Why would anyone want to be a Mormon or Jehovah Witnesses? Part 2

[Nicea325]

yep…

A university professor once told the class:

The Truth is always defended.

Amen!

 

[twopekinguys]

Waiting in vain. Show me one NT verse from Jesus disapproving of polygamy.

Absence of condemnation does not equal approval.

Also, try reading John 21:25

Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

Come on now Z, you’re slippin

 

[mathonihah]

Really? I have already stated, more than once, pick any translation you wish. That is what I have already agreed. I have already picked two translations (Catholic translations). Stop avoiding the question and just answer it based upon any translation you wish.

Can you find a credible translation that does not state that the judgment of God is visited upon generations for the sins of the father?

I had originally quoted the KJV. That and the ones you gave disagree. We need to settle on one, and stick to it. Which is it going to be?

 

[LivingWaters7]

Is this still a doctrine?

“[There is] “no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith. If Joseph Smith was verily a prophet, and if he told the truth…no man can reject that testimony without incurring the most dreadful consequences, for he cannot enter the kingdom of God” -Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p.190

I’ll take the Christian Jesus, thank you very much.

Yes, that is believed, however I think the part included in the ellipsis may be helpful:
*
“NO SALVATION WITHOUT ACCEPTING JOSEPH SMITH. If Joseph Smith was verily a prophet, and if he told the truth when he said that he stood in the presence of angels sent from the Lord, and obtained keys of authority, and the commandment to organize the Church of Jesus Christ once again on the earth, then this knowledge is of the most vital importance to the entire world. No man can reject that testimony without incurring the most dreadful consequences, for he cannot enter the kingdom of God” *

I think that this is consistent with the Mormon belief that they have the fulness of the truth, and that no one can receive eternal life without coming to accept that fulness, whether in this life or the next. That would include baptism by the “proper” authority (i.e. LDS priesthood), as well as the other “saving” ordinances, being members of the “true Church”. So, in their belief, you cannot be fully saved if you don’t come to accept the Restoration, including the supposed restoration of authority to perform required ordinances for salvation.

Hope that helps.

 

[SteveVH]

I had originally quoted the KJV. That and the ones you gave disagree. We need to settle on one, and stick to it. Which is it going to be?

Go ahead and use the KJV. How many times do I have to say this? In fact I insist on the KJV. How’s that?

Here, I’ll even quote it for you:

“6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, 7Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.”

 

[twopekinguys]

Yes, that is believed, however I think the part included in the ellipsis may be helpful:
*
“NO SALVATION WITHOUT ACCEPTING JOSEPH SMITH. If Joseph Smith was verily a prophet, and if he told the truth when he said that he stood in the presence of angels sent from the Lord, and obtained keys of authority, and the commandment to organize the Church of Jesus Christ once again on the earth, then this knowledge is of the most vital importance to the entire world. No man can reject that testimony without incurring the most dreadful consequences, for he cannot enter the kingdom of God” *

I think that this is consistent with the Mormon belief that they have the fulness of the truth, and that no one can receive eternal life without coming to accept that fulness, whether in this life or the next. That would include baptism by the “proper” authority (i.e. LDS priesthood), as well as the other “saving” ordinances, being members of the “true Church”. So, in their belief, you cannot be fully saved if you don’t come to accept the Restoration, including the supposed restoration of authority to perform required ordinances for salvation.

Hope that helps.

Thanks, but if we couple this quote with the one about having to pass by smith to get into heaven, isn’t it putting him on the same level as the Christian Jesus?

Also, this quote can be interpreted as having to believe in smith instead of Jesus. I mean, if we reject smith’s testimony, then there is no salvation.



ETA: I notice Z/Math doesn’t have anything to say about it, and he knows everything.

 

[TexanKnight]

I had originally quoted the KJV. That and the ones you gave disagree. We need to settle on one, and stick to it. Which is it going to be?

Lets use the one that came first…and was not edited by Martin Luther

 

[LivingWaters7]

Thanks, but if we couple this quote with the one about having to pass by smith to get into heaven, isn’t it putting him on the same level as the Christian Jesus?

Also, this quote can be interpreted as having to believe in smith instead of Jesus. I mean, if we reject smith’s testimony, then there is no salvation.



ETA: I notice Z/Math doesn’t have anything to say about it, and he knows everything.

LOL well you know how Zerinus is…

Putting on my believing, active LDS hat, no, I don’t think that Mormons believe in Joseph Smith instead of Jesus, or that he’s on the same level as Jesus. I think what it means by rejecting Smith’s testimony, is that, coming from their POV of it being the truth, if someone rejects that the Restoration really happened, and therefore reject the authority of the LDS Church, its priesthood, and power to perform required saving ordinances, presumably how Christ offers salvation (i.e. through the Church and priesthood ordinances), then one cannot be saved, since they’re rejecting the true church, ordinances, and fulness of the Gospel, as revealed through Joseph Smith.

As far as passing by Joseph Smith to get to Heaven, well, I think that would be viewed as similar to when Jesus talks about the 12 apostles sitting on thrones and judging the 12 tribes.

