LDS Alaska Mission President says missionaries do not proselytize members of other religions!

[Pat_De]

Well, Pat De,

I disagree with Edwards (and with you, come to think about it) in quite a few things.Calvinism in general leaves me cold, frankly.

There’s this problem I keep coming up with, in that any logical analysis of Calvinistic thought leaves God responsible for our sin, so that He is actually punishing us for something He made us do–or rather, for something that He has given us no choice BUT to do.

It is, frankly, a philosophical/religious argument with absolutely no hope to it. We are naught but leaves being blown by the wind; some may end up ‘saved,’ some burned in the yard fire, but we are utterly helpless to choose which.

Where is there any ‘good news’ in that?

That is a common response for the people that do not understand the “Just” nature of God or the “depravity” of man’s sinful nature, or the Gospel, which of course the implication of that should be obvious.

I’ll give you an example; let’s say you are married and have 4 children and you come home and you see your spouse and 3 of your children slaughtered and lying dead in pools of blood and then you see the man responsible because he is in the process of murdering your last child; like a mad bull you rush toward the man, knock him down and call the police.

The police come and arrest him and then in the courtroom with you and all the town’s people are there and the judge says "well I’m a real nice guy and I forgive you; you are free to go." What would you and all the other people in that courtroom do; you would go to every local. state, and Federal official and the media and proclaim that there is a judge who is more wicked than person who murdered your entire family. So you expect a human judge to be fair and just because of your desire and love for justice, but expect a perfectly just God to just forget and overlook worse offensives?

How in the world you can put your evil wickedness on God is beyond me and in fact the greatest dilemma in the entire Scripture lies within this one passage.

***Proverbs 17:15
He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD. ***

That judge I described above would be an abomination to God as well as to you.

So how does God justify wicked men and not be an abomination? See the problem? That is why your comments tell me you neither understand the fact that by nature God is just and by nature man is unjust or wicked. This is exactly what Calvin and other great expositors have always understood. So how is God able to rectify this dilemma and still maintain His nature of being a just God and not an abomination?

Take the 101 minutes and learn something. HERE

Can you give me some insight into your thinking about how Calvin leaves God responsible for our sin? The real issue is you; like most people want to have something to do with your own merit to earn your salvation, which is why I don’t care much for religion or my heart goes out to those caught in religious works-based salvation, which only amount to another Gospel that in the end will only bring judgment.

 

[Cat_Herder]

What would you and all the other people in that courtroom do; you would go to every local. state, and Federal official and the media and proclaim that there is a judge who is more wicked than person who murdered your entire family. So you expect a human judge to be fair and just because of your desire and love for justice, but expect a perfectly just God to just forget and overlook worse offensives?

Hmm… Where have I heard this one before… Oh yeah.

[BIBLEDRB]Luke 23:32-34[/BIBLEDRB]

So how does God justify wicked men and not be an abomination? See the problem? That is why your comments tell me you neither understand the fact that by nature God is just and by nature man is unjust or wicked. This is exactly what Calvin and other great expositors have always understood.

It’s called concupiscence and it’s not Calvin’s idea.

So how is God able to rectify this dilemma and still maintain His nature of being a just God and not an abomination?

By forgiving everybody (even serial murderers) who does not reject Him.

 

[Pat_De]

The Scripture says:

[BIBLEDRB]1 Timothy 2:3-4[/BIBLEDRB]

In your post you name two groups of people who do not have access to Christ: abortion victims and Jews. According to your religion (Calvinism, which is an -ism), they have no chance of salvation because salvation is by faith alone. You then ask us if we love them. God clearly does. Why would God then allow them to be lost?

Again; “twist not the Scripture”; do not confuse God’s desire with His effectual will. If that passage above was His effectual will, than all would be in Heaven regardless if they ever heard the Gospel or not.

I did not name two groups who do not have access to God; “twist not my words”. I did say their are only two religions in the world; only two. One fits into the category of human achievement where God does His part and man does His part and in the end God does His part and man hopes he has done good enough on his part. Then their is true and undefiled religion, which really isn’t a religion, but a relationship with the Savior and the perfect Master, the Lord of Lords and King of Kings, Jesus Christ and based soley on His merits, despite the rebellion of the sinner He saved some, called saints and they are few according to Scripture.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Again; “twist not the Scripture”; do not confuse God’s desire with His effectual will. If that passage above was His effectual will, than all would be in Heaven regardless if they ever heard the Gospel or not.

This distinction between “desire” and “will” is a tradition of men found nowhere in Scripture.

I did not name two groups who do not have access to God; “twist not my words”. I did say their are only two religions in the world; only two. One fits into the category of human achievement where God does His part and man does His part and in the end God does His part and man hopes he has done good enough on his part.

Are they saved, yes or no?

 

[dianaiad]

That is a common response for the people that do not understand the “Just” nature of God or the “depravity” of man’s sinful nature, or the Gospel, which of course the implication of that should be obvious.

I’ll give you an example; let’s say you are married and have 4 children and you come home and you see your spouse and 3 of your children slaughtered and lying dead in pools of blood and then you see the man responsible because he is in the process of murdering your last child; like a mad bull you rush toward the man, knock him down and call the police.

The police come and arrest him and then in the courtroom with you and all the town’s people are there and the judge says "well I’m a real nice guy and I forgive you; you are free to go." What would you and all the other people in that courtroom do; you would go to every local. state, and Federal official and the media and proclaim that there is a judge who is more wicked than person who murdered your entire family. So you expect a human judge to be fair and just because of your desire and love for justice, but expect a perfectly just God to just forget and overlook worse offensives?

How in the world you can put your evil wickedness on God is beyond me and in fact the greatest dilemma in the entire Scripture lies within this one passage.

that is quite a strawman you have presented there. First, none of us believe as you present us; we are quite aware that God is very just.

The problem is, Calvinism gives us an incredibly UNjust God.

Remember; God created us. All that we are, He made us. Calvinism is especially clear on the subject that man is born depraved and unable to choose NOT to sin…and only those of use who are chosen to be saved by God can be saved; we have no say in the matter.

If God made us unable to choose, then He is responsible for our not making that choice. It’s very simple.

The Calvinist god is like the puppeteer who, having built defective puppets, throws them in the fire to punish them for his incompetence.

Worse; he is like the dog breeder who, having deliberately bred defective puppies, sells them to medical research labs for a lifetime of painful experimentation as ‘punishment’ for the way they were born.

Calvinism has us condemned to hellfire from the instant we are conceived no matter what we do–unless one is of the ‘elect’ (and who knows whether one is of the elect or not?) in which case he’s going to heaven no matter what he does–and GOD is the one who created us that way.

This is not something I want to have anything to do with. This is a partial God, a biased god…an INSANE god–and if this is really how God is, no wonder Satan rebelled.

Goodness, I wonder if I could express my opinion more strongly? I could try…

 

[LongJourney]

This thread is getting derailed. Can someone participating in the derail please start a new thread on Calvinism?

 

[Pat_De]

Hmm… Where have I heard this one before… Oh yeah.

[BIBLEDRB]Luke 23:32-34[/BIBLEDRB]

It’s called ***concupiscence ***and it’s not Calvin’s idea.

You are right about that; since your choice of word is usually used in the strong desire for sexual lust. Where have I seen that before?

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. – Romans 1

By forgiving everybody (even serial murderers) who does not reject Him.

You will need to dig a little deeper; well much deeper.

There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God; – Romans 3

I’ll tell that you are unable to answer the question and it is for that reason you would do well to spend the 101 minutes with your Bible in hand; but I know you are not interested in hearing any truth as you have continuously demonstrated here and elsewhere by your own words.

What is a cat herder?

 

[LongJourney]

What is a cat herder?

Catholics are independent folk. We don’t take well to being bossed around by a couple of men on horses with dogs. Sort of like trying to make cats act like cows or sheep.

 

[Pat_De]

This distinction between “desire” and “will” is a tradition of men found nowhere in Scripture.

Look up the Greek and might learn something in regards to an effectual will of God; something He has purposed and will come to pass verses a desire, as in a wish or hope; two different Greek words with two entirely different meaning, but what is truth or the importance of having reverence for God’s word over religion?

