What to talk

[Paul MT]

Hi all

It has been awhile since I participated on this board, but have been following some or the threads. I am not to sure what the policy of this board is in its attitude toward differences of belief or opinion. However, the members of this board will be most welcome on (name removed by OP) to discuss your beliefs, and if respectful in your differences, your threads will not be deleted or closed , neither will you be disallowed to use the features of the board, just because we can not convince you of our beliefs. You will always be welcome.

Your friend Paul

Edited March 20, 2006 by Paul MT

[ayin jade]

This is a ministry for the glory of the Lord, not to promote false doctrines. Mormon doctrines are false doctrines.

For Christians, and I do not consider mormons as Christians, unless you are well armored spiritually and led by the Lord to go and debate there, I highly recommend people do not going to mormon boards. We are to avoid false teachings. Such things can harm those who are not spiritually prepared.

[Tari]

After watching the last mormon thread play out, it just seems impossible for many mormons to ever question this religion. It was important to me to watch the whole response, since my husbands family is mormon. He is one of the lucky few who has been freed from being raised in mormonism. It took a lot of prayer, and because he denounced mormon beliefs, the Lord intervened in his life. In a way he was purged from all those beliefs he grew up with. Mormon's are so sure that their beliefs are it. For one thing a person would have to humble themselves before the Lord, and be willing to question their beliefs. It seems rare that any mormon deeply involved in this belief system, ever questions their faith. Any input on this, anyone?

[Paul MT]

By all means, the administrators of a board can set any rules of use the desire. I have no problem with that. If it pleases a person to be misinformed about the beliefs of others that is up to that person as well. Form what I am aware of participation of LDS on this board has not been to promote but to correct erroneous statements about our beliefs. I don

[Tari]

Where the problem lies with most mormons is that they are literally scared to ever question their beliefs. Lies can take deep root. When a mormon is baptized they have to pronounce that they believe what Joseph Smith taught is 100% correct. From that point on, it's all or nothing. If they question at all, it would mean it is all wrong. They do not know our true Heavenly Father.

[Lasere]

Tari, praise God that your husband has been set free. Before I was Born Again I was in a false doctrine and it took a lot of prayer for me to recieve the Truth. Others that I know that are in false belief systems seem to be very defensive about it and can be a bit arrogant. The only way that I have ever got through to someone like that is with a LOT of prayer and also to fast when they are extra stubborn. I pray that God would open their ears and eyes to recieve the truth of the Gospel.

[ayin jade]

"This doctrine presents in a clear light the wisdom and mercy of God in preparing an ordinance for the salvation of the dead, being baptized by proxy......Those saints who neglect it in behalf of their deceased relatives do it at peril of their own salvation."

Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p 193

I took the time to find out what the beliefs are PaulMT. It is quite clear that this is a teaching contrary to the bible. For those who did not come to Christ in life do not get a second chance by having baptism of the dead by proxy. This work cannot get you into heaven, but following a false prophet can keep you out of heaven.

Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no other One; for there is no other name under Heaven given among men by which we must be saved.

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment,

[Guest NewPilgrim]

The following is documentation on a false doctrine cited as standard LDS doctrine by LDS.org:

Blessings for our ancestors

Many people have died without receiving baptism and other ordinances that Jesus Christ taught were necessary to enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5). Because Heavenly Father wants all His children to have the opportunity to return to Him, He has provided a way for those who have died without these ordinances to receive them.

In holy temples, members of the Church can perform these ordinances on behalf of their ancestors who have died.

This makes it possible for those who have not received these ordinances to accept them, if they choose, and return to live one day with our Heavenly Father.

I would have to assume that this self-proclaimed "official mormon website" has some authority with mormon followers and is as such a fair representation of core beliefs and doctrines, if not, please correct my error.

The first point of contention I would have is that the above reference to John 3v5 contends that "born of water" means baptism which is a misunderstanding of the text and its context. It refers to physical birth as discussed here? :

And therefore falsely leads to a misunderstanding that water baptism is essential to the acquisition of salvation in Christ.

Onto the more pertinant point of question which is the passage of 1Cor 15, which deals with a rising doubt within the early church that led people to state that there would be no bodily resurrection to which Paul protests (paraphrased)"if you say that there is no resurrection of the body then you say that Christ is not risen, but dead, and hence we have no victory over death. Furthermore, the baptism which we preach and practice is reduced to a baptism into death, not life. If we are to hold fast to this then why should we baptised for the sake of Jesus, a dead man? (ref:v29 - taken from KJV translation) *notes in square bracket added by myself*

Else what shall they do which are baptized for [in the namesake of] the dead[Jesus], if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for [in the namesake of] the dead[Jesus]?

The greek word in the verse translated "for" is the greek "huper" which can mean in the stead of, for the namesake of, or over and above the subject. My interpretation of the verse rests on the 2nd meaning. Following are two examples of the follower acting for the namesake of Christ (which would include baptism, we are baptised both for the namesake of Christ, to take on his name, and also for the sake of Christ in that he commands us to do it)

Examples: ("For"; Grk: huper - in context of " for the sake of, in the name of")

2Cr 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] by us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

Act 15:26 Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ

Baptism for the namesake of Christ and acting/behaving for the namesake of Christ:

Act 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

1Cr 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

2Th 3:6Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy [are ye]; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.

So it is clear from scripture that all that we do in ministry and witness, we do for Christs sake, that being that he is glorified by us before all men. The same applies to baptism in water and to proclaim him dead and be baptised into his name does not glorify Christ, and is the reason for Pauls rebuke of the church at corinth, and indeed for the language in v29. If we believe in an unresurrected Christ and are baptised into such a namesake, then we live every day in jeopardy.

The LDS church believes in a risen Christ, but because of a misunderstanding of the cited passage of scripture believe that baptism for the sake of a now dead believer was a common practice in the early church and an edifying one. Hopefully, my explanation of the passage will show otherwise. Should one not be convinced of my understanding that Paul was rebuking an attitude towards the resurrection of both the believer and of Jesus, rather than a mythical act of performing baptisms for dead people, and should such a reader still be of the mind that baptism for the dead as the LDS understands it is a common and edifying practice, then pehaps they should consider why Paul was rebuking the church of Corinth for this "baptism for the dead"

1Cr 15:31 I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.

1Cr 15:34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak [this] to your shame.

54 So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: "Death is swallowed up in victory."

55 "O* Death, where is your sting?

O Hades, where is your victory?"*

56 The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.

[Paul MT]

Where the problem lies with most mormons is that they are literally scared to ever question their beliefs. Lies can take deep root. When a mormon is baptized they have to pronounce that they believe what Joseph Smith taught is 100% correct. From that point on, it's all or nothing. If they question at all, it would mean it is all wrong. They do not know our true Heavenly Father.

Hi Tari

My thoughts for this thread are more centred on differences in attitudes about dialogue. It has appeared to me that more than a few main line Christian boards force a resolution to a discussion when others of a different view can not be convinced of their position. My point is that on the LDS board that I am familiar with the opposite is the case. The only exception being if someone is blatantly antagonistic. In the majority of cases, threads do not criticize ones faith or belief (however, there are some exceptions which ended with the suspension of both the LDS and non Christian debater) or dissuade anyone from their own believe, but only answers questions or comments. The point again is that from what I know we do not shut down debate because we cannot convince our quests of our position. If we could keep our comments to this proposition I will be happy to respond.

Paul

[Paul MT]

Well, scripture says that after a few admonitions we should reject heretics.

If you are preaching false doctrine, and defending false beliefs, after some time, it is no longer prudent to allow you to waste the cyber space God has provided to allow you to promote heresy.

Titus 3:10

A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;

Is this the position of this ministry that after two or three admonitions all discussion is over on your part?

For the most part LDS do not participate in these kinds of boards to preach our doctrines (We have our own sites that do that), but those of us who do participate endeavour mainly to directly answer questions, correct faulty teaching, and clarify what we think on particular issues.

On the LDS board that I am familiar with we allow people to discuss their beliefs at length.

Paul also wrote