the ~ 600 original did Martin Luther decide were not scriptural? How many even made it to his time for debate? Why dont you have or use the other 600 listed? Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John would all have been talking about every available scripture during their time when they said “what you have is sufficient”. Or, do you take their words to mean that their words alone are sufficient? There is so much we dont have for a variety or reasons. So many changes in the global make up of power. In personal discussion with someone on here, we discussed liberal to conservative Lutherans. You have the exact same Bible, why the difference in even relative belief? Why the liberal stance, and the conservative stance at all? Why would these people not commune in the opposites church? And this is JUST Lutherans… This doesnt even get into Baptist, Catholic, Evangelical, Methodists…… There are so many denominations based off of ONE book. So many different view points. Do you think these different view points were intended originally? Do you think the Apostles were writing books going “Man, i hope someone puts my name on a church one day and follows more specifically what i teach vs. what the other apostles taught”? They taught one accord. One way. One Truth. One Light. There are only 2 things any of these churches really have in common. They use the same corrupt book, and none of them understand it, mostly i am sure because they dont realize that it is corrupt.

  96. 96 joshtried
    April 29, 2012 at 5:54 am

    The website from above… the post wouldnt take with this link in it:
    http://www.thelostbooks.com/list.htm

  97. 97 joshtried
    April 29, 2012 at 5:55 am

    found another site that is blocked from being posted. Would mark or echo care to address this issue specifically? the post is not going into moderation, or awaiting approval. i simply can not post this link.

    The website from above… the post wouldnt take with this link in it:
    thelostbooks
    .com/
    list
    .htm

  98. 98 joshtried
    April 29, 2012 at 6:09 am

    correction to post 94
    If only the PEOPLE that were teaching

  99. 99 JBR
    April 29, 2012 at 2:31 pm

    Josh,
    Being this OP in not about the defense of the Bible as to attempting to satisfy those who reject it … I’ll make one last response and leave it at that. (some information taken from WELS.net)

    1) Jesus defined the OT scriptures
    … the Book of Moses (i.e the Law)
    … the Prophets
    … the Pslams

    2) The Disciples defined what they only wrote as scriptures

    Between the OT & NT years, the Hebrew was translated into the common language of the day which was Greek. This was the Septuagint translation, which the New Testament writers often used when quoting the Old Testament. The apocryphal books were known by Jesus, by the apostles. The Jewish believers prior to Christ did not consider them canonical.

    These books ought not be considered inspired for three main reasons:

    1) Christ, the Jews, the apostles, and the early Christian church did not accept them as inspired thus making them scripture.

    2) the Apocrypha makes no claim to divine origin. No “thus says the Lord” is found in them.

    3) they contain errors and anti-scriptural teachings.

    The fact is that the Jewish believers prior to Christ did not consider them inspired or scripture. Luther included them in his German translation of the Bible but followed the historical view about them which was (though they make for interesting reading) they aren’t the inspired Word from God.

    In fact historically, not all Catholics accepted them as part of the Bible until the church hierarchy declared them to be so and attached a curse on everyone who did not accept their ruling.

    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

    “why in the world did Martin Luther go against the Catholic Church?”

    For many of the same reasons he would oppose Mormonism and more to boot.

    1) Works righteous … salvation by works \ obedience to the law
    2) salvation being dependent on membership
    …… RCC is convinced they are the “true” church
    …… LDS is convinced they are the “true” church

    You think we’re bad about our opposition to Mormonism, that’s nothing.
    I would love to see \ read your reaction if a former Mormon would be “Luther-isk” as Luther was towards RCC.

    But if you want to hear modern day “Luthers” but in the Mormonism context… then read about Sandra Tanner ( a direct relative of B. Young)
    …. http://www.utlm.org

    or

    watch the youtube vidoe from Living Hope Ministries ( founded in Utah by Mormons)
    http://sourceflix.com/the-bible-vs-the-book-of-mormon/

  100. 100 JBR
    April 29, 2012 at 7:14 pm

    Josh,
    I too do not know how show youtube things here …
    But if you want to hear modern day “Luthers” but in the Mormonism context… then read about Sandra Tanner ( a direct relative of B. Young)
    … utlm.org

    or the youtube “the bible vs the book of mormon”
    from Living Hope Ministries

  101. 101 joshtried
    April 29, 2012 at 7:28 pm

    JBR, my comment about links was not a youtube link. My link was to my understanding a legitimate link. I have run across this several times and am curious why some links post, some go to moderation, and some links are not aloud in any way. I know about the first 2, and am more specifically wondering why some websites are not aloud to be posted

  102. 102 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 1:27 am

    Seriously Josh?

    Why do you insist on personally attacking me with your ranting on on on about my Bible being corrupt. I have been so upset over this emotional abuse that I have spent the better part of the day crying in a corner and I may never come back to this site ever again. NOT!

    If my Bible is corrupt then, please provide me with an copy that is not corrupt that shows where it is corrupt. The Catholic Church is not the Bible.

    “Our communication then broke down, and you decided to tell me that i am not going to heaven because i dont prescribe to your way of dealing with God. My personal life and dealings with God should not be on trial here.”

    You think I’m judging you by showing you your churches standard. That is not judging and I would still like to know how you are planning on getting around being forgiven of all your sins. Accepting Christ is just one of many things you need to do to be saved and stand before God when you die. I didn’t say you weren’t going to heaven, Spencer Kimball said you are not going to heaven. If you don’t believe the teachings of one of your most revered leaders then just say so.

  103. 103 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 2:06 am

    The big question is, if the LDS Church is true, repentance should be something that can actually be achieved. Have you met the requirements of repentance as defined by the LDS Church?
    1.True or False? According to the Doctrine and Covenants, people who repent of their sins forsake their sin.
    2.True or False? True repentance involves keeping the commandments.
    3.True or False? In order to live with Heavenly Father you must stop sinning.
    4.True or False? True repentance means never repeating that sin again.
    5.True or False? A crucial test of repentance is abandonment of the sin.
    6.True or False? If you hope to achieve exaltation in the next life, you must overcome your sin in this life.
    7.True or False? Repenting of only some sins never results in complete forgiveness.

    Answers
    1.According to the Doctrine and Covenants, people who repent of their sins forsake their sin.
    TRUE: According to Doctrine and Covenants 58:42,43: “Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more. By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins–behold, he will confess them and forsake them.”
    2.True repentance involves keeping the commandments.
    TRUE: The LDS Church manual Gospel Principles states, “To make our repentance complete we must keep the commandments of the Lord” (1992 ed., p.125).
    3.In order to live with Heavenly Father you must stop sinning.
    TRUE: Page 67 of the LDS Church manual Gospel Fundamentals insists, “Our Father in heaven does not sin, and He does not allow people who sin to live with Him. To live with Him, we must repent of our sins. To repent means to feel sorry for our sins and stop doing them.”
    4.True repentance means never repeating that sin again.
    TRUE: In an unnumbered tract published by the LDS Church titled Repentance Brings Forgiveness, it states, “The forsaking of sin must be a permanent one. True repentance does not permit making the same mistake again” (1984).
    5.A crucial test of repentance is abandonment of the sin.
    TRUE: Spencer W. Kimball, the 12th President of the LDS Church, declared, “There is one crucial test of repentance. This is abandonment of the sin” (The Miracle of Forgiveness, p.163. Also cited in Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual: Religion 231 and 232, p.40).
    6.If you hope to achieve exaltation in the next life, you must overcome your sin in this life.
    TRUE: 12th President Spencer W. Kimball said, “Christ became perfect through overcoming. Only as we overcome shall we become perfect and move toward godhood. As I have indicated previously, the time to do this is now, in mortality” (The Miracle of Forgiveness, p.210).
    7.Repenting of only some sins never results in complete forgiveness.
    TRUE: Page 212 of The Miracle of Forgiveness reads, “…incomplete repentance never brought complete forgiveness” (12th President Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness, p.212).

    “If you find yourself repenting every day, doesn’t this prove that you have not “completely repented” as explained by both Mormon scripture and Mormon leaders? Why should people who have forsaken all of their sin and keep all of the commandments need to repent at all? The fact is, if D&C 58:43 is true, people who repent every day only prove that they have not completely repented and are not qualified for exaltation.”

    From: http://www.mrm.org/repentance-quiz

  104. 104 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 2:31 am

    you take these things out of context, and try to use them to say that i am not going to heaven. This is when it becomes an attack. We can honestly both say this to each other, as we have a different starting point. The difference is I expressed my personal life in good faith, and you attacked that. I know what our doctrine says, and where i stand in relation to that doctrine and to Jesus Christ.

    The Catholic Church was the KEEPER of your Bible. They were the scribes. The were the ones that added the Apocrypha. They had complete and utter control over the Bible. This is where your bible came from. I say God did save his word, but not in the way you insist. I say he saved it and restored it during a time when it would no longer be corrupted.
    I have also pointed you to a non-corrupt version, the JST, which you refuse to believe. I cant really do anything thing else… You can lead a horse to water, you cant make him drink. About all i can do is wait for you to die and baptize you by proxy…

    You have not yet address how anything you say matters if Christ accepts us.. Your words are literally said in vain if this is the case. There is absolutely no reason for saying anything if Christ is the sole decision maker in this process. Does this mean by default you are saying that i must make the choice first? I must accept Christ with my free will? Which is it? Yall play both sides of the fence so much i dont know where you stand.

  105. 105 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 3:01 am

    “However, there could be someone reading who does want Jesus to save them so feel free to assume that my posts are for them and not for you.
    This is an all out lie when it comes to Lutheran doctrine. If people dont get to choose God, then you are all hear talking for nothing. ”

    I’m still scratching my head over how you took this to mean that people don’t have to choose God, then again that’s what your church teaches since you are going to baptize me against my wishes/choice. Baptism didn’t save me, the blood of Jesus did. I think I already told you. I’m not Lutheran. I believe in election and free will, both are evident in the Bible which, by the way, the Catholic church did not write.

    1.“Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)

    2.“For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all …” (1 Timothy 2:5)

    3.“There is one body and one Spirit … one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” (Ephesians 4:4)

    4.Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (John 14:6)

    5.“I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and find pasture … I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.” (John 10:9)

    6.Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life, he who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die.” (John 11:25)

    7.Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.” (John 8:12)

    8.And Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35)

    9.“I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.” (John 6:51)

    10.“… whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” (John 3:15-16)

    11.“He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” (John 3:36)

    12.“Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.” (John 8:24)

    13.“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.” (John 5:24)

    14.“… And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; He who does not have the Son of God does not have life.” (1 John 5:11)

    15.“And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.” (1 John 4:14)

    This is the good news: JESUS. I went through God to obtain my salvation. Mormons have to go through a man (their bishop, an imperfect, human man) for their salvation. Think about it. The bishop holds the key to your temple recommend. If in his human faulty flesh he decides you are not temple worthy, you do not get to go to God. Oops, he made a mistake on judging your character, no God for you. What if he just flat out doesn’t like you (after all he is human and capable of making mistakes) and he decides you just aren’t good enough for the temple, NO GOD FOR YOU! God is perfect, your bishop is not.

    By the way, my faith is strong enough to withstand your “personal attack” in telling me I’m not saved according to the LDS church. PRAISE GOD! I’m not depending on a list of requirements to be with God. I am forgiven, washed clean, sin free, holy in the eyes of God, perfect right now, a temple and dwelling place for His Spirit living in me. WOOOOOO HOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  106. 106 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 3:05 am

    1.True or False? According to the Doctrine and Covenants, people who repent of their sins forsake their sin.
    True. But, while we are perfect through Christ, Satan still retains power to tempt us. Since we are not yet perfect ourselves, but only through Christ, we will most likely sin again. We choose moment by moment whether Christ works through us.
    2.True or False? True repentance involves keeping the commandments.
    True. If we were never meant to keep a single commandment, why would they be given in the first place?
    3.True or False? In order to live with Heavenly Father you must stop sinning.
    True. “No unclean thing can dwell in the presence of the Lord”. Once we die, we claim Christs atonement and advance to our place as appropriate.
    4.True or False? True repentance means never repeating that sin again.
    True. I can truly repent of being a hypocrite today, and sincerely have no want to do it again. As i said in relation to #1, Satan is going to continue to tempt us. We do have the power to overcome this temptation, but not all of us will overcome out of weakness in spirit. Christ’s love is forgiveness, even when we screw up again. Again, God commands us to be perfect. If you have a problem with that, take it up with God, not the LDS church for repeating what God has commanded. We as LDS know why Christ was sent. You obviously fail to see where Christ fits in our puzzle.
    5.True or False? A crucial test of repentance is abandonment of the sin.
    True. Again, God commands perfection. We are commanded to repent correctly. Whether this happens or not is not a “deal breaker”. Again, this is why Christ came to the earth at all…
    6.True or False? If you hope to achieve exaltation in the next life, you must overcome your sin in this life.
    True. We accept Christ’s forgiveness and thereby overcome all sin. No person’s personal life should be on trial with relation to this. Their dealings with Christ dictate whether HE accepts them.
    7.True or False? Repenting of only some sins never results in complete forgiveness.
    True. Whether or not a person repents correctly is not up to you. It is up to Christ. I can repent and ask to work on something myself. While you may not prefer this method, that as well is not up to you. I believe this life is for trials. I believe that working for something makes it more worth while. How many teenagers every year get handed a brand new vehicle and wind up flipping it? How many kids that worked for that car, and their parents contribute nothing, wind up flipping it? They know the value of “a dollar.” I know the value of “overcoming sin”. Is it easier for God to do it for you? Yes, it most certainly is. God does not give you anything that you can not handle though. Some people just handle things very poorly.
    A great example here is death. As Christians, you believe a person goes to heaven if they believe in Christ at the time of death. Why then are there people that break down fully heart broken over this loss? Why do they not utterly rejoice in the persons death? I am not saying it is wrong to mourn, I am saying some people just dont get it… When my Dad died, he wanted us to throw a party. I knew this, and rejoice in my heart when he finally died. I still did the normal funeral thing to have a mourning period, but did in no way take it to excess. I was sad to see him leave me and his grand children, sad that they would not know him personally growing up. I was so happy for him though that he would be going to heaven. I knew of his love for Christ. I then went and did a baptism for the dead for him, because he was not LDS. There was a woman who says she fell in love with him at the end of his life. She was not self sufficient, and even though there was no legal relationship between them, and for lack of a better term, made my family support her for a few months after he died. Now, my dad died, and i moved on happy and content in his life, and her “sweetheart” (he would not even come close to referring to her as his girlfriend) was devastated to the point of basically being on welfare… That welfare being provided by my family. She handled this very poorly in my opinion. I handled it very well in my (and my family’s) opinion.

  107. 107 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 3:10 am

    “I think I already told you. I’m not Lutheran.”

    If you did, i apologize, as i have before when not getting someones belief system correct. It is difficult to remember who believes what. I am glad to hear that you believe that it is our choice to believe in God or not. Whether you wish to believe me or not, in this point we fully agree.

  108. 108 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 3:12 am

    By the way, you did not acknowledge that it is your church doctrine that says you’re not going to heaven (Celestial Kingdom), not me. BTW, your early church fathers taught that anything less than the Celestial is damnation. Are you saying you disagree with your church and Kimball?

    Did you or did you not admit you are in your sins?

    Does this or does this not mean your repentance is not complete?

    Does this or does this not mean that you are not saved in the eyes of the LDS church?

    If you are not forgiven of your sins, do you or do you not get to be with God?

    If the teachings of Kimball are wrong, then please let us in on how you plan on getting into the Celestial Kingdom unclean or are you one of those mormons who is just willing to accept damnation in a lesser kingdom?

  109. 109 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 3:18 am

    Mormons have to go through a man (their bishop, an imperfect, human man) for their salvation. Think about it. The bishop holds the key to your temple recommend. If in his human faulty flesh he decides you are not temple worthy, you do not get to go to God. Oops, he made a mistake on judging your character, no God for you. What if he just flat out doesn’t like you (after all he is human and capable of making mistakes) and he decides you just aren’t good enough for the temple, NO GOD FOR YOU! God is perfect, your bishop is not.

    While in theory this is true, i have never personally run into an instance where this is actually the case. There are people that become offended when a Bishop recommends some change before allowing a person access to the temple. When you go to a temple recommend appointment, there are a specific set of questions that the Bishop (or delegated official) is to ask you. None of these deal with personal likes or dislikes of the person in question. There are things that a bishop may know that prevent you from going to the temple, and as such make sure that you are truthful in dealing with God. For instance, one of the questions is if you pay a full tithe. If you were in the week before discussing how you have been unable to pay, and the next week are asking for a temple recommend, he may bring up the last weeks discussion. Know, generally speaking, they would say in the last weeks meeting “from this time forth pay your tithe.” If he knows enough about you to know that you got paid on friday, he may specifically ask if you paid tithe this sunday. Again, i know of no cases of this actually happening, but this to me would be how the discussion would go. There has never been any personal bias with regard to a temple recommend that i am aware of. I also dont know ever LDS member world wide.

  110. 110 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 3:19 am

    “Now, generally speaking”……..

  111. 111 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 3:31 am

    “By the way, you did not acknowledge that it is your church doctrine that says you’re not going to heaven (Celestial Kingdom), not me.”
    I acknowledged that you do not understand the teachings as a whole, and are therefore twisting what is taught by pulling one-liners out of texts. I even made reference to this in my “puzzle” analogy. You disregard everything we say regarding Christs atonement and then insert “obey the law or go to hell” script. This is wrong and deceptive.

    “Did you or did you not admit you are in your sins?”
    I admitted that right now I do not have perfect faith. I admitted that no person on this earth has perfect faith.
    Unless i am mistaken, not having perfect faith was not a sin. I also admitted that i chose to work on some things with the assistance of Christ.
    The rest of the questions hinge on this. since i did not say i am in my sins, the rest do not at this time seem to need my answers.

  112. 112 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 3:32 am

    Here’s something else for you to think about: when you baptize me, won’t my baptism be better than your baptism since you threw your baptism out the window the moment you committed your first sin following your baptism. You have been baptized and are unclean in your sin. I will be baptized and clean because of you. I will be clean in a lesser glory, but God can’t come see me and I can’t go see Him. You will be unclean in a lesser glory, God can’t come see you and you can’t go see God. How are we any different according to LDS teaching? Won’t you and I be in the same place?

    Here’s a better way, you ditch the false teachings of the LDS church, repent, admit the blood of Christ is all you need for your salvation (nothing more) and we will both be with God. Isn’t God’s way better?

    Here’s a little something to help you with that: http://www.bible-knowledge.com/what-is-salvation/

  113. 113 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 3:34 am

    You’re a sinner Josh, we all are.

  114. 114 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 3:34 am

    BTW, your early church fathers taught that anything less than the Celestial is damnation. Are you saying you disagree with your church and Kimball?
    I see this in light of personal perception. To those in Hell, the Telestial kingdom would be awesome. To those in the Celestial Kingdom, the Telestial would probably seem like torture. I do not know the extent of everything that goes on in either kingdom of heaven, and comment solely based on my perception of what i have learned.

  115. 115 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 3:40 am

    “I will be clean in a lesser glory, but God can’t come see me and I can’t go see Him.”

    No, you would not be in a lesser glory. You would receive all the temple ordinances and upon your accepting the work done for you by proxy, you would be admitted to the Celestial Kingdom.

    As to the thought that i will be in a lesser kingdom, you do not understand the power we place in Christ’s forgiveness. I work hard to maintain that forgiveness eternally. I do screw up occasionally. I learn from this and move forward in Christ. There is only one unforgivable sin, and to my knowledge i have not committed this sin.

  116. 116 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 3:41 am

    Seems we found another point we agree on Choose. We are all sinners.

    The question of this post is “does God have the power to help you not want to sin any more”. Do you think God has this power Choose?

  117. 117 JBR
    April 30, 2012 at 4:00 am

    Josh ….about the link stuff.

    I know it was attempted to be explained to you…but that doesn’t still explain why some are able to post youtube links. I’m not too computer savy …..
    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

    also ……

    take into consideration that we understand that even within Mormonism there are different perspectives among Mormons ( i.e, LDS vs FLDS), you will find that within Christianity their will be different perspectives as well. (i.e. Lutheran vs Baptist)

    But what unites the Lutheran & Baptist is still the main obstacle between us and Mormonism……. the basic truths as revealed in the Bible.
    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

    Final note\suggestion:

    too long of reply’s are too hard to read in this web blog. (example 103 & 104 )
    I really do recommend that if you want to be read fully, that somehow you break it down into smaller paragraphs …….

  118. 118 JBR
    April 30, 2012 at 4:02 am

    too long of reply’s are too hard to read in this web blog. (example 103 & 104 )
    I really do recommend that if you want to be read fully, that somehow you break it down into smaller paragraphs …….

    which I am guily of once in awhile also ;)

  119. 119 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 1:05 pm

    “No, you would not be in a lesser glory. You would receive all the temple ordinances and upon your accepting the work done for you by proxy, you would be admitted to the Celestial Kingdom.”

    You are going to do all the work for me and I don’t have to do anything, but accept the work you do for me?

    Jesus did all the work for me and I don’t have to do anything, but accept the work Jesus did for me. What’s the point of Mormonism? Just sounds like you are trying to be Jesus for me.

    “Complete obedience brings eternal life. But to be exalted one must keep the whole law … to receive the exaltation of the righteous, in other words eternal life, the commandments of the Lord must be kept in all things.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation: Sermons and Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith, 2:6).”

    What does ALL mean? What does complete obedience mean? Are you saying no one really needs to keep the commandments?

  120. 120 shematwater
    April 30, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    JOSH

    I am sorry, but I have to correct one thing. I am not going to speak in relation to any particular person, but I have to point out that there is only one chance at the Celestial Kingdom. If one had that chance here they cannot have it in the next life.
    D&C 76: 74-75 “Who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, but afterwards received it.
    These are they who are honorable men of the earth, who were blinded by the craftiness of men.”
    A person who has had the chance in this life can have their work done for them, but it will only save them from the Telestial world; it will not get them into the Celestial.
    I do not make comments on individuals, as it is up to God to determine if a person truly received the opportunity in this life and rejected it. But don’t think that work for the dead can just be done for anyone and bring them into the Celestial Kingdom.

    CHOOSE

    Josh is right that you keep twisting our doctrine. I have actually showed you clearly in the book Mormon Doctrine (which you quoted actually) where it contradicts everything you have claimed, but you refuse to see it.

