A question for mormons.

[Jane_Doe22]

I don’t think you know me or what I defend. I have found that salvation is a very personal event. It’s different for each individual. But if someone thinks of it in terms of “asking Jesus into their heart,” who are we to bash this?

Amen!

Who is "bashing" anything? I am simply inquiring about where this tradition comes from. In reality, I think everyone has to have a starting place. A sinner's prayer asking for forgiveness and the indwelling of Jesus is as good as any. In fact, I think if prayed in sincerity with true repentance then it is always answered. The problem arises when we assure someone that they are saved just because they have prayed this prayer. I have several friends who are unreachable now because they "prayed the prayer" and someone told them that's all there is to it. They have been indoctrinated and can't see past it because they have their "fire insurance". I guess you have to have the same experience with people you know to have the same concern.

Amen to this as well.

Accepting Jesus does not mean shallow "recite this prayer and then you'll get into heaven". (as if you were uttering a magic spell...)
But it's true deep conversation: accepting of our Savior and following Him. Not just talking the talk, but the full-package conversion (words, actions, heart, mind, soul).

Saying a prayer with that deep conversion is great. If it's an acceptance over time or without words, those are great too.

 

[Grailhunter]

But not for righteousness' sake.

Because the lie of Mormonism is unrighteousness.

btw, I have been persecuted also: and for the right reasons; although you seem to think otherwise

Because the lie of Mormonism is unrighteousness.

How many? How many lies? How many unrighteous Christians? 30,000....50,000 Protestant denominations. How many are unrighteous? Well the Catholics would say all of them. But within themselves how many interpretations of the Holy Bible exists. How many have their beliefs defined? How many use a fuzzy logic to define their religion? Which denomination is true and which tens of thousands are lies. Then you have the church of one....Non-denominationals.... millions...which person is correct, and which millions are lies. By this reckoning Christianity is full of unrighteousness, more lies than trues. What is a young Christian to do with this? What percentage of Christianity is made up of liars and condemners. Is it an attractive religion when you look at the character of the Christians? Does it build confidence that they cannot figure out the Holy Bible? Who introduced this fracturing nature in Christianity? Who would want to fracture Christ's Church? Who would like to see us condemning each other? At this point, after the damage has been done, our only logical, correct, and righteous thing to do is suggest unity and camaraderie within Christianity.

 

[justbyfaith]

Your entire platform here is against straw man based of your single verse exegesis completely taken out of textual and theological context!

Please show in the Book of Mormon how it teaches by comparison that the verse in question does not teach what I have said that it teaches.

@Prayer Warrior already challenged you with this as a task and you have not been up to it it seems. But perhaps if I also put you up to the task, you will rise to the challenge.

Because, believe it or not, I have considered Mormonism. However the contradiction that is shown by the OP makes it not an option for me; because as a born again Christian, I hold the Bible to be inspired and authoritative and will not place the Book of Mormon above it concerning level of inspiration.

But if you can show how the Book of Mormon, as a whole, does not teach "Ye are saved by grace after all that ye can do" in contradiction to John 5:24 and a multitude of other passages, then perhaps I will again consider Mormonism as being a valid possible religion.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Please show in the Book of Mormon how it teaches by comparison that the verse in question does not teach what I have said that it teaches.

Why???


Are you willing to stop "exposing cults" and instead listen to what is actually believed?

If not, then any conversation with you is just you not listening and instead blindly persecuting me. And the more I'm subjected to that treatment by you, the harder and harder I have to forcefully remind myself that you love Christ too. And I don't think that's good for me or you.

 

[justbyfaith]

Why???


Are you willing to stop "exposing cults" and instead listen to what is actually believed?

If not, then any conversation with you is just you not listening and instead blindly persecuting me. And the more I'm subjected to that treatment by you, the harder and harder I have to forcefully remind myself that you love Christ too. And I don't think that's good for me or you.

Edited #143.

 

[justbyfaith]

Because the lie of Mormonism is unrighteousness.

How many? How many lies? How many unrighteous Christians? 30,000....50,000 Protestant denominations. How many are unrighteous? Well the Catholics would say all of them. But within themselves how many interpretations of the Holy Bible exists. How many have their beliefs defined? How many use a fuzzy logic to define their religion. Which denomination is true and which tens of thousands are lies. Then you have the church of one....Non-denominationals.... millions...which person is correct, and which millions are lies. By this reckoning Christianity is full of unrighteousness, more lies than trues. What is a young Christian to do with this? What percentage of Christianity is made up of liars and condemners. Is it an attractive religion when you look at the character of the Christians? Does it build confidence that they cannot figure out the Holy Bible? Who introduced this fracturing nature in Christianity? Who would want to fracture Christ's Church? Who would like to see us condemning each other? At this point, after the damage has been done, our only logical, correct, and righteous thing to do is suggest unity and camaraderie within Christianity.