Are they saved, yes or no?

Who are they? We are speaking in terms of the Gospel according to God verses the gospel according to religions.

But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! – Galatians 1

 

[RebeccaJ]

Catholics are independent folk. We don’t take well to being bossed around by a couple of men on horses with dogs. Sort of like trying to make cats act like cows or sheep.

moo

 

[dianaiad]

You are right about that; since your choice of word is usually used in the strong desire for sexual lust. Where have I seen that before?

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. – Romans 1

You will need to dig a little deeper; well much deeper.

There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God; – Romans 3

I’ll tell that you are unable to answer the question and it is for that reason you would do well to spend the 101 minutes with your Bible in hand; but I know you are not interested in hearing any truth as you have continuously demonstrated here and elsewhere by your own words.

What is a cat herder?

You’ve never heard of something being as difficult as herding cats?

Ah, well.

I wonder; do your posts come under the heading of proselyting? Or just pulpit pounding?

 

[Pat_De]

that is quite a strawman you have presented there. First, none of us believe as you present us; we are quite aware that God is very just.

The problem is, Calvinism gives us an incredibly UNjust God.
Remember; God created us. All that we are, He made us. Calvinism is especially clear on the subject that man is born depraved and unable to choose NOT to sin…and only those of use who are chosen to be saved by God can be saved; we have no say in the matter.
If God made us unable to choose, then He is responsible for our not making that choice. It’s very simple.
The Calvinist god is like the puppeteer who, having built defective puppets, throws them in the fire to punish them for his incompetence.

Worse; he is like the dog breeder who, having deliberately bred defective puppies, sells them to medical research labs for a lifetime of painful experimentation as ‘punishment’ for the way they were born.
Calvinism has us condemned to hellfire from the instant we are conceived no matter what we do–unless one is of the ‘elect’ (and who knows whether one is of the elect or not?) in which case he’s going to heaven no matter what he does–and GOD is the one who created us that way.
This is not something I want to have anything to do with. This is a partial God, a biased god…an INSANE god–and if this is really how God is, no wonder Satan rebelled. Goodness, I wonder if I could express my opinion more strongly? I could try…

I would hate to be in front of the Great White Throne when He brings this to your attention. Be like a wax figurine before a blast furnace. Yikes! Repent and believe the Gospel!
You have a god of your own making because you hate the God of the Bible; otherwise you would not make up some other god of you own making. You would rejoice and embrace the doctrine of election if you knew the God of the Bible because without the Elect, who would be in heaven?That doctrine has just the opposite effect of what you believe it would.

I John chapters 1&2 give the tests of assurance, but you would already know this if you actually believed the God of the Bible.

What does the Scripture say?
*What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin *{CF Eph. 2:1-3}; 10 as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one; 11 There is none that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God; 12 They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable; There is none that doeth good, no, not, so much as one: 13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit: The poison of asps is under their lips: 14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: 15 Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16 Destruction and misery are in their ways; 17 And the way of peace have they not known: 18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it speaketh to them that are under the law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought under the judgment of God: 20 because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for through the law [cometh] the knowledge of sin. 21 But now apart from the law a righteousness of God hath been manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God; 24 being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 whom God set forth [to be] a propitiation, through faith, in his blood, to show his righteousness because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God; 26 for the showing, , of his righteousness at this present season: that he might himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus. 27 Where then is the glorying? It is excluded. By what manner of law? of works? Nay: but by a law of faith. 28 We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. 29 Or is God [the God] of Jews only? is he not [the God] of Gentiles also? Yea, of Gentiles also: 30 if so be that God is one, and he shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith. - Romans 3

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, {it is} the gift of God;

2Tim 2:25 if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth,

How many people deserve to be in Heaven? None. How many deserve Hell? All Would God be just if not a single person was in heaven, but all in hell? Yes. Why? It is about Him and His glory; not about you or me. If not for the elect, no one would be in heaven. Praise God for the elect and propitiating blood & righteousness of God via the God-man Jesus Christ my Savior and my perfect Master!**

 

[Pat_De]

This thread is getting derailed. Can someone participating in the derail please start a new thread on Calvinism?