    Your twisting can be seen clearly in point 7 in your previous posts. You asked “7.True or False? Repenting of only some sins never results in complete forgiveness.” You then answered by citing The Miracle of Forgiveness “Repenting of only some sins never results in complete forgiveness. TRUE: Page 212 of The Miracle of Forgiveness reads, “…incomplete repentance never brought complete forgiveness” (12th President Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness, p.212).”
    The question is this: Is your understanding accurate. The answer is no. The simple reason is that you don’t think about what is being said, you just throw it out there and hope it sticks.
    What is meant by this is the exact same thing that James teaches in James 2: 10, that a person cannot try to hold onto even one sin and think they will gain forgiveness. As a good friend puts it “you can’t have a mansion in heaven and time share in Hell.” It is like the women who expressed the belief that God would not keep her out of heaven just for one cup of coffee a day. This mentality is one of “Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God.” (2 Nephi 28: 8) This mentality will never lead to forgiveness.

    Of course, you prefer to focus on the actions, and so you miss the weightier matters of the gospel (Matthew 23: 23).

  121. 121 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 2:37 pm

    Shem, “The question is this: Is your understanding accurate. The answer is no. The simple reason is that you don’t think about what is being said, you just throw it out there and hope it sticks.”

    I have thought about everything that has been said and it still makes no sense to me. Don’t explain it to me by throwing scripture back at me and hope that I see what you are trying to say. If I have it wrong, then I would like an explanation in your words what I need to do to understand what you say I don’t understand.

    “Complete obedience brings eternal life. But to be exalted one must keep the whole law … to receive the exaltation of the righteous, in other words eternal life, the commandments of the Lord must be kept in all things.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation: Sermons and Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith, 2:6).”

    What does “complete obedience brings eternal life mean” then?

  122. 122 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 4:45 pm

    “I have thought about everything that has been said and it still makes no sense to me. Don’t explain it to me by throwing scripture back at me and hope that I see what you are trying to say. If I have it wrong, then I would like an explanation in your words what I need to do to understand what you say I don’t understand.”

    Choose, we have given you both scripture and our personal understanding of that scripture. You have decided against seeing things our way. Whether this was before or after you first heard our message, i dont know. I can guess, but that does no good. I will say that IF it was before you ever heard the message from an LDS person, you are doing yourself a disservice by being biased. We must take scripture as a whole. There is not one scripture that sums up Mormon theology. “After all you can do” is one statement in a whole book. Taken out of context, of course this is going to seem bad. Taken in proper context, this is not a bad thing. I am LDS, I do live LDS values, and i have no problem with this scripture. It does not make my goals unattainable. It does not make my life any more difficult. As i have said before, you can take someone’s word who does not live this life over mine, but you will not gain the truth.

    And Shem, thank you for the correction.

  123. 123 joshtried
    April 30, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    “Complete obedience brings eternal life. But to be exalted one must keep the whole law”

    I may be mistaken, and i say this up front. I was not alive during this, and have not had it presented before. I will take a stab at it based on my understanding of previous scripture.

    First, “Complete obedience brings eternal life”. Complete obedience did bring eternal life. You and i both know there was only one who was ever completely obedient, from birth until death. I do not see this statement as saying that I must have complete obedience, but Christ must, and did, and therefore our eternal life is possible.

    Second, “But to be exalted one must keep the whole law”. This i would break down into 2 parts. Part 1, again, Christ is the only one that kept the whole law from birth until death. Christ made exaltation possible. Part 2 depends on us accepting Christ and becoming exalted through him. We still must strive to keep the law, and not willfully disobey it at every corner. Shem hit the nail on the head with the “eat drink and be merry” part of his last reply. To expound on this a little bit, maybe the American penal system can help. Yes, i know it is a broken system, but for the purpose of this i want to point out being tried as a minor vs being tried as an adult. We are tried as a minor when we dont fully understand what we have done. We have pity taken on us because of our lack of understanding. Before we accept Christ, we are minors. We are still subject to the law, and we will still receive death, but when we come to him that first time, everything is forgiven because you did not understand what is correct. After we accept Christ, we are tried as adults, having a complete understanding of what is right and wrong, and what is expected of us. This does not mean that we can not still be forgiven. It means we should be acting differently based on the understanding we hold. Here, forgiveness does become “more” conditional. Do i know how much Christ will forgive, and in what circumstances? No, i dont. Christ said follow the commandments. It is up to Christ to decide if i have followed them, and if he will forgive me.

  124. 124 choosethechrist
    April 30, 2012 at 10:45 pm

    Josh, I am surrounded by mormons and plenty of them have interpreted the quotes exactly as I have presented them here.

    You break the law, maybe Jesus will forgive you and maybe he won’t?

    To be exalted one must keep the whole law. Are you saying you can be exalted without keeping the whole law and that this should read: to be exalted one does not have to keep the whole law, but that really all depends on if Christ decides to forgive someone for the laws they have not kept?

  125. 125 shematwater
    May 1, 2012 at 12:54 am

    CHOOSE

    This quote does mean exactly what it says. The problem is that you do not understand what the Law is. You try to make the law to be only the outward actions; the actually works that are done. While this is part of the law it is not all of it. Forgiveness is part of the law. Repentence is part of the Law. Mercy is part of the Law. Most of all, Faith is part of the Law.
    As I said before “you prefer to focus on the actions, and so you miss the weightier matters of the gospel (Matthew 23: 23).” I do not think that you are like the pharisees, but your mentality is very similar when you think of LDS doctrine. You see the “tithe of mint and anise and cummin” but you do not see that we also believe in “judgment, mercy, and faith.”
    I keep the whole law when I live worthy to partake of the sacrament every week. I will make mistakes, and I do not keep every commandment perfectly. But if I am worthy to partake of the sacrament than the law states that I am forgiven of all those sins, and thus I am as if I did keep them perfectly. Thus I have kept the whole law and will be exalted.

    Don’t confuse outward ordinances and actions for the law, for they are only part of it. To go to Josh’s analogy, to say the entire was only those designating crimes would be to ignore the procedural laws of the courts and governments.

  126. 126 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 1:53 pm

    Shem said, “This quote does mean exactly what is says”. Exactly!

    Shem, you have made some incorrect assumptions about my understanding regarding “what the Law is”. I understand the meaning behind your law and what you believe you are doing when you repent, take the sacrament, etc. In making your assumptions about my understanding you have accused me of “twisting” your doctrine implying that there is no possible way that someone from outside your church could possibly comprehend the ordinances of your church. I was baptized, I take communion at my church and am quite capable of comprehending the deeper meaning behind an action and what that action represents.

    What you seem to have missed in all of this is the deeper meaning that we Christians place on the blood that Christ shed on the cross for us. Everytime I take communion it is about the shed blood of Christ and what that blood did for me and how thankful I am that through the shedding of his blood that his blood has washed me clean so that I can be in the presence of God. I am not worthy and I can never be worthy enough without that blood to be right in God’s eyes, but I am worthy because of the blood of Christ. My continual need to repent of my sins shows that I can never be worthy enough for God on my own without the blood of Christ to cover my sins. I don’t repent to seek the forgiveness to be worthy and clean in God’s eyes because I have already been forgiven of all my sins through the blood of Christ. I repent to restore the relationship that I have with God that my sin damaged. My sins do not return to me because I was forgiven “once for all”. There is a major difference here between you and I. For me, Christ did it all, I am forgiven right now and forever more. I am clean and will always be clean. For you, “It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when. It could be weeks, it could be years, it could be centuries before that happy day when you have the positive assurance that the Lord has forgiven you. That depends on your humility, your sincerity, your works, your attitudes.” ~Spencer Kimball

  127. 127 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 1:59 pm

    Hebrews 10

    Christ’s Sacrifice Once for All

    10 The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2 Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. 3 But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins. 4 It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

    5 Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:

    “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
    but a body you prepared for me;
    6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings
    you were not pleased.
    7 Then I said, ‘Here I am—it is written about me in the scroll —
    I have come to do your will, my God.’”

    8 First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them” —though they were offered in accordance with the law. 9 Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. 10 And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

    11 Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. 14 For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

    15 The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:

    16 “This is the covenant I will make with them
    after that time, says the Lord.
    I will put my laws in their hearts,
    and I will write them on their minds.”

    17 Then he adds:

    “Their sins and lawless acts
    I will remember no more.”

    18 And where these have been forgiven, sacrifice for sin is no longer necessary.

  128. 128 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 2:03 pm

    There are people who believe that salvation is eternal but still teach that we need to seek forgiveness for our sins in order to keep favor with God. Since we know salvation is eternal and we could not get more forgiveness if we lost it how can we think that we need more forgiveness whether it is for salvation or fellowship with God? There was only one sacrifice for sins, and if anyone is going to claim that they lose the forgiveness that came with that one sacrifice then they have to also admit that there is “no sacrifice for sins left,” and therefore no way to be forgiven again. Why is that? Forgiveness requires blood to be shed.

    Heb 9:18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.” 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

    Blood was required for forgiveness in the Old Testament and that did not change under the New Covenant. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. So, if Jesus did not completely forgive us for ALL of our sins, there is no sacrifice left because there will not be any more sacrifices offered.

    Under the Old Covenant our sins were covered by the blood of the bulls and goats that were sacrificed for them. But under the New Covenant our sins were not merely covered up, they were taken away.

    ~http://blog.guidedbytruth.com/eternalforgiveness.php

  129. 129 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    Heb 10:11 Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. 13 Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, 14 because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

    Since our sins were literally taken away, God said that he would not even remember them.

    Heb 10:17 Then he adds: “Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.” 18 And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.

    Since salvation is eternal we have to realize that we had to have already been forgiven for ALL of our sins because Christ died once for all of them.

    ~http://blog.guidedbytruth.com/eternalforgiveness.php

  130. 130 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    1 Peter 3:18 For Christ died for sins once for all , the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit,

    Heb 7:27 He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.

    Rom 6:10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all ; but the life he lives, he lives to God.

    Christ died once for all sins and all people and since forgiveness requires the shedding of blood we know there is no sacrifice left for sins and therefore no more forgiveness can be offered. Jesus said His work was finished and He is now sitting down at the right hand of the Father. He will not shed his blood again for you no matter how grievous your offense is. To claim that any sin was not already taken away by His blood is to claim that Christ’s sacrifice was not sufficient.

    ~http://blog.guidedbytruth.com/eternalforgiveness.php

  131. 131 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 2:19 pm

    Jeremiah 31
    31 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
    “when I will make a new covenant
    with the people of Israel
    and with the people of Judah.
    32 It will not be like the covenant
    I made with their ancestors
    when I took them by the hand
    to lead them out of Egypt,
    because they broke my covenant,
    though I was a husband to them,”
    declares the Lord.
    33 “This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel
    after that time,” declares the Lord.
    “I will put my law in their minds
    and write it on their hearts.
    I will be their God,
    and they will be my people.
    34 No longer will they teach their neighbor,
    or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
    because they will all know me,
    from the least of them to the greatest,”
    declares the Lord.
    “For I will forgive their wickedness
    and will remember their sins no more.”

    This is for Josh in case he wants to claim that the Catholic church corrupted Hebrews 10:16-17. The OT was around way before the Catholic church “corrupted” the Bible.

    You see, we needed Jesus (the new covenant) because we are all covenant breakers. It is because of the blood of Jesus Christ that our wickedness and sins are no longer remembered. AMEN!

  132. 132 joshtried
    May 1, 2012 at 2:22 pm

    Choose, perhaps I am mistaken, so i would like to clarify something. Are you advocating “once saved, always saved”? That is what your last couple of posts seem to indicate to me.

  133. 133 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 2:23 pm

    Mormons, do you believe God? This is a promise of God:

    “For I will forgive their wickedness
    and will remember their sins no more.”

    Or do you believe this:

    “It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when. It could be weeks, it could be years, it could be centuries before that happy day when you have the positive assurance that the Lord has forgiven you. That depends on your humility, your sincerity, your works, your attitudes.” ~Spencer Kimball

  134. 134 joshtried
    May 1, 2012 at 2:28 pm

    We do not deny God the power to forgive anything and everything.

    We do believe in personal accountability, and other parts of the Bible that say that you can lose your forgiveness.

  135. 135 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    Josh, I think we need to get a clear understanding of forgiveness before we move on to a converstation about “once saved, always saved”.

    How am I forgiven vs how are you forgiven?

    I am advocating the blood of Christ alone for the forgiveness of sins. I know I have posted a lot of info, but I would like to respectfully ask that you carefully read, consider and try to understand what I have posted from the Christian perspective.

  136. 136 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 2:35 pm

    Josh, you are skipping past my point. I can’t talk with you about personal accountablity, etc until you get my point about the shedding of blood and total forgiveness.

    “Christ died once for all sins and all people and since forgiveness requires the shedding of blood we know there is no sacrifice left for sins and therefore no more forgiveness can be offered. Jesus said His work was finished and He is now sitting down at the right hand of the Father. He will not shed his blood again for you no matter how grievous your offense is. To claim that any sin was not already taken away by His blood is to claim that Christ’s sacrifice was not sufficient.”

    vs

    “It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when. It could be weeks, it could be years, it could be centuries before that happy day when you have the positive assurance that the Lord has forgiven you. That depends on your humility, your sincerity, your works, your attitudes.” ~Spencer Kimball

  137. 137 joshtried
    May 1, 2012 at 2:47 pm

    You are making a 2 part claim, as such I am doing my best to address both. Yes, Christ died for every sin everywhere.
    The question then becomes is every single person going to heaven right now? If there are some that are not going to heaven, why are they not going?

  138. 138 choosethechrist
    May 1, 2012 at 2:53 pm

    Jesus is the new covenant. What is a covenant? Is a covenant one sided?

  139. 139 joshtried
    May 1, 2012 at 5:41 pm

    Biblical definition:
    a. the conditional promises made to humanity by God, as revealed in Scripture.
    b. the agreement between God and the ancient Israelites, in which God promised to protect them if they kept His law and were faithful to Him.

    Worldly definition:
    an agreement, usually formal, between two or more persons to do or not do something specified.

  140. 140 joshtried
    May 1, 2012 at 6:10 pm

    “This is for Josh in case he wants to claim that the Catholic church corrupted Hebrews 10:16-17. The OT was around way before the Catholic church “corrupted” the Bible.”

    Once again, you missed my point. Was there another “Bible” that Martin Luther used? Who had possession of the Bible during the 1000 years before Martin Luther came on to the scene to say Catholics screwed up? You can say that this entire book isnt corrupt, but even yall (the Christian side) has said that the bible may have foot notes because we arent sure which word really goes in a particular spot. To me, i see this: “we dont know for sure, but we know that you arent right, because your LDS.” There were many scribes copying many manuscripts. There are thousands of miniscule changes, but none of those changes were a mistake. None of those lead to corrupt doctrine being taught. Unless every single ancient manuscript has the exact same word in the exact same place in the sentence, then you are wrong. We have no way of knowing which copy is correct, except the power of the Holy Ghost. Even in that, one of us is wrong, as we both claim the Holy Ghost is telling us our “Bible” is correct. I have laid before you what i consider to be a well put together argument stating the Bible was corrupt. You dismiss this by saying things are inspired or claim “God protected his word”. I claim the exact same last statement. God did protect his word, but not in the way you describe, or every single manuscript ever written with regard to the Bible would match up PERFECTLY. Not mostly, but utter and downright PERFECTION. If they dont, then you are wrong, and the “Bible” was in fact corrupted.

  141. 141 joshtried
    May 1, 2012 at 6:18 pm

    I think we have talked about this scripture in particular before, but i will share with you my thoughts on this again:
    Jeremiah 31
    31 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,

    To me, these days are not yet here. If they were, then this would be true: “34 No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the Lord. You are still trying to teach me to know the Lord, correct? Ergo, this is prophetic of a time not yet come.

  142. 142 shematwater
    May 1, 2012 at 6:39 pm

    CHOOSE

    Again you twist my words.

    “you have accused me of “twisting” your doctrine implying that there is no possible way that someone from outside your church could possibly comprehend the ordinances of your church.”

    I make no such implication. I know many people who are not members and never have been that understand the doctrine very well. I implied nothing, but spoke directly in terms of your understanding. I did not say you couldn’t understand our doctrine, but that your approach to it was preventing that understanding. You have a pre-conceived idea of what we believe, based on a bias that is deeply rooted; because of this you prevent yourself from understanding what we actually believe, but instead come up with the unrecognizable jumble you have posted here.

    “I…am quite capable of comprehending the deeper meaning behind an action and what that action represents.”

    Yes, but still you are focused on action, and the meaning of action. More particularly you aere focused on our actions. I am not talking about the meaning behind the actions. It is like I said; there is a difference between crimimal law and court procedure. You may understand what constitutes a crime, but you do not understand the procedures of repentence and forgiveness. Thus you keep coming back to the false idea that the court requires imprisonment if even one crime is committed, but fail to understand the ideas of parol, or working to pay a fine.

    “What you seem to have missed in all of this is the deeper meaning that we Christians place on the blood that Christ shed on the cross for us.”

    I have missed nothing. I understand completely what you believe. But what you believe is not what you were talking about. You were not comparing our beliefs with yours, but were trying to portray what we believe, and were failing. As such, what you believe, and the meaning you put on the atonement, is of no consequence to the discussion.

    “Everytime I take communion it is about the shed blood of Christ and what that blood did for me and how thankful I am that through the shedding of his blood that his blood has washed me clean so that I can be in the presence of God. I am not worthy and I can never be worthy enough without that blood to be right in God’s eyes, but I am worthy because of the blood of Christ. My continual need to repent of my sins shows that I can never be worthy enough for God on my own without the blood of Christ to cover my sins.”

    I would agree with everything stated here, as does LDS doctrine.

    “There is a major difference here between you and I.”

    Yes, there is a major difference. If by your doctrine all people are already forgiven than no one should be denied heaven. If they are then you have no justice.
    so, since you want to switch the topic to discuss your doctrine rather than ours, why not answer this question: What does the relationship with God do? If that is the reason for repentence than does that relationship have any effect on our eternal reward in Heaven?

  143. 143 shematwater
    May 1, 2012 at 6:56 pm

    Speaking of Hebrews 10, I again reiterate that I prefer the KJV, and this illustrates why. The meaning is different from the KJV and the NIV (at least I am assuming that this is the version Choose cites).

    NIV Hebrews 10: 14 “because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.”

    KJV Hebrews 10: 14 “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.”

    Notice the difference here. In the NIV he had made perfect those who are in the process of being made holy. In the KJV he has perfected only those who have already been made holy, or who have been sanctified. I think this is a big difference.

    However, to get to the meat of the whole thing, I addressed this very chapter earlier in this thread (post 89) but will repeat it here.

    In Hebrews 10: 10-18 Paul is describing the effect of the Atonement, but he also states that this effect will only be for those who are sanctified (verse 14). In this same chapter, after the explanation of the effects of the Atonement, Paul then tells us how we lay hold on those effects.
    “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. (aka baptism)
    Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
    And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
    Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.” (22-25)

    Notice the wording of these verses. If doing this was not to secure the promise than what was the point in giving that motivation in verse 23? Previously he said the sanctified are perfected, and now he tells us that we are washed with pure water; an obvious allusion to the fact that it is baptism that sanctifies, and thus opens the way for the perfecting of the people.
    Verse 10-18 do not indicate that the sinner is justified, but that through the atonement such is possible, if they sanctify themselves in the way that he describes in verse 22-25.

    Now, Choose does make the point of one sacrifice being made, and no more being needed. This is very true. There need be no more sacrifice for sins. That has been done. But this does not negate that need for our own efforts and repentence to lay hold on the effects of that sacrifice.

  144. 144 choosethechrist
    May 2, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    Josh, Jeremiah 31 is messianic prophecy whether you want to believe it or not. Jesus is the new covenant and it has already come to pass.

    Shem said, “Yes, there is a major difference. If by your doctrine all people are already forgiven than no one should be denied heaven. If they are then you have no justice.
    so, since you want to switch the topic to discuss your doctrine rather than ours, why not answer this question: What does the relationship with God do? If that is the reason for repentence than does that relationship have any effect on our eternal reward in Heaven?”

    Shem, You missed my point about asking what a covenant is. The blood of Christ does not atone for the sins of those who reject what God has offered. There is justice.

    The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from sin and this is not dependent upon our repentance or confession of sins because it is based upon what Jesus Christ has already done for us. In the OT confession was made, but forgiveness was the result of a blood sacrifice. In the NT confession is made and cleansing by the blood of Christ results in forgiveness of sin, but forgiveness from sin only happens through Jesus Christ when we believe in Him. Those who do not believe are not forgiven and will be accountable for their sins.

    We are forgiven by the blood of Jesus. Why should we bother to confess our sin? Confession heals us from our rebellion and brings us back into a close relationship with God.

    The blood of Jesus Christ alone is not sufficient for the forgiveness of sins for the mormon which explains what Spencer Kimball said:

    “It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when. It could be weeks, it could be years, it could be centuries before that happy day when you have the positive assurance that the Lord has forgiven you. That depends on your humility, your sincerity, your works, your attitudes.” ~Spencer Kimball

    Mormons do not believe in the sufficiency of the blood of Christ alone for forgiveness from all sin. Therefore, mormons are not forgiven and will be held accountable because it depends on their “humility”, “sincerity”, “works”, and “attitude”. Christians are forgiven of all their sins and will not be held accountable for their sins because of the sufficiency of the blood of Christ.

    This does not mean we have license to sin. My status of sinner is no different than the mormon’s status as sinner because we all sin. A true Christian keeps God’s commandments just as faithfully as any mormon does.

    What this does mean is that the mormon is depending upon the blood of Christ + what they are able to do to earn god’s forgiveness and secure the right to dwell in the presence of God. Whereas the Christian was given the right to dwell in the presence of God through the blood of Christ alone. My God given right to dwell with Him for all eternity is my eternal reward.

  145. 145 choosethechrist
    May 2, 2012 at 2:19 pm

    As for this: KJV Hebrews 10: 14 “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.”

    One offering: the sacrificial blood of Christ

    hath: a singular form of the present tense

    forever: continually; incessantly; always; endless

    sanctified: cleansed; purified; set apart; made holy

    Now that we have broken down the KJV, how is it different than the NIV?

    NIV Hebrews 10: 14 “because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.”

    being made holy: sanctification, sanctifying

    sanctification: the act of making one holy; the act of cleansing; (all believers enter into this state when they are born of God).

    I accepted God’s new covenant offering and in doing so, at that moment I became clean, holy, and perfect FOREVER.

  146. 146 shematwater
    May 2, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    CHOOSE

    You don’t actually answer my question. Does our relationship with God have any effect on our eternal reward?

    As to everything else you say, you are preaching a changing God, which contradicts the Bible. Regardless of this, your comments raise the question Why was the Atonement performed? You indicate that “In the OT confession was made, but forgiveness was the result of a blood sacrifice.” Thus you are claiming that it was through the sacrifice of animals that people gained forgiveness under the Old Covenant. If this is true then why was there any need for a New Covenant?

    You still don’t understand our doctrine, as you still try to minimize our belief and trust in the Atonement of Christ. You fail to understand that it is not simply by “the blood of Christ + what they are able to do,” but is by the blood of Christ that we an enabled to do what we need to do. We cannot take full credit for anything we do, as it is all made possible through Christ. We believe we have to be baptized, and we do take credit for making that choice. However, it would have no effect without the blood of Christ. We also believe in the necessity of the temple ordinances, but they too have no effect without the blood of Christ. It is not by our efforts that we are saved or forgiven. It is through the blood of Christ, which we allow to work in us, that these things are possible.
    Honestly I am getting tired of repeating this.

    Now, I understand that you believe it is only those who have faith that are forgiven, so let me ask you this. Do we choose to have faith, or is it just given to us? Is there any choice on our part at all?

  147. 147 shematwater
    May 2, 2012 at 6:10 pm

    CHOOSE

    Regarding Jeremiah 31, your claim does not fit with the chapter itself. Notice in verse 8 that Jeremiah says God “will bring them from the north country, and gather them from the coasts of the earth…” This cannot be refering to the time of Christ because no Israelites came from the North to Jerusalem at this time. This chapter is so clearly referring to the last days just preceding the Second Coming, when God will act to gather scattered Israel. It is not a Messionic Prophecy.

  148. 148 joshtried
    May 2, 2012 at 6:31 pm

    Choose, has all of this happened?
    33 “This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,” declares the Lord. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 34 No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the Lord.

    It may be messianic in that only Christ can make this stuff happen, but not in Christ having already come. It says “No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord'”. If you are trying to teach me, and i am trying to teach you, then by definition, this has not yet come to pass.

  149. 149 JBR
    May 2, 2012 at 10:07 pm

    Shem said….. “Honestly I am getting tired of repeating this.”

    My response : As well as you should. Because if it were not for God protecting us the elect, then nobody would believe the truth.

  150. 150 JBR
    May 2, 2012 at 10:10 pm

    No Josh,
    by definition you have rejected the new covenant because as per custom from the usual Mormons who post here…you’ve not accuratly quoted all of the new covenant.

  151. 151 joshtried
    May 2, 2012 at 11:32 pm

    JBR: i have rejected nothing, but i have shown that part of this had not fully come to pass. As shem stated, this is referencing the 2nd coming. That is all that i am pointing out.
    As to Christ’s ability to forgive, i dont limit that either. I know what the Bible says he will and will not forgive.

  152. 152 choosethechrist
    May 3, 2012 at 2:17 am

    OY! An indepth study of Jeremiah is very much needed by our LDS friends.

    Shem said, “Regarding Jeremiah 31, your claim does not fit with the chapter itself. Notice in verse 8 that Jeremiah says God “will bring them from the north country, and gather them from the coasts of the earth…” This cannot be refering to the time of Christ because no Israelites came from the North to Jerusalem at this time.”

    Jeremiah 31:7-8 speaks of the “remnant” those who were not destroyed by God and sent into exile to Babylon aka the land of the North. This is God’s promise of restoration for those who were exiled. He promised to bring them back which was the whole reason why Jeremiah bought the field in chapter 32. This purchase was meant to enable Jeremiah or his heirs to reclaim the field after the 70 year exile. God promised a restoration after the exile and it did happen. See also chapter 33 regarding this promise note especially 33:14-15 which is another messianic prophecy. Jesus is the righteous branch from David.

    Jeremiah 31:31 is messianic prophecy which has come to pass. Jesus is the new covenant.

    Jeremiah 31:31
    “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
    “when I will make a new covenant
    with the people of Israel
    and with the people of Judah.

    Matthew 26:28
    This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

    God said hearts needed to be circumsized. That is what He did when He took the written law that needed to be taught by men (the priests) and fulfilled the written law with Jesus Christ. The law is written in the minds and hearts of those who belong to Christ. The new covenant is solemnized by the blood of Christ which reunites people with God (get it, we have 2 restorations here: the remnant back from exile i.e. Babylon and us with Christ).

    AWESOME!!!!!

    “No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the LORD. “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”

    John 6:45 It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me.

    Romans 11:27 And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins.

    Isaiah 43:25 “I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more.

    Isaiah 54:13 All your sons will be taught by the LORD, and great will be your children’s peace.

    Jeremiah 33:8 I will cleanse them from all the sin they have committed against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellion against me.

    Jeremiah 50:20 In those days, at that time,” declares the LORD, “search will be made for Israel’s guilt, but there will be none, and for the sins of Judah, but none will be found, for I will forgive the remnant I spare.

    Micah 7:18 Who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance? You do not stay angry forever but delight to show mercy.

  153. 153 choosethechrist
    May 3, 2012 at 3:00 am

    Shem said, “Does our relationship with God have any effect on our eternal reward?”
    We should probably be more concerned about entering the new covenant through the blood of Jesus Christ so that you can be given your eternal reward of salvation before we discuss maintaining a right relationship with God by keeping His commandments.

    Shem said, “you are preaching a changing God, which contradicts the Bible.”
    Nope, God has not changed. Read my previous post in regard to how God restored Judah after the exile and how God restores us to Him through the blood of Jesus Christ.

    Shem said, “If this is true then why was there any need for a New Covenant?”
    Because they could not keep the law then and you can’t keep the law and I can’t keep the law. Go back and read Hebrews again, it is now 1 offering once for all instead of repeated blood offerings over and over. Your LDS repentance process over and over and over again to gain forgiveness is similar to having to repeat animal sacrifice over and over and over.

    Shem said, “but is by the blood of Christ that we an enabled to do what we need to do.”
    That is not what God said. God made a promise: The time is coming when I will make a new covenant (blood of Jesus) and For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more. See my post in 143.

    LDS sins are remembered. Everytime an LDS person commits a sin that they already commited, it is remembered and not forgotten.

    “It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when. It could be weeks, it could be years, it could be centuries before that happy day when you have the positive assurance that the Lord has forgiven you. That depends on your humility, your sincerity, your works, your attitudes.” ~Spencer Kimball

    It depends on you? No, Jesus did it all, it could be right now. Be forgiven. Enter into the new covenant and accept the blood offering of Jesus for the forgiveness of your sins.

  154. 154 shematwater
    May 3, 2012 at 4:04 am

    CHOOSE

    “We should probably be more concerned about entering the new covenant through the blood of Jesus Christ…”

    Nice evasion. I hope you don’t mind if I just keep evading you until you answer my question.

    Jeremiah 31, 32, and 33: These are not related. They may be sequential in the record, but not in their writing, and thus do not carry the same meaning.

