Search results

This article is... so incredibly inaccurate, biased driven, and offensive I'm not even sure where to start with it. Literally every sentence in this thing is false and purposely twisted.

Of course it wasn't cheap! It was the biggest sacrifice and price ever! The phrase "cheap grace" refers to a person who errantly treats grace as if it were cheap. Somebody who says "oh yeah I believe in Christ" but is completely superficial about it, having no interest in discipleship or...

Sadly, most "eye openers" are usually going for shock value, as opposed to being accurate as to what LDS Christians actually believe. Misconceptions are rampant.

It is by real faith. Real faith that is a gift from God, and causes a person to move & change. Not the cheap grace stuff. I have no doubt that when you told them "we are saved by grace", that what they heard was you advocating for cheap grace. Such a misunderstanding (thinking Protestants...

Actual member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints here--- a "Mormon" if you insist on the nickname. Clarifying LDS Christian beliefs here: we are saved by having faith in Jesus Christ, our Savior, the Son of God. It is a gift. The idea that you could some how "earn" salvation...

Again, I have been trying to highlight the central actual difference here: whether or not a non-repentant person can be baptized. That's the core issue.

You do realize that I'm not a Protestant....

Because it's a tangent of a tangent of a tangent of a tangent. The big issue here to discuss is whether or not a non-repentant person can be validly baptized.

Good that you can acknowledge the actual point of disagreement. That's a sidetrack.

Ok.

Again, that is your perspective. Other groups believe extremely strongly that repentance MUST precede baptism. Hence the rejection of babies and baby-mentally baptisms: because they have not repented, and hence should not be baptized. That's the biggest point of disagreement. The question...

I personally agree. You'll see in post #1024 BOL disagrees. Hence highlighting where that source of difference is.

You don't have to prove yourself to me- as I said, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm just highlighting where the foundational difference comes in: that you do not believe that repentance should proceed baptism. Other people strongly do believe that it should proceed.

But whose sin is a person being baptized primarily for? And does it come before or after that person repenting? I'm not trying to change your perspective, just pointing out what the actual crux of the disagreement is here. I that that, and understanding other people's views, is helpful.

"Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." Who's sins? And in what order are these things to be done? Those are the big questions. From perspective A...

BOL, the biggest issue here is "*why* should a person be baptized?". The then "How should such a person go about being baptized" is a secondary issue.

I think I got a different message from the OP than was intended.

CoreIssue's understand is incorrect. I am an LDS Christian. I love my Lord & Savior Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God. My salvation is a gift from Him, one that I was in no way deserving of. I love the Bible and all of God's words. My personal study this week was just on John 7...

Execept that it's not polytheism at all: it's multiple divine persons being ONE God. "21 And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of...

You know how there are anti-catholic sites out there that exist to completely pretzel Catholic beliefs to make them look ridiculous? Because for some reason these people can't be bothered to disagree with the *actual* Catholic beliefs? There are the same type of people who make stuff sites out...