The lie that God the Father fornicated with a virgin is unconscionable.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

@Prayer Warrior already challenged you with this as a task and you have not been up to it it seems.

@Prayer Warrior request was already responded to, see below. She has been a fine example of a Christian this thread.

Should I likewise denounce the Book of James it's downright blatant declaration "Faith without works is dead"? Should I declare the Bible to be a contradiction to itself? Should I do as Martin Luther did and refer to the Book fo James as an "epistle of straw"?

NO!!

JBF, no one's should indulge in one-verse-founded theology. Rather, we need to look the world of scripture, and understand things as a whole. Ephesians 2:8-9 are great verses, but we must not also forget all of the verses which urge actions as a huge part of the believer's life.

Neither you nor I belief in cheap grace. We each give our entire selfs to Christ - that's all that can be given. The Gospel is all about the contrite spirit and a broken heart.

Everything a person does after that accepting of Christ (such as studying scripture, giving alms, serving each other, ministering to one another, etc), are fantastic. And a disciple of Christ should indeed do these things. But those actions aren't what's doing the saving. And your very ability to do them and walk with Christ is empowered by God.

 

[justbyfaith]

Why???

Because you have accused me of taking the verse in question out of context of the rest of Mormon documentation.

The burden of proof, therefore, is on you.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

The lie that God the Father fornicated with a virgin is unconscionable.

Again, LDS Christians believe Mary was a virgin throughout Christ's conception & birth. (Despite the anti-Mormon myth and poor citations here).

LDS Christians don't hold to perpetual virginity of Mary though.

 

[justbyfaith]

Going to church, will be back shortly.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Please show in the Book of Mormon how it teaches by comparison that the verse in question does not teach what I have said that it teaches.

@Prayer Warrior already challenged you with this as a task and you have not been up to it it seems. But perhaps if I also put you up to the task, you will rise to the challenge.

Because, believe it or not, I have considered Mormonism. However the contradiction that is shown by the OP makes it not an option for me; because as a born again Christian, I hold the Bible to be inspired and authoritative and will not place the Book of Mormon above it concerning level of inspiration.

But if you can show how the Book of Mormon, as a whole, does not teach "Ye are saved by grace after all that ye can do" in contradiction to John 5:24 and a multitude of other passages, then perhaps I will again consider Mormonism as being a valid possible religion.

Again I ask: are you willing to listen?

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Who is "bashing" anything? I am simply inquiring about where this tradition comes from. In reality, I think everyone has to have a starting place. A sinner's prayer asking for forgiveness and the indwelling of Jesus is as good as any. In fact, I think if prayed in sincerity with true repentance then it is always answered. The problem arises when we assure someone that they are saved just because they have prayed this prayer. I have several friends who are unreachable now because they "prayed the prayer" and someone told them that's all there is to it. They have been indoctrinated and can't see past it because they have their "fire insurance". I guess you have to have the same experience with people you know to have the same concern.

I agree that it is misleading someone to tell them that all they have to do is speak the words of a prayer if their heart is not in it. What this boils down to is that we need the guidance of the Holy Spirit as we share the gospel, pray for the lost, etc.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

@justbyfaith
Context of the verse in question: (link for first reading yourself 2 Nephi 25)
I'll summarize below-
This is BC times (~600 BC). The author is Jewish and he & his family keep the Law of Moses. He had just finished serval chapter of heavily quoting Isaiah's prophesy of Christ and explaining how he (the author) love's those prophecies. He does then acknowledge that Isaiah is hard for people not contemporary to then to understand. So he's going to speak plainly.

He talks about how the Jews are stiff-necked. Then how God will himself unto them in the flesh and the prideful Jews will reject Him and crucify Him. Three days later, Christ will then raise from the dead & manifest manifest himself unto his people, unto as many as will believe on his name.

He cautions how Jews and others will be destroyed & scattered due to their stiff-neckedness. They will remain scattered until they accept Christ, the Son of God, and the atonement, which is infinite for all mankind. People will be restored from their fallen state and He will proceed to do a marvelous work and a wonder among the children of men. Words from God shall be given them for the purpose of convincing them of the true Messiah (whom the Jew originally rejected).

The author then speaks about Moses, and how God him power for the miracles of healing and water, and that there is none other name given under heaven save it be this Jesus Christ, of which I have spoken, whereby man can be saved. The author & his people keep the Law of Moses, The Law of Moses does not save you, and all are dead in that law. The Law of Moses will be fulfilled in Christ, and all are made in Christ. We should still keep the the commandments

The central thesis is (emphasis mine): "26 And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. Wherefore, we speak concerning the law that our children may know the deadness of the law; and they, by knowing the deadness of the law, may look forward unto that life which is in Christ, and know for what end the law was given. And after the law is fulfilled in Christ, that they need not harden their hearts against him when the law ought to be done away."

The author then once again urges his people to quit being stiffnecked, to instead listen, and that the the right way is to believe in Christ and deny him not; for by denying him ye also deny the prophets and the law.

 

[Grailhunter]

The lie that God the Father fornicated with a virgin is unconscionable.

First off no matter how you cut it, He impregnated a woman that was engaged, that is adultery...and you are concerned about fornication? Please explain to me, your version of how, Miriam's egg was fertilized. Is your explanation going to sound like Star Trek. Beam me in dad!

 

[justbyfaith]

I don't know how many times I have corrected you and told you that LDS Christians believe Mary was a virgin throughout Christ's conception & birth.

You have never corrected me on this; it was the first time I ever brought it up.

But it is one of the doctrines in Mormonism that it is said that most Mormons will deny when you ask them about it over how embarrassing it is to their faith.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

You have never corrected me on this; it was the first time I ever brought it up.

But it is one of the doctrines in Mormonism that it is said that most Mormons will deny when you ask them about it over how embarrassing it is to their faith.

Not really...

Jesus Christ, Birth of

• 
  virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, Isa. 7:14 (2 Ne. 17:14).
  
  
• unto us a child is born, Isa. 9:6 (2 Ne. 19:6).
  
  
• Beth-lehem … out of thee shall he come forth, Micah 5:2.
  

• virgin shall … bring forth a son … Emmanuel, Matt. 1:23.
  
  
• Jesus was born in Bethlehem, Matt. 2:1.
  
  
• bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus, Luke 1:31.
  
  
• unto you is born this day … a Saviour, which is Christ, Luke 2:11.
  
  
• Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, John 1:14 (1:3).
  
  
• Jesus … made of the seed of David, Rom. 1:3.
  
  
• God sent … Son, Gal. 4:4.
  

• six hundred years … God raise up among the Jews—even a Messiah, 1 Ne. 10:4 (19:8; 2 Ne. 25:19).
  
  
• mother of the Son of God, 1 Ne. 11:18.
  
  
• signs given … of his birth, 2 Ne. 26:3.
  
  
• he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem, Alma 7:10.
  
  
• sign … before he is born, Hel. 14:4.
  
  
• day that the Lord should be born, 3 Ne. 1:19.
  

• since the coming of our Lord … in the flesh, D&C 20:1.
  
  
• he came into the world, even Jesus, D&C 76:41.
  
  
• I … made flesh my tabernacle, D&C 93:4.
  

• Son … should come in the meridian of time, Moses 5:57 (6:57–62).
  

 

[justbyfaith]

@justbyfaith
Context of the verse in question: (link for first reading yourself 2 Nephi 25)
I'll summarize below-
This is BC times (~600 BC). The author is Jewish and he & his family keep the Law of Moses. He had just finished serval chapter of heavily quoting Isaiah's prophesy of Christ and explaining how he (the author) love's those prophecies. He does then acknowledge that Isaiah is hard for people not contemporary to then to understand. So he's going to speak plainly.

He talks about how the Jews are stiff-necked. Then how God will himself unto them in the flesh and the prideful Jews will reject Him and crucify Him. Three days later, Christ will then raise from the dead & manifest manifest himself unto his people, unto as many as will believe on his name.

He cautions how Jews and others will be destroyed & scattered due to their stiff-neckedness. They will remain scattered until they accept Christ, the Son of God, and the atonement, which is infinite for all mankind. People will be restored from their fallen state and He will proceed to do a marvelous work and a wonder among the children of men. Words from God shall be given them for the purpose of convincing them of the true Messiah (whom the Jew originally rejected).

The author then speaks about Moses, and how God him power for the miracles of healing and water, and that there is none other name given under heaven save it be this Jesus Christ, of which I have spoken, whereby man can be saved. The author & his people keep the Law of Moses, The Law of Moses does not save you, and all are dead in that law. The Law of Moses will be fulfilled in Christ, and all are made in Christ. We should still keep the the commandments

The central thesis is (emphasis mine): "26 And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. Wherefore, we speak concerning the law that our children may know the deadness of the law; and they, by knowing the deadness of the law, may look forward unto that life which is in Christ, and know for what end the law was given. And after the law is fulfilled in Christ, that they need not harden their hearts against him when the law ought to be done away."

The author then once again urges his people to quit being stiffnecked, to instead listen, and that the the right way is to believe in Christ and deny him not; for by denying him ye also deny the prophets and the law.

Good. Now I want to understand how, in your eyes, this information changes the meaning of the verse in question, "for ye are saved by grace after all that ye can do." so that it does not mean what I have said it means.

First off no matter how you cut it, He impregnated a woman that was engaged, that is adultery...and you are concerned about fornication?

Technically, Joseph and Mary were only betrothed to each other, and not yet married: but if you want to call it adultery rather than fornication, same point as when I said it was fornication. Did God the Father sin?

Please explain to me, your version of how, Miriam's egg was fertilized. Is your explanation going to sound like Star Trek. Beam me in dad!

The Spirit of God became one with the egg in the womb of the virgin Mary in the conception of Jesus, forming a zygote, in a miraculous fashion, out of Spirit and flesh (the egg, and/or the seed of the woman).

 

[justbyfaith]

Not really...

Jesus Christ, Birth of

• 
  virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, Isa. 7:14 (2 Ne. 17:14).
  
  
• unto us a child is born, Isa. 9:6 (2 Ne. 19:6).
  
  
• Beth-lehem … out of thee shall he come forth, Micah 5:2.

• virgin shall … bring forth a son … Emmanuel, Matt. 1:23.
  
  
• Jesus was born in Bethlehem, Matt. 2:1.
  
  
• bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus, Luke 1:31.
  
  
• unto you is born this day … a Saviour, which is Christ, Luke 2:11.
  
  
• Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, John 1:14 (1:3).
  
  
• Jesus … made of the seed of David, Rom. 1:3.
  
  
• God sent … Son, Gal. 4:4.

• six hundred years … God raise up among the Jews—even a Messiah, 1 Ne. 10:4 (19:8; 2 Ne. 25:19).
  
  
• mother of the Son of God, 1 Ne. 11:18.
  
  
• signs given … of his birth, 2 Ne. 26:3.
  
  
• he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem, Alma 7:10.
  
  
• sign … before he is born, Hel. 14:4.
  
  
• day that the Lord should be born, 3 Ne. 1:19.

• since the coming of our Lord … in the flesh, D&C 20:1.
  
  
• he came into the world, even Jesus, D&C 76:41.
  
  
• I … made flesh my tabernacle, D&C 93:4.

• Son … should come in the meridian of time, Moses 5:57 (6:57–62).

Since I haven't exhaustively read all of the Mormon documents, I think that you may be withholding information; such as the source of the doctrine in question that is believed by Mormons.

I know that I once had an encounter with a Jack Mormon who constantly blasphemed God by announcing that He had had sex with the virgin Mary. He obviously believed that he had substantiation for his claim within Mormon documents.

 

[justbyfaith]

First off no matter how you cut it, He impregnated a woman that was engaged, that is adultery

You state this as though it is a fact.

Are you saying it in agreement with Mormon doctrine?

If so, this is one more evidence that Mormon doctrine teaches that the Father had sexual relations with Mary.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Good. Now I want to understand how, in your eyes, this information changes the meaning of the verse in question, "for ye are saved by grace after all that ye can do." so that it does not mean what I have said it means.

See post 153.
The central thesis is (emphasis mine): "26 And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. Wherefore, we speak concerning the law that our children may know the deadness of the law; and they, by knowing the deadness of the law, may look forward unto that life which is in Christ, and know for what end the law was given. And after the law is fulfilled in Christ, that they need not harden their hearts against him when the law ought to be done away."

Since I haven't exhaustively read all of the Mormon documents, I think that you may be withholding information; such as the source of the doctrine in question that is believed by Mormons..

If you're just going to say just blanket not believe what I say & cite due to prejudice, what's they point of me responding?
Links are included if you want context.