Posted on 05/24/2011 2:32:34 PM PDT by Colofornian
“...we don’t need another religious ideologue like Obama in the White House.”
VERY well said, Grey. And every American bears the burden as a voter of trying their best to return this country to its Christian roots. Period. We can easily see the fruits of labor of religious ideologues that remove Jesus as the Son of God. (Or that remove God altogether, for that matter.) Just doesn’t work. The fruit is spoiled and stinks. Time is short for this nation.
May God grant us a little more patience.
My best to you, GreyFoxx.
Post the “outright lies”.
Luna -
I cannot add much to the excellent summary Zak gave you. I would only advise you to do one additional thing - look carefully at the difference in definitions of words. Why? Because mormonism uses words and phrases commonly used in Christianity and redefined them to fit its doctrines.
An example would be the term “salvation”. Within mormonism there are two general uses - first to describe a general resurrection (everyone gets their physical bodies back) and the second to describe the culumination of eternal progression - attainment of the Celestial kingdom and godhood. When a Christian mentions salvation we are talking about something different. A definition of the Christian doctrine of salvation would be “The deliverance, by the grace of God, from eternal punishment for sin which is granted to those who accept by faith God’s conditions of repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus alone and not in any works they might do to gain God’s favor for that salvation.” Salvation is available in Jesus alone (John 14:6; Acts 4:12) and is dependent on God alone for provision, assurance, and security.
Make sure you look into the definitions and usage differences, and don’t take them at face value as saying what you’ve been taught as a mormon they mean.
As a descendent of Mormons, I pray you ponder it, study it. Indeed, pray as well...but note that the Bereans in Acts 17 weren't commended because they "prayed" to discover truth:
Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. (Acts 17:11)
We judge alleged new revelations by pre-existent ones. If they do not conform, then they are to be tossed.
The two "keys" I would say are this (and I would love to dialogue more with you on these):
#1 If you had two friends who introduced you to strangers with similar names -- say Jesus Johnson and the other, Jesus Johnston (with a "t")...both Jesuses might be quite similar: Same hometown, same schooling, same demographic background, etc.
But you and I know the "two" Jesuses are NOT the same person.
* The Jesus of history left a cross for people to embrace; the Jesus introduced to Mormons eschew that cross.
* The Jesus of history absorbed God's wrath in full on our behalf; the Jesus introduced to Mormons took out his wrath @ death upon numerous villages, resulting in hundreds drowning and being buried (3 Nephi 8; 3 Nephi 9 if my memory serves me correctly)
* The Jesus of history is the ONLY Savior (John 4:42; 1 John 4:14); whereas previous Lds "prophets" identify numerous saviors...Brigham Young said there was a redeemer on each world...John Taylor & others said Mormons themselves were "saviors" via baptism for the dead.
* The Jesus of history created all beings -- including Satan; the Jesus introduced to Mormons was -- per Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie & BYU prof Millet -- a "creature" -- a "saved being."
* The Jesus of history was prayed to (by Stephen, Acts 7) and worshiped (numerous times); yes, this happened to the Book of Mormon Jesus, too, in numerous places...but Lds leaders militantly counter those BoM verses and tell grassroots Mormons like yourself to ignore those verses.
If you're interested, I would be glad to supply you chapter and verse.
Think of yourself as knowing a "Jesus" online. Only to discover this character behind a certain screenname was NOT who he claimed to be. You thought you knew him; all along it was a sheer masquerade. Yes, you "communicated" with him...but did you really? You were communicating to the "substitute"...and communication offered to a characature of who somebody is -- is not in a true vibrant living relationship with the real person.
Therefore, there is a distinct difference between knowing about Jesus or God (the demons know God, and tremble, says James - 2:19)...and "knowing the one true God, and His Son whom He has sent" (Jesus' prayer, John 17:3). In fact, in John 17:3, Jesus defines this "knowing" as eternal life.
And Jesus further earlier said that this "eternal life" was something we HAVE NOW (John 3:36; 5:24). Since your leaders define "eternal life" as ONLY a celestial living in the future, you know they are talking about a "substitute" definition of how Jesus defined it: A living relationship with the true Him NOW.
#2 Rather than continue to simply "spout" away here, I would like to ask you a question:
Mormons say the only those in the celestial kingdom get to live with Heavenly Father forever.
That excludes non-temple Mormons.
It excludes never-married Mormons.
It excludes wives whose husbands are not "celestial material."
It excludes all non-Mormons.
Tell us, if you would: What is the difference between someone who gets to live with Heavenly Father forever; and somebody who doesn't?
I'm truly interested in your answer.
Thank you for your spirit of inquiry.
Wonderful (and warm) post, Zakeet.
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.