SO, while LDS obviously have clear fundamental differences from orthodox Christianity on the nature of Christ, the Godhead, etc, it’s also true that they believe that it is only through Christ and His atonement that salvation can be found, and Joseph Smith, as important as he’s believed to be in their salvation history, isn’t on the same level as Christ.

 

[mathonihah]

Go ahead and use the KJV. How many times do I have to say this? In fact I insist on the KJV. How’s that?

That is fine, except that it takes us back to square one. The conversation began as follows:

SteveVH;10822759:

You can hash that out with Rebecca, I’m sure she will be more than happy to respond. But you have not answered the question concerning the obvious conflict of this verse with Mormon doctrine. Why don’t you give that a shot?

I will do that only if you first tell me what you think of Exodus 34:6-7. Do you agree with it, disagree with it; do you think it is fair, unfair, just, unjust of God to act in that way? What do you think.

You answered that by quoting from a translation which changed the meaning of the verse. If you are now accepting the KJV translation, I am still waiting for your answer to the above before we can proceed.

 

[twopekinguys]

LOL well you know how Zerinus is…

Putting on my believing, active LDS hat, no, I don’t think that Mormons believe in Joseph Smith instead of Jesus, or that he’s on the same level as Jesus. I think what it means by rejecting Smith’s testimony, is that, coming from their POV of it being the truth, if someone rejects that the Restoration really happened, and therefore reject the authority of the LDS Church, its priesthood, and power to perform required saving ordinances, presumably how Christ offers salvation (i.e. through the Church and priesthood ordinances), then one cannot be saved, since they’re rejecting the true church, ordinances, and fulness of the Gospel, as revealed through Joseph Smith.

As far as passing by Joseph Smith to get to Heaven, well, I think that would be viewed as similar to when Jesus talks about the 12 apostles sitting on thrones and judging the 12 tribes.

SO, while LDS obviously have clear fundamental differences from orthodox Christianity on the nature of Christ, the Godhead, etc, it’s also true that they believe that it is only through Christ and His atonement that salvation can be found, and Joseph Smith, as important as he’s believed to be in their salvation history, isn’t on the same level as Christ.

I can kind of see where you’re coming from, but there are still some major differences. Including what is the “atonement”.

Can you quote the scripture for the 12 apostles sitting on thrones and judging. I don’t think I’m familiar with that.

 

[twopekinguys]

That is fine, except that it takes us back to square one. The conversation began as follows:

You answered that by quoting from a translation which changed the meaning of the verse. If you are now accepting the KJV translation, I am still waiting for your answer to the above before we can proceed.

You should be on Dancing with the Stars the way you dance around things.

Hope you got your ballet slippers on Tinker Bell

 

[LivingWaters7]

You should be on Dancing with the Stars the way you dance around things.

Hope you got your ballet slippers on Tinker Bell

:bowdown:

 

[SteveVH]

That is fine, except that it takes us back to square one. The conversation began as follows:

You answered that by quoting from a translation which changed the meaning of the verse. If you are now accepting the KJV translation, I am still waiting for your answer to the above before we can proceed.

You are truly unbelievable. I’m done wasting my time. You should be embarrassed.

 

[LivingWaters7]

I can kind of see where you’re coming from, but there are still some major differences. Including what is the “atonement”.

True.

Can you quote the scripture for the 12 apostles sitting on thrones and judging. I don’t think I’m familiar with that.

Sure:

Matthew 19:28
28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
**
Luke 22:28-30
28 Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations.

29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;

30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.**

 

[twopekinguys]

True.

Sure:

Matthew 19:28
28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
**
Luke 22:28-30
28 Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations.

29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;

30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.**

Thanks, I can’t believe I missed that in Matthew. That is probably my favorite book.

 

[twopekinguys]

:bowdown:

Thank you! Thank you very much. I’m here all week.

Don’t forget to tip your waiters and bartenders.

 

[mathonihah]

You are truly unbelievable. I’m done wasting my time. You should be embarrassed.

Not really. If my original request was unreasonable, why did you proceed to answer it in the first place, by quoting a translation that changed the meaning of the verse? You need to decide which translation is the right one, and what your answer to my original question would be, so we can proceed.

 

[kimg901]

Not really. If my original request was unreasonable, why did you proceed to answer it in the first place, by quoting a translation that changed the meaning of the verse? You need to decide which translation is the right one, and what your answer to my original question would be, so we can proceed.

It wont matter what he picks, it will be wrong because it isnt translated correctly. Is this not what you mormons say?

 

[TexanKnight]

Not really. If my original request was unreasonable, why did you proceed to answer it in the first place, by quoting a translation that changed the meaning of the verse? You need to decide which translation is the right one, and what your answer to my original question would be, so we can proceed.

He did not use a version that changed the meaning. You were adamant in discussing Joes various versions that a few different words did not change meanings.

Right?

 

[SteveVH]

Not really. If my original request was unreasonable, why did you proceed to answer it in the first place, by quoting a translation that changed the meaning of the verse? You need to decide which translation is the right one, and what your answer to my original question would be, so we can proceed.

I quoted the KJV to you. My answer has not changed. You, on the other hand have thus far refused to answer, taking every dodge you can find. I’m not interested in playing games.