**The majority of this is my fault; I apologize and will no longer post here since I bear the greatest responsibility. **

 

[Pat_De]

You’ve never heard of something being as difficult as herding cats?

Ah, well.

I wonder; do your posts come under the heading of proselyting? Or just pulpit pounding?

God is the only one that can change a person’s heart in my view; but in your view it may not be that way. I can only speak for myself on what I know about God and I also cannot continue here on this topic since I have taken the majority responsibility and said I will not get off topic any longer. Feel free to start a different subscription or PM.

 

[Pahoran]

Returning to the thread from the long Calvinist derail:

Paul, you seem, yet again, to have – inadvertently, I am sure – misunderstood what you read. Even though it is in fairly plain English.

This seems to be a bit of a pattern with you. Perhaps you should work on it.

This news article quotes Alaska Mission President Don Clark:

As a former LDS missionary, I’m flabbergasted by this statement. When I was a missionary in Taiwan, President Ezra Taft Benson visited for our mission conference. During his talk he said “We are not here to convert the Buddhists. We are here to convert the Protestants and the Catholics.”

Your thoughts?

Are four.

1. *]As others have already pointed out, Don Clark is not the Alaska Mission President; he is the Branch President in a mighty metropolis called Unalaska, population 4347.
   
   *]Also as others have already pointed out, President Clark is talking about the senior missionary couples, when he says, “But they can also be older members of the Church. Clark says that their work primarily involves working the community’s LDS church,” etc.
   
   How could you possibly have missed that?
   
   *]You have also – inadvertently, I am sure – misunderstood what you heard from President Benson. Is it possible that you forgot the word “only” in that quote? As in “We are not here only to convert the Buddhists?” Because that’s a lot closer to what he really said, isn’t it?
   
   You see, the notion that the Church of Jesus Christ targets its missionary efforts at other Christians is a complete falsehood; so, of course, President Benson did not utter it. The fact, as President Benson knew better than anybody, is that we share the Gospel with everyone.
   
   Also, and again as President Benson knew better than anybody, we don’t see ourselves as converting people at all. We proclaim the message of the Restoration, teach, preach, expound, exhort and baptise; but it is always the Holy Ghost that converts. That is axiomatic. It was so when I was on my mission; it was during the time you tell us you were serving a mission; and it is so today.
   
   *]I also notice that you appear to have abandoned your own thread. Are you not really interested in progressing the discussion, or was this just a bomb-throw?
   
   Regards,
   Pahoran

 

[LongJourney]

The thread has run its course. Plain and simple. We are tired of having seven and more LDS-related threads on the first page of this forum. Have you read Eric H.'s posts?

 

[Pahoran]

The thread has run its course. Plain and simple. We are tired of having seven and more LDS-related threads on the first page of this forum. Have you read Eric H.'s posts?

Was this addressed to Paul Dupre, who was the thread originator, or me?

What are you upset about: the fact that Paul started yet another LDS-related thread, or the fact that a Mormon (ugh!) had the temerity to correct his errors?

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[LongJourney]

I was referring to the fact that LDS had already pointed out Paul’s possible misreading of the article.

 

[Pahoran]

I was referring to the fact that LDS had already pointed out Paul’s possible misreading of the article.

Not merely “possible,” but demonstrated.

However, there is no rule that I am aware of that requires each Latter-day Saint here to stand alone when he or she defends his faith.

And besides, I do seem to have been the first to spot Paul’s misremembering of the talk he allegedly heard from Ezra Taft Benson.

Now LJ, if you are so tired of the number of LDS-related threads on the first page of this forum, perhaps you shouldn’t keep participating in them.

Because it’s participation that keeps them on the first page, you see.

And I can’t think of a single reason why the attackers should always have the last word.

Can you?

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[LongJourney]

And I can’t think of a single reason why the attackers should always have the last word.

This is our turf. Therefore, you are the attackers. I do not respond to a post unless it is already close to the top of a page. And, even then, I restrain my fingers if I think another can respond just as effectively, or perhaps more so.