Featured Are Mormons Biblical Christians?

Yes, I forgot. I am confusing you with someone else.
You are the Catholic incognito either hypocritically attending a Baptist church, or just saying you are attending a Baptist church. Either way you have been challenged before to produce your church's statement of faith to show that they believe in these doctrines that you put forth. No Baptist church does.

 

They denty the nature of God, as there are endless number of "gods", and the god of the earth was omce a man like one of us are now...

They deny the Cross of jesus, as Joseph Smith holds the keys to eternal life, not jesus...

they deny heaven/hell as Christians define them, as hold to basically all make it to heaven, 3 seperate levels, third level where mormons become gods...

They have extra biblical revelation , adding to the Bible

they practice faith and good works to be saved...

different God, different Gospel, different Christ!

 

Nice...epecially when comming from a "christian moderator".

1. I am not putting forth any "doctrines" - you are. I simply clarified what I believe the idea of purgatory is, which happens to have been different than the views of others here.

2. Whether I elect to believe outside of my Church's "statement of faith" is none of your business. If you cannot handle differing beliefs from your own in the "Other Christian Denominations" section of the board, then perhaps you should consider a change of scenery. Clearly, you have one huge chip on your shoulder my friend. I will pray for you in this regard.

WM

 

The operative phrase here is "...I don't believe..."

I think TS has already provided those in a previous post.

Well if everything has been paid for then you should be able to go on and sin all you want without any problem. It's all good...

No one here has stated that. In fact the exact opposite has been stated.

WM

 

Even though the word purgatory is not in the Bible the concept is both in the Old and the New Testament. The Jews have always believed in Purgatory. The Jews have always believed in purification in the next world and the tradition of praying for the dead has always been passed on from generation to generation. I lived in upstate New York for a number of years in an area with a large Orthodox Jewish community. A child is required to pray for his deceased parents for one year, a prayer that is called “Kadis” [Pronounced Kadesch] So important was this considered that if there are no surviving children, a person is hired to pray for the deceased for one year.
Peter also talks about a third place. Prison is not Heaven and Jesus would not be preaching to people in Hell. “For Christ suffered for sins once. The righteous for the sake of the unrighteous, that He might lead you to God, put to death in the flesh, He was brought to life in the spirit. In it He also went to preach to the spirits in prison, who had at once been disobedient while God patiently waited in the days of Noah during the building of the ark, which a few persons, eight in all, were saved through water (1Pt 3:18-20).

 

In Search of Moroni

Is this still: Are Mormons Biblical Christians thread?

That is a curious way to put the question--does this imply there may be un-Biblical Christians? Perhaps the only real Christians use the Bible only as the whole counsel of God.

Mormons stand or fall on the testimony of Joseph Smith Jr. who says he got a revelation from God having been personally visited by heavenly personages. This revelation was that: all churches had apostasized and a restored church and priesthood would be through Joseph--along with the Book of Mormon and other subsequent revelations.

This is either a true revelation or a false revelation. Joseph is either a true prophet or a false prophet. If true, we should all become Mormon. If false, everything which has been promulgated by LDS since 1830's is necessarily false. Reformed falsity is still falsity reformed.

Similar analogy can be made for those reforming the Holy See(the largest extra-biblical religious entity in Christendom). If the Holy See does not go back to Peter being given sole authority in Mt. 16, they are usurpers and so are those who have come out or her, for they have no authority either.

The Holy See has a little different slant on the extra-biblical: they have apocryphal writings, traditions of the holy fathers, councils and cathechisms to support their plethora of dogma/ false teachings--going all the way back to the 4th century and Constantine the Great One, whose mother helped set up Vatican Hill--an arrangement which still stands. Amazing, the perseverence of false doctrine. More amazing: it is still considered Christian--by worldly definition anyway. This term is really full of ambiguity in modern usage. The scripture says the disciples were called Christian first at Antioch. It has seldom been a term of endearment.

True disciples would never allow being set up as a state religion. Curiously, Luther, Calvin and others promoted state churches and pedobaptism, both unscriptural doctrines. Why do many laud them as champions of Christianity?

Me thinks the real Christians have been among those killed for their Faith, especially the anti-pedobaptists. "They that live Godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution..." Most of us have no idea what real persecution might be. Millions have been killed, refusing to baptize their infants and recant to Rome. The long war against God is still raging.

Persecution, per se, does not make one a Christian--Joseph Smith was murdered/martyred while incarcerated, possibly by an angry group of concerned fathers who found their daughters caught up in Mr. Smith's polygamy doctrine.

We are in the midst of ecumenism as never before. The daughters of Rome are returning to their mother. Preaching such things has been outlawed before. "The mystery of iniquity is already at work." "Repent and do the first works."

Even so come Lord Jesus.
Peace,
Bro. James

 

I find your lack of internal consistency interesting with statements such as

but then also saying

Certainly Contradictory. Only a religious state would outlaw a heretical view. So Certainly I think you are confused.

As far as

Your history is inaccurate. Catholic writings not in scripture goes back long before the 4th Century and Constