Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Comparing LDS Beliefs with First-Century Christianity (REAL Mormon / LDS)
LDS.org ^ | Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks

Posted on 03/29/2011 3:19:02 PM PDT by Paragon Defender

Comparing LDS Beliefs with First-Century Christianity

 

 

 

By Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks

Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, "Comparing LDS Beliefs with First-Century Christianity", Ensign, Mar. 1988, 7

 

 

 

Latter-day Saints reject the doctrines of the Trinity as taught by most Christian churches today. These creeds were canonized in the fourth and fifth centuries A.D. and do not reflect the thinking or beliefs of the New Testament church.

 

 

 

Since the inception of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, many critics have denied that it is Christian. Surprisingly, the basis for the claim has little to do with the standard definition of Christian: anyone or any group that believes in Jesus Christ as the Savior and Son of God. Rather, it has to do with Latter-day Saint doctrines that some feel are alien to “traditional Christianity,” where “traditional Christianity” means that body of beliefs held by most present-day Christian churches. The argument essentially goes that if the LDS church believes in certain doctrines not believed in by most present-day Christian churches, then the LDS church cannot be Christian.

The problem with this argument is that the major doctrines under attack are amazingly similar to Christian beliefs held during the New Testament period and the generations immediately following.

Does the New Testament define Christianity?

The Gospels lack any explicit treatment of the word Christian. Indeed, the word appears only three times in the New Testament, and never from the mouth of Christ himself. The word Christianity is entirely absent from the New Testament.

Acts 11:26 tells us that “the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” Here, the passive construction “were called Christians” suggests that the term was first used not by Christians, but by non-Christians. (Similarly, the names Yankee and Mormon were first used by outsiders.)

The term was probably modeled on such words as Herodian and Caesarian, already in circulation at that time, and meant nothing more complicated than Christ’s people or, perhaps, partisans of Christ. Note that the Christian congregation at Antioch represented a wide range of backgrounds, including Jews and non-Jews. These believers displayed the whole spectrum of attitudes toward the Jewish law—from continued adherence to the traditions of Judaism to rejection of all things Jewish.

The next mention of the term Christian is in Acts 26:28, where Agrippa makes his famous reply to Paul: “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” The Apostle had related to Agrippa and Festus the story of his conversion. The doctrinal content of Paul’s speech is simple and straightforward: Paul bears witness that Jesus had been foretold by the Jewish prophets, that he suffered and rose from the dead, and that forgiveness may be obtained through him. Paul described Christ’s mission as summoning people to “repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.” (Acts 26:20.) The scriptural account gives no indication that Paul had to correct Agrippa’s use of the word Christian to describe one who believes in these basic doctrines.

First Peter 4:16 is the last instance of the word’s appearance in the New Testament. This verse is virtually without doctrinal definition, merely assuring the believer that he need not be ashamed if he suffer as a “Christian.” Even here, the term may be one that persecuting outsiders were using. It may have derived from current Roman, that is, non-Christian, legal usage.

In each of these instances, the term appears to originate from someone outside the community of believers themselves. In neither of the two passages from Acts does Paul use the word himself; it is non-Christians who use it. Where the term is used, the stated and implied beliefs of the Christians are far different from the present-day beliefs used to deny that Latter-day Saints are Christians, as can be clearly shown.

Is it true that because Latter-day Saints reject the traditional doctrine of the Trinity, they are not Christians?

The Church’s first Article of Faith is “We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.” This is a straightforward statement of belief that there are three members in the Godhead. However, Latter-day Saints do reject the doctrines of the Trinity as taught by most Christian churches today. For the most part, these creeds—the most famous of which is the Nicene Creed—were canonized in the fourth and fifth centuries A.D. following centuries of debate about the nature of the Godhead. Consequently, it is highly questionable whether these creeds reflect the thinking or beliefs of the New Testament church.

“The exact theological definition of the doctrine of the Trinity,” notes J. R. Dummelow, “was the result of a long process of development, which was not complete until the fifth century, or maybe even later.” 1 As Bill Forrest remarks, “To insist that a belief in the Trinity is requisite to being Christian, is to acknowledge that for centuries after the New Testament was completed thousands of Jesus’ followers were in fact not really ‘Christian.’” 2 Certainly the revelatory manner by which Joseph Smith learned of the doctrine of the Godhead pierces through the centuries-old debate on the subject.

Is it true that because Latter-day Saints believe that human beings can eventually become like God, they are not Christian?

As even a cursory glance at early Christian thought reveals, the idea that man might become as God—known in Greek as theosis or theopoiesis—may be found virtually everywhere, from the New Testament through the writings of the first four centuries. Church members take seriously such passages as Psalm 82:6 [Ps. 82:6], John 10:33–36, and Philippians 2:5–6 [Philip. 2:5–6], in which a plurality of gods and the idea of becoming like God are mentioned.

The notion of theosis is characteristic of church fathers Irenaeus (second century A.D.), Clement of Alexandria (third century A.D.), and Athanasius (fourth century A.D.). Indeed, so pervasive was the doctrine in the fourth century that Athanasius’s archenemies, the Arians, also held the belief 3 and the Origenist monks at Jerusalem heatedly debated “whether all men would finally become like Christ or whether Christ was really a different creature.” 4

According to an ancient formula, “God became man that man might become God.” Early Christians “were invited to ‘study’ to become gods” (note the plural). 5

Though the idea of human deification waned in the Western church in the Middle Ages, it remained very much alive in the Eastern Orthodox faith, which includes such Christian sects today as the Greek Orthodox and Russian Orthodox churches. 6 Jaroslav Pelikan notes, “The chief idea of St. Maximus, as of all Eastern theology, [was] the idea of deification.” 7

Is the subject of deification truly a closed question? After all, echoes of man becoming like God are still found in the work of later and modern writers in the West. For instance, C. S. Lewis’s writings are full of the language of human deification. 8 Even Martin Luther was capable of speaking of the “deification of human nature,” although in what sense it is not clear. 9

Related to the claim that Latter-day Saints are not Christians because of their belief in deification is the assertion that if they hold to some kind of belief in deification then it must be that Church members do not view Jesus as uniquely divine. Such an assertion is totally erroneous. The phrase “Only Begotten Son” occurs with its variants at least ten times in the Book of Mormon, fourteen times in the Doctrine and Covenants, and nineteen times in the Pearl of Great Price. Basic to Latter-day Saint theology is the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the Only Begotten Son of the Father in the flesh.

Is it true that because Latter-day Saints practice baptism for the dead, they are not Christian?

The argument that Latter-day Saints cannot be Christians because they practice baptism for the dead presumes that it has been definitely established that 1 Corinthians 15:29 [1 Cor. 15:29] has nothing to do with an early Christian practice of baptism for the dead. The argument ignores the fact that such second-century groups as the Montanists and Marcionites—who are invariably referred to as Christians—practiced a similar rite. The practice was condemned in A.D. 393 by the Council of Hippo, which certainly implies that it was still a vital issue. 10 As Hugh Nibley has shown in great detail, many of the Church Fathers understood this verse literally, even when they did not always know what to make of it. 11

Mormon temple ritual in general is another source of controversy, largely because many think that the reticence to talk about it is not Christian. But the New Testament scholar Joachim Jeremias has shown that “the desire to keep the most sacred things from profanation”—a concern shared by the Latter-day Saints—is widely found in the New Testament and in the early Christian community. 12

The second-century church father Ignatius of Antioch was known to have held “secret” doctrines. The historian Tertullian (second century A.D.) even takes the heretics to task because they provide access to their services to everyone without distinction. As a result, the demeanor of these heretics becomes frivolous, merely human, without seriousness and without authority. 13

The pagan critic Celsus (second century A.D.) probably referred to Christianity as a “secret system of belief” because access to the various ordinances of the church—baptism and the sacrament—was available only to the initiated. In his response to Celsus, Origen (third century A.D.) readily admitted that many practices and doctrines were not available to everyone, but he argues that this was not unique to Christianity. 14 As late as the fourth century, some groups were making efforts to return to an earlier Christian tradition of preserving certain doctrines and practices for the initiated only. 15

Is it true that because Latter-day Saints do not accept the Bible as their sole authority in faith and doctrine, they are not Christians?

Latter-day Saints accept the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price as scriptural, in addition to the Bible. But the whole question of canon—which writings are sacred, inspired, and binding on disciples—has always been a complicated one in the history of traditional Christianity.

In the earliest period of the Christian church, it is difficult to see a distinction being made between canonical writings and some books not in the present Protestant canon. For example, the Epistle of Jude draws heavily on noncanonical books such as 1 Enoch and The Assumption of Moses. As E. Isaac says of 1 Enoch, “It influenced Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Hebrews, 1 John, Jude (which quotes it directly) and Revelation (with numerous points of contact) … in molding New Testament doctrines concerning the nature of the Messiah, the Son of Man, the messianic kingdom, demonology, the future, resurrection, the final judgment, the whole eschatological theater, and symbolism.” 16

The so-called Muratorian Fragment, dating from the late second century A.D., shows that some Christians of the period accepted the Apocalypse of Peter as scripture. Clement of Alexandria, writing around A.D. 200, seems to admit a New Testament canon of thirty books, including the Epistle of Barnabas, the Epistle of Clement, and the Preaching of Peter. Origen recognized the Epistle of Barnabas and the letter from the Shepherd of Hermas. 17

Even in more recent times, the question of canon has not been unanimously resolved. Martin Luther characterized the Epistle of James as “an epistle of straw”—largely because it seemed to disagree with his teaching of justification by faith alone—and mistrusted the book of Revelation. 18 Roman Catholics and the Orthodox churches tend to accept the Apocrypha as canonical—books included in their Bibles but left out of most Protestant Bibles, including the current King James Version. In fact, Eastern Orthodox churches have never settled the question of canon. A number of scholars have pointed out that the church has priority, both logically and historically, over the Bible—that is, a group of believers existed before a certain body of texts, such as the books of the Old and New Testament, were declared canonical. 19

Is it true that because Latter-day Saints deny the doctrine of original sin, they are not Christian?

The notion of original sin as it is usually understood today in traditional Christianity is a distinctly late invention that evolved from the controversies of the fourth and fifth centuries. Tertullian (second century A.D.), who was very concerned with the idea of sin, says nothing of the doctrine of original sin. Indeed, very few of the Church Fathers up to the fourth century show any interest in it at all. It was not clearly enunciated until Augustine (fourth/fifth century) needed it in his battle with the Christian Pelagians, who denied the doctrine, and it came to be associated with the Council of Carthage in A.D. 418. 20

As Norbert Brox points out, “Pelagian theology was the traditional one, especially in Rome. But the Africans, under the theological leadership of Augustine, managed to make their charge of heresy stick within the church, thereby establishing the Augustinian theology of grace as the basis of the Western tradition.” 21 Some modern scholars now raise the issue that Augustine, and not Pelagius, was the real heretic. 22

Is it true that because Latter-day Saints reject the doctrine of salvation by grace alone, they are not Christians?

Perhaps the most famous statement of the Latter-day Saint understanding of the relation between grace and works is in 2 Nephi 25:23: “It is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.” [2 Ne. 25:23] This idea is sometimes called synergism—a term Van A. Harvey has used to describe Roman Catholicism. 23

The doctrine that salvation depends both on God’s grace and man’s good works is very old in Catholic theology. One of the canons at the Council of Trent specifically repudiates the notion of grace alone: “If anyone saith that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sin for Christ’s sake alone; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified, let him be anathema.” 24 Are we to say, then, that Roman Catholicism is not Christian because it does not subscribe to the doctrine of salvation by grace alone?

The doctrine of salvation through faith alone, sometimes called solafidianism, is not a biblical doctrine: there are no instances in the New Testament of the phrases “grace alone” or “faith alone.” The philosopher-theologian Frederick Sontag argues that Jesus himself was interested not in words, and not even in theological dogma, but in action: For the Jesus in Matthew, he says, “Action is more important than definition.” 25 Richard Lloyd Anderson shows that even in Paul’s major treatments of the doctrine of grace, particularly in Romans and Ephesians, there is a balancing element of works as well. 26 Other New Testament writers, most notably James, make it clear that saving faith can only be recognized through works: “Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” (James 2:17.)

The generations immediately following the New Testament period also recognized the need for both grace and works for salvation. The famous Didache—The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles—which dates back to before A.D. 70, is conspicuous for its moralism and legalism. 27 It is also significant that “the oldest datable literary document of Christian religion soon after the time of the Apostles”—the letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians, written in the last decade of the first century—emphasizes “good works, as it is in the Epistle of James, which may belong to the same time.” 28 The second-century document Shepherd of Hermas contains twelve commandments. J. L. Gonzales writes that they “are a summary of the duties of a Christian, and Hermas affirms that in obeying them there is eternal life.” 29

Even F. F. Bruce, who contends that Paul taught a doctrine of salvation by grace alone, concurs sadly that the doctrine was not a part of the early Christian church: “The Biblical doctrine of divine grace, God’s favour shown to sinful humanity, … seems almost, in the post-apostolic age, to reappear only with Augustine. Certainly the majority of Christian writers who flourished between the apostles and Augustine do not seem to have grasped what Paul was really getting at. … Marcion has been called the only one of these writers who understood Paul.” 30

Marcion, incidentally, was a second-century gnostic Christian who distinguished between the gods of the Old and New Testament. He felt that the Old Testament deity was a lesser deity than the God of the New Testament and rejected the Old Testament entirely, as well as any New Testament writing “tainted” with Old Testament ideas. Marcion produced a canon of scripture that recognized no Apostle of Jesus except Paul. He considered the other Apostles falsifiers of God.

By contrast, in the fourth century, one prominent Christian bishop was teaching the necessity of rituals. “If any man receive not Baptism,” wrote Cyril of Jerusalem, “he hath not salvation.” He also wrote about an ordinance of anointing, which he called “chrism”: “Having been counted worthy of this Holy Chrism, ye are called Christians. … For before you were deemed worthy of this grace, ye had no proper claim to that title.” 31

The Eastern Orthodox churches also do not accept solafidianism, the doctrine of salvation by faith alone. “Eastern Orthodox Christians emphasize a unity of faith and works. For the Orthodox, being conformed to the image of Christ … includes a response of our faith and works.” 32 Sensing the danger that a “grace alone” position could become “cheap grace” (to borrow an expression from the theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer) or “a theologically thin, no-sweat Christianity,” some modern Protestant writers have adopted a similar position, recognizing that works also play a vital role in salvation. 33

With so many other past and present Christians rejecting the position that grace alone brings salvation, excluding the Latter-day Saints from “Christianity” for their belief in faith and works is not justified.

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints easily meet the definition of a Christian as implicitly defined in the New Testament: they believe that ancient prophets foretold Christ’s coming, that Jesus Christ suffered for our transgressions, that he was put to death but rose from the dead, that through him we may obtain forgiveness of our sins, and that he will come again in glory.

The doctrinal reasons some Christians give for excluding the Latter-day Saints from Christianity make little sense, because many of the doctrines used by traditional Christianity are late developments, reflective of creeds formulated in the fourth and fifth century or developed during the Reformation.

Given the wide variety of beliefs among the various Christian churches, it is better to take persons claiming to be Christians at their word and to let the Lord be the judge.

 

 

 

 

 


TOPICS: Other Christian; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: antichristianitypap; christianity; ctr; cult; heresy; inman; lds; mormon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 451-452 next last
An excellent article. I hope you will read it and ponder the truths contained in it.
1 posted on 03/29/2011 3:19:05 PM PDT by Paragon Defender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

The Trinity is basic Christianity of which the LDS church knows nothing about. You have just shown how the LDS and Mormonism is not Christian. Thank you.


2 posted on 03/29/2011 3:27:21 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("If You Don't Read The News You're Uninformed, If You Do Read The News You're Misinformed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
Truth my eye!

You continually post your cult propaganda in a manner that would make Herr Doktor Joe proud



(BTW-The Nazis and the Mormons got along just fine from what I've read....by authors who weren't self-serving like your cult's shills.)
3 posted on 03/29/2011 3:27:36 PM PDT by Emperor Palpatine (Tosca, mi fai dimenticare Iddio!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

Thanks Paragon.

I’ve found a terrific book by Tad R. Callister, The Inevitable Apostacy and the Promised Restoration. It is very well written, and it clarified much for me.

Regards,
Yellow Roses


4 posted on 03/29/2011 3:39:42 PM PDT by yellowroses (A yankee in Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
Mormonism is a wolf in sheep's clothing... SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES (John 5:39)

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing,
but inwardly they are ravening wolves
...
For such are FALSE apostles,
DECEITFUL workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.”

(Matthew 7:15; 2nd Corinthians 11:13).

 
- Warning! -
 
This thread has been flagged as Cultic Mormon Spam
by Christians on FreeRepublic.com
 
Let the reader beware!

5 posted on 03/29/2011 3:43:05 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

Thanks for posting! :-)


6 posted on 03/29/2011 3:45:33 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
Even I know longer believe in the false religion I started! Yet day after day, the people I led astray keep posting on FreeRepublic and knocking on doors to mislead people.

Oh, how I regret how Satan used me to lead millions astray! If only I had a second chance to change things! FLEE! Before it is too late! Flee the cult of mormonism!


7.5 posted on Sat Nov 27 15:23:02 2010 by Joseph Smith



Wait. I'm getting a testimony... a repentant Joseph Smith, who now knows the truth, is testifying to us all! If you are sincere, you will here his voice repenting of his demonic activities.


7 posted on 03/29/2011 3:45:55 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

[An excellent article. I hope you will read it and ponder the truths contained in it.]

I will ponder these truths to the same extent I ponder peepstones, magic under wear, secret handshakes, polygamy, Kolob, celestial marriage, the kinderhook plates, hieroglyphics and various other magical talismans I pull out of a Cracker Jacks box.


8 posted on 03/29/2011 3:47:30 PM PDT by DaxtonBrown (HARRY: Money Mob & Influence (See my Expose on Reid on amazon.com written by me!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

I told this little anecdote here a while back but it bears repeating:

At a kids’ birthday party a couple years ago in a Mormon home, the men were sitting around the kitchen table waiting to eat when someone raised the question: “How did God get here? Have you ever thought about that?”

Another “elder” replied, “The old bishop once told me that our God was sent to rule Earth by twelve other gods.”

After my eyeballs stopped spinning around in my head, I got up and went outside to shoot baskets on the driveway with the kids.


9 posted on 03/29/2011 3:49:56 PM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
even a cursory glance at early Christian thought reveals, the idea that man might become as God

Nowhere in Scripture does it say this. This is the same old lie that the serpent told Eve.

10 posted on 03/29/2011 3:50:54 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
because Latter-day Saints practice baptism for the dead, they are not Christian?

True. The dead cannot be saved. It is too late.

11 posted on 03/29/2011 3:53:26 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
An excellent article. I hope you will read it and ponder the truths contained in it.

The only truth in the article is this paragraph at the end....

"Given the wide variety of beliefs among the various Christian churches, it is better to take persons claiming to be Christians at their word and to let the Lord be the judge."

Christians are willing to let the Lord be the judge, and mormons have to have the "certificate of Joseph Smith"..

12 posted on 03/29/2011 3:55:31 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (White House war strategy 2011: Sun Tzu meets Barney Fife..H/T Iowahawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Good one. Every time PD puts up something proving they’re the only true Christian church he contradicts himself and the LDS church claims that they’re Christian. It’s so funny it’s really sad. Multiple gods????? Hey, can I become a godess???


13 posted on 03/29/2011 3:55:31 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("If You Don't Read The News You're Uninformed, If You Do Read The News You're Misinformed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian; Elsie; FastCoyote; svcw; Zakeet; SkyPilot; rightazrain; Tennessee Nana; ...

Ping


14 posted on 03/29/2011 3:57:11 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (White House war strategy 2011: Sun Tzu meets Barney Fife..H/T Iowahawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
Is it true that because Latter-day Saints do not accept the Bible as their sole authority in faith and doctrine, they are not Christians?

Absolutely! The Bible is God's word. Smith's Book of Mormon and other writings are nothing but hooey. It has been proven that he lied and made up a false translation for the book of Abraham (which was really an Egyptian book of the Dead) so why we should we take any of this other "translations" seriously?

I say God's word and God's alone.

15 posted on 03/29/2011 3:57:46 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
Is it true that because Latter-day Saints reject the doctrine of salvation by grace alone, they are not Christians?

Yep.

Perhaps the most famous statement of the Latter-day Saint understanding of the relation between grace and works is in 2 Nephi 25:23: “It is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”

More cultic twisting. We are saved by grace and grace alone. Works has nothing to do with acheiving salavation. Works, however, are very important to show faith after salvation.

16 posted on 03/29/2011 4:01:10 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
The first point of the article, that "Christian" was a later appellation, is probably correct. It was simply called "The Way," and I sometimes prefer that name.

The other points are a curious hodgepodge. As an Orthodox "Christian," I can state that the understanding of the concept of theosis to be seriously mistaken, if the statements in this article are not outright lies. Theosis is the restoration of the image and likeness of God with which man was originally created. This does not mean that theosis makes one God; that is blasphemy. It does not surprise me to find these (mis)quotations of the Fathers in the article. I recently listened to an Orthodox Bible study warning that Mormons were doing precisely that.

Furthermore, is it not self-evidently contradictory to first claim that the 4th Century Fathers were completely wrong about the Trinity, but were spot on about theosis? - a teaching that, while valid, is not as central to Orthodoxy.

Orthodoxy is not some cafeteria line where one can pick out what one wishes to consume. I invite you to study the True Ancient Faith. Come and see! We have been proclaiming the same unchanging truth for almost 2000 years. If you are curious, try listening to some of the podcasts on Ancient Faith Radio on the Internet.

17 posted on 03/29/2011 4:01:35 PM PDT by Martin Tell (ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

Is this a caucus thread?


18 posted on 03/29/2011 4:03:11 PM PDT by lastchance (Hug your babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown; Paragon Defender

19 posted on 03/29/2011 4:03:21 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

Suuuure you can!

Just convert, get yourself a “celestial husband” and go through the temple indoctrination. No sweat. Y’all will get your own planet too!

As polytheists, they make the Hindus look like slow motion.


20 posted on 03/29/2011 4:03:54 PM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

Christian Theology. You’re doing it wrong.


21 posted on 03/29/2011 4:04:27 PM PDT by lastchance (Hug your babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lastchance
No. Jim Rob gave Paragon Defender a tongue lashing a while back about abusing the caucus label by posting highly inflammatory stuff which non-mormons were not allowed to come and debate on. Now everybody is allowed to post on the Mormon threads. They still say mormon in the title, but they don't say caucus anymore. :-)
22 posted on 03/29/2011 4:07:06 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

This article is so full of BS it would take a long time to go through it all.


23 posted on 03/29/2011 4:08:25 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown

You left out “golden plates” and “the book of Abraham”

;)


24 posted on 03/29/2011 4:09:00 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown

You forgot the cork submarines.

Oh, the horror of it all.


25 posted on 03/29/2011 4:09:49 PM PDT by Emperor Palpatine (Tosca, mi fai dimenticare Iddio!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lastchance; Paragon Defender
Joseph Smith translating the Book of Mormon by looking at the seer stone in his hat:


26 posted on 03/29/2011 4:10:39 PM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis (Want to make $$$? It's easy! Use FR as a platform to pimp your blog for hits!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

Does the MORG / COB / LDS,INC pay you...or is this part of your “mission”?


27 posted on 03/29/2011 4:15:44 PM PDT by Osage Orange (I knew what I was feeling, but what was I thinking!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oPcYtfAg18
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ4O1lRLWxU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IONy8MBHWpg&feature=related


28 posted on 03/29/2011 4:16:10 PM PDT by BlueMoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

“the idea that man might become as God”

Based on these “teachings”, are you going to become a “god” over your own planet PD?

Yes or No. No links please - a simple Yes or No.

I doubt you can answer Yes or No without just posting links.

Prove me wrong. Answer with a Yes or a No.

Isaiah 14:13-15 (King James Version)

13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 (King James Version)

3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


29 posted on 03/29/2011 4:16:51 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

And this is just another reason I’ll never vote for Willard Romney!


30 posted on 03/29/2011 4:17:09 PM PDT by Emperor Palpatine (Tosca, mi fai dimenticare Iddio!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
An excellent article. I hope you will read it and ponder the truths contained in it.


31 posted on 03/29/2011 4:18:22 PM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Giggity.


32 posted on 03/29/2011 4:19:38 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("If You Don't Read The News You're Uninformed, If You Do Read The News You're Misinformed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Emperor Palpatine

I’d not vote for Romney because of his political beliefs, not his religious ones. Unless of course he would. But then, did JFK bring his Catholic beliefs into the WH? Before my time but was just wondering.


33 posted on 03/29/2011 4:21:38 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("If You Don't Read The News You're Uninformed, If You Do Read The News You're Misinformed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

I didn’t realize first century Christians wore “magic underwear.”

Christians send missionaries to third world countries. Mormons concentrate on converting people in Christian countries. Like Mitt, when he was “roughing it” in France to avoid ‘Nam: “Hey guys, it’s noon and we’re out of brochures. Let’s hit the topless beach and look for converts.”


34 posted on 03/29/2011 4:23:04 PM PDT by bwc2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlueMoose

Really, BlueMoose, the “Backyard Professor”?

He is a whack job, based on his search for truth in tarot cards, etc.

Is that really ALL you’ve got???

You’ve got feelings that are backed up by feelings, that you yourself admitted you have no objective way of knowing are not demonic.
You’ve now added The Backyard Professor, who searches for truth in Tarot cards.

Really? Really?

And you are staking your ETERNAL DESTINY on possible demonic feelings and the backyard professor???

Really? Have you stopped to think about this, BlueMoose? Really?

ampu


35 posted on 03/29/2011 4:24:49 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

I tried that simple yes or no thing with PD several times before.....and like Adlai Stevenson I’m still waiting for Hell to freeze over for an answer.


36 posted on 03/29/2011 4:26:57 PM PDT by Emperor Palpatine (Tosca, mi fai dimenticare Iddio!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer
".....did JFK bring his Catholic beliefs into the WH? Before my time but was just wondering."


Well, considering he was banging both Marilyn Monroe and Judith Exner in the White House I doubt it. I suspect JFK took his Catholicism about as seriously as his baby brother, Nancy Pelosi, and John Kerry do.
37 posted on 03/29/2011 4:30:39 PM PDT by Emperor Palpatine (Tosca, mi fai dimenticare Iddio!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: BlueMoose

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL7v5I6zj7k


38 posted on 03/29/2011 4:32:52 PM PDT by BlueMoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: BlueMoose

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL7v5I6zj7k


39 posted on 03/29/2011 4:33:04 PM PDT by BlueMoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Emperor Palpatine

Well maybe Romney would also, but I doubt it.


40 posted on 03/29/2011 4:40:09 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("If You Don't Read The News You're Uninformed, If You Do Read The News You're Misinformed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

You deny the Trinity because you say it’s a fifth century idea, not from original Christian belief. Yet all of the other things you bring up are concepts and ideas that originated much later then the fifth century, but that I am suppose to believe?

Oh, and where do the aliens fit in?


41 posted on 03/29/2011 4:41:38 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Mormon temple ritual in general is another source of controversy, largely because many think that the reticence to talk about it is not Christian

Their "reticence to talk about it", stems from the fact that it was stolen from Free Masonry, which predates mormonism by a long shot.

A bit embarrassing that.

42 posted on 03/29/2011 5:23:57 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Of course Obama loves his country. The thing is, Sarah loves mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: BlueMoose

Didn’t this Backyard Professor guy used to be on Green Acres?


43 posted on 03/29/2011 5:26:12 PM PDT by Belteshazzar (We are not justified by our works but by faith - De Jacob et vita beata 2 +Ambrose of Milan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Their "reticence to talk about it", stems from the fact that it was stolen from Free Masonry, which predates mormonism by a long shot.

And...mormons believe these Masonic "tokens" are necessary for them to reach "exaltation"

In a way, the temple endowment is preparation for the sealing ordinance of eternal marriage, which in turn is preparation for the promise of eternal life preparatory to the realization of exaltation.10

I think it would be interesting to see a lawsuit by Masonry against LDS, Inc. for theft!

I've been watching the newest episodes of "Sister Wives"....this particular guy has the system all figured out and the women are totally clueless. Joseph Smith's legacy...in spades and living color.

44 posted on 03/29/2011 5:35:58 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (White House war strategy 2011: Sun Tzu meets Barney Fife..H/T Iowahawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer
The Trinity is basic Christianity of which the LDS church knows nothing about. You have just shown how the LDS and Mormonism is not Christian. Thank you.

Sorry.

The trinity is not part of first century
belief in the Jewish Messiah.

It was added later.

shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
45 posted on 03/29/2011 5:53:43 PM PDT by Uriel-2012 (Psalm 119:174 I long for Your salvation, YHvH, Your law is my delight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Uri’el-2012
The concept of a triune G-d was written about in the OT (Elohim is plural). The doctrine of the Trinity just defined it. Even though it wasn't talked about in the NT just the fact that Yashua mentions the Comforter i.e. the Holy Spirit and of course He mentions His Father in Heaven brings it more into focus. You can mention the triune or Trinity of G-d without having a defined statement alluding to the fact. We believe in the Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit. It's one times one times one; not one plus one plus one.

שאלו שלום ירושלם

46 posted on 03/29/2011 6:18:55 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("If You Don't Read The News You're Uninformed, If You Do Read The News You're Misinformed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

Lev 26:11 'Moreover, I will make My dwelling{tabernacle} among you, and My soul will not reject you.

Lev 26:12 'I will also walk among you and be your God, and you shall be My people.

Deu 6:4 "Hear, O Israel! YHvH is our God, YHvH is one!

Psalm 51:11 Do not cast me away from Your presence And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.

Isaiah 63:10 But they rebelled And grieved His Holy Spirit;
Therefore He turned Himself to become their enemy, He fought against them.

Isaiah 63:11 Then His people remembered the days of old, of Moses.
Where is He who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds of His flock?
Where is He who put His Holy Spirit in the midst of them,

Mar 12:29 Jesus answered, .... 'HEAR, O ISRAEL! YHvH OUR GOD IS ONE YHvH;

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt{tabernacle} among us,

John 10:30 "I and the Father are one."

John 14:7 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also;
from now on you know Him, and have seen Him."

John 14:9 Jesus said to him,... He who has seen Me has seen the Father;
how {can} you say, 'Show us the Father'?

I take YHvH at His WORD; I reject the Pagan Man-made Tradition which seek to impugn His Word.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
47 posted on 03/29/2011 6:26:48 PM PDT by Uriel-2012 (Psalm 119:174 I long for Your salvation, YHvH, Your law is my delight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Uri’el-2012

Please then tell me; who is the Father that Yashua speaks of and who is The Holy Spirit, the Comforter that Yashua speaks of? Is Yashua lying when he mentions Them? Is Yashua also lying when He says He is Messiah (G-d)? In the NT when it mentions “call no man Father” is really “call no man Creator” - We have Creator G-d, Son G-d and Holy Spirit G-d. Do you believe that Holy Spirit is G-d? I don’t want Bible verses. I’d like to know what you yourself believe of the G-d Head.


48 posted on 03/29/2011 6:33:57 PM PDT by SkyDancer ("If You Don't Read The News You're Uninformed, If You Do Read The News You're Misinformed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: yellowroses; MHGinTN
I’ve found a terrific book by Tad R. Callister, The Inevitable Apostacy and the Promised Restoration. It is very well written, and it clarified much for me.

Y'all understand what Yellow Roses is claiming here?...that ALL of the founding fathers were "corrupt" apostates.

JosephSmith came along & claimed that some unnamed entities appeared to him 1820, 1821 or 1822 (he couldn't stick to the year) & told him that ALL such "professors" were "corrupt."

49 posted on 03/29/2011 6:34:34 PM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: y'all

I must say, post 7.5 is hilarious!


50 posted on 03/29/2011 6:45:09 PM PDT by Enosh (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 451-452 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson