And get a television show.
Here is what the BofM record says, “Wo, wo, wo unto this people;…and it is because of their iniquity and abominations that they are fallen!” (3 Ne 9:2)
It just doesn’t seem to fit after forgiving the thief on the cross, asking for forgiveness for those who called for crucifixion, the destruction of so many people seems out of place. Though I suppose if one doesn’t believe that Christ’s sacrifice is complete, covering all sins it could make sense.
Lets think about your post leading up to this. It makes perfect sense really. Nephi(?) says He destroyed everything. It makes it easier for mormons to argue against our claims that why is there no evidence or artifacts from these “supposed people”. And this is why in my opinion (and the vast majority of christians) they are not christians as they claim. Jesus has always failed in His Works.
I didn’t say it made perfect sense, I said it could make sense if a person doesn’t believe Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient for all sin. If you have a low opinion regarding Christ’s work on the cross then I suppose you could say that something besides Christ’s sacrifice is necessary. The idea that God’s sacrifice could be insufficient strikes me as almost blasphemous but that’s what they believe.
I think we should be clear on this though, as I’m sure you know how Mormons would respond to this. They believe that Christ’s atonement does not cover murder. If someone murders, they cannot be forgiven. Now, all Christians do believe that there is an unpardonable or unforgivable sin, i.e. blasphemy against the Holy Ghost:I didn’t say it made perfect sense, I said it could make sense if a person doesn’t believe Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient for all sin. If you have a low opinion regarding Christ’s work on the cross then I suppose you could say that something besides Christ’s sacrifice is necessary. The idea that God’s sacrifice could be insufficient strikes me as almost blasphemous but that’s what they believe.
Lord knows I agree with youI didn’t say it made perfect sense, I said it could make sense if a person doesn’t believe Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient for all sin. If you have a low opinion regarding Christ’s work on the cross then I suppose you could say that something besides Christ’s sacrifice is necessary. The idea that God’s sacrifice could be insufficient strikes me as almost blasphemous but that’s what they believe.
But as a catholic, I believe in the Trinity so to me, blasphemy against all 3 is unforgivable, not just the Holy Spirit. So how are we to take this passage from Scripture?I think we should be clear on this though, as I’m sure you know how Mormons would respond to this. They believe that Christ’s atonement does not cover murder. If someone murders, they cannot be forgiven. Now, all Christians do believe that there is an unpardonable or unforgivable sin, i.e. blasphemy against the Holy Ghost:
***Matthew 12:31-32 (and the other verses that say the same thing)
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.***
So, Christ’s atonement covers all sins except blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Mormons, for whatever reason (perhaps related to the need for “restitution” for the repentance process), add murder to that. They also believe that murderers would have to suffer for that sin in spirit prison, then go to the telestial kingdom.
It is conundrum, but maybe there is a clue in what came before. Christ was accused of driving out demons because he is a demon. Could it be that calling God the Holy Spirit a demon, that is the ultimate blasphemy, especially as he was witnessing to Christ through miracles such as casting out devils. Just a thought, but our Lord is very clear that the unforgivable sin is the sin against Holy Spirit
Good point LJ. Im going to take this question to AAA for their thoughts
So let me get this straight. Since Mormons don’t believe the same as Catholic’s that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross was sufficient for all sins, (a misinterpretation by the way). Mormons may be guilty of blasphemy? But since, as you say, Christs’ sacrifice was suffient for all sins, what then would be the problem?I didn’t say it made perfect sense, I said it could make sense if a person doesn’t believe Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient for all sin. If you have a low opinion regarding Christ’s work on the cross then I suppose you could say that something besides Christ’s sacrifice is necessary. The idea that God’s sacrifice could be insufficient strikes me as almost blasphemous but that’s what they believe.
So do you use this line of reasoning when it comes to committing other sins?So let me get this straight. Since Mormons don’t believe the same as Catholic’s that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross was sufficient for all sins, (a misinterpretation by the way). Mormons may be guilty of blasphemy? But since, as you say, Christs’ sacrifice was suffient for all sins, what then would be the problem?
This is your line of reasoning, not mine.
But since your god is different from ours then it would make sense in what Zaf is saying. Our God doesnt make mistakes, yours does. Jesus died for our sins yet it seems like you believe it wasnt good enough.
The my God your God argument is getting old but never mind that.
I have to assume Zaff is talking about the Catholic Jesus. What Zaff said was that it may be blasphemy to say that the sacrifice of Christ was not sufficient for all sins. But if you say that blasphemy is a problem you are saying that Christ’s sacrfice is not sufficient for all sins. To say that, according to Zaff’s reasoning, is blasphemy of the Catholic Jesus. (which, according to Zaff’s reasoning, doesn’t matter).
Blasphemy is no different than any other sin, all are wrong, and one needs to repent no matter the sin. That I find belittling the sacrifice of God a sin is no different than the fact that I find adultery a sin. What is different is that in LDS “theology” these 2 things are not considered sin.The my God your God argument is getting old but never mind that.
Exactly, being willing to follow the commandments of Jesus and our willingness to repent of our sins is the key. Understanding the importance of obedience and repentance is not belittling the sacrifice of Jesus.
You are putting me on!