    Chapter 31 describes the gathering of all the tribes of Israel just prior to the second coming. As I pointed out before, it concerns them coming from the North, as well as the coasts of the earth (or the ends of the earth). This did not happen when they returned from Babylon. At that time they came from the East, not the North; and from only one basic area, not the ends of the earth.
    Also note in verse nine the statement “for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.” Clearly this is talking about a time when the tribe of Ephraim would assume the leadership of Israel, as is its birthright. This also did not happen at the Baylonian return.
    As to the New Covenant, it is talking about the time just after to the second coming, or the New Covenant that will be established during the millennium era. As Josh points out, verse 34 states that they will no longer teach each otehr, but it also states that “for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord.” So, unless you can accurately claim that all Israel knows God as God this has not yet happened and so it cannot refer to Christ’s first coming.

    Chapter 32 does contain a prophecy of the return of Israel from Babylon. However, it is in no way connected to the prophecy of chapters 31 or 33. It is on a different occasion that it was given, and it gives a definite timeline of events (the 70 years).

    Chapter 33 is also about Christ, but it also is about the second coming. While it was given while Jeremiah was in prison, as was chapter 32, it was at a later date, and thus is not connected to chapter 32. We know this from verse 33: 1. You are right that the Branch of David in verse 15 is Christ, but read verse 16. “In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The Lord our righteousness.” Judah was not saved at the first coming of Christ, but was under the control of Rome for several centuries afterwards. Jerusalem did not dwell safely, but was destroyed by Rome, with the Temple being completely leveled.
    The seed of David is also Christ, but this is a separate prophecy than that of the first half of the same chapter. We read in verse 19 “And the word of the Lord came unto Jeremiah, saying,” indicating that this was a new message being dilivered at a different time.

    I have no need of you to teach me the meaning of Jeremiah’s prophecies.

  155. 155 choosethechrist
    May 3, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    I had no idea the LDS church had twisted Jeremiah to the extent you have revealed.

    “Judah was not saved at the first coming of Christ, but was under the control of Rome for several centuries afterwards. Jerusalem did not dwell safely, but was destroyed by Rome, with the Temple being completely leveled.”

    Judah was not saved because Judah did not accept the new covenant offering at the first coming of Christ. Judah was so busy looking for a King to save them from Rome that they missed that they got a savior who was to save them from separation from God which is the true meaning of “saved”.

    The land of the North is Babylon because Babylon could not enter Judah by crossing the Arabian dessert, Babylon had to enter the kingdom from the North to avoid geographical obstacles. The return of Judah from exile did happen. The return of Israel is another story, but it does not discount that God’s work toward the Messianic fulfillment began with the return of Judah. I did not know that the LDS do not recognize Jesus as the new covenant. As Gentiles, the grafted branch, we are already under the new covenant because we have accepted Jesus as such. The new covenant applies to us as Gentiles, we are the grafted branch, Judah was offered this new covenant and some did accept it at the first coming. The majority rejected the new covenant (Jesus), but they will eventually accept it with the 2nd coming of Christ. You are trying to discount my new covenant inheritance based on the return of Israel and Judah’s refusal of the new covenant (Jesus). As a grafted branch, His laws are in my mind and on my heart and He has forgiven and will remember my sins no more. You just threw all of Christianity out the window. You are basically stating that I can’t claim my inheritance until the second coming of Christ. I am a grafted branch, I accepted what Judah rejected and your twisted theology can NOT take that away from me.

  156. 156 choosethechrist
    May 3, 2012 at 2:19 pm

    “It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when. It could be weeks, it could be years, it could be centuries before that happy day when you have the positive assurance that the Lord has forgiven you. That depends on your humility, your sincerity, your works, your attitudes.” ~Spencer Kimball

    It depends on Jesus:

    “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.”

    One offering: the sacrificial blood of Christ

    hath: a singular form of the present tense

    forever: continually; incessantly; always; endless

    sanctified: cleansed; purified; set apart; made holy

    “Their sins and lawless acts
    I will remember no more.”

    Every time a mormon tries to keep the law of forgiveness, they are effectively nailing Christ to the cross all over again:

    the law of forgiveness embraces the following requirements:

    1.GODLY SORROW FOR SIN…

    2.ABANDONMENT OF SIN–This means to stop doing what is wrong, to cease completely from one’s evil acts,…

    3.CONFESSION OF SIN–To gain forgiveness all sins must be confessed to the Lord. …

    Further, those sins which involve moral turpitude–meaning serious sins for which the court procedures of the Church could be instituted so that a person’s fellowship or membership might be called in question–such sins must be confessed to the proper church officer. … It follows that it is the order of the Church for confession to be made to the bishop,…

    Normally a period of probation is involved before the earthly agent determines to refrain from instituting the procedures whereunder church penalties are imposed.

    4.RESTITUTION FOR SIN–Restitution means restoration; it is to return the stolen property, to make amends for the offense committed,…

    5.OBEDIENCE TO ALL LAW–Complete forgiveness is reserved for those only who turn their whole hearts to the Lord and begin to keep all of his commandments–…

    Complete forgiveness is reserved for those only who turn their whole hearts to the Lord and enter into the new covenant which is sealed with Christ’s blood.

    AMEN!

  157. 157 shematwater
    May 3, 2012 at 8:22 pm

    CHOOSE

    I am done with this. The events described by Jeremiah 31 and 33 have not yet come to pass, and the return from Babylon does not match what is described. Keep deluding yourself that they have all you want.

    Note: It doesn’t matter what route they take, the Babylonians came out of the East, not the north.

    Also note that we do not believe Christ is the New Covenant. We believe he is the maker of the New Covenant. Of Course we believe he was the maker of the Old Covenant as well, as he is the maker of all covenants.

    I believe this is sufficient answer to everything you have said, as I and Josh have addressed all the rest multiple times, you just simply refuse to understand.

  158. 158 choosethechrist
    May 5, 2012 at 7:03 pm

    So long Shem!

    New and Everlasting Covenant ~LDS.org

    The fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ (D&C 66:2). It is new every time it is revealed anew following a period of apostasy. It is everlasting in the sense that it is God’s covenant and has been enjoyed in every gospel dispensation where people have been willing to receive it. The new and everlasting covenant was revealed again to men on earth by Jesus Christ through the prophet Joseph Smith. It contains sacred ordinances administered by priesthood authority—such as baptism and temple marriage—that provide for man’s salvation, immortality, and eternal life. When people accept the gospel and promise to keep God’s commandments, God covenants to give them the blessings of his new and everlasting covenant.

    No wonder the LDS do not understand the concept of forgiveness through the shed blood of Jesus Christ alone.

    Jesus is the new covenant, NOT the LDS church:

    Isaiah 42:6
    “I, the Lord, have called you in righteousness;
    I will take hold of your hand.
    I will keep you and will make you
    to be a covenant for the people
    and a light for the Gentiles,

    Luke 2:27 Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, 28 Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying:

    29 “Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
    you may now dismiss your servant in peace.
    30 For my eyes have seen your salvation,
    31 which you have prepared in the sight of all nations:
    32 a light for revelation to the Gentiles,
    and the glory of your people Israel.”

    Jeremiah 31:31
    “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
    “when I will make a new covenant
    with the people of Israel
    and with the people of Judah.

    Matthew 26:28
    This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

    Romans 11:17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.

    True forgiveness comes from entering the new covenant of Jesus Christ. The blood of Christ alone cleanses sin and makes us holy before God.

    The LDS church is NOT the new covenant and forgiveness can NOT come from keeping the LDS law of forgiveness as this can only come from Jesus Christ alone.


Comments are currently closed.

April 2012
M T W T F S S
« Mar   May »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  

Blog Stats

  • 182,150 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 998 other followers


%d bloggers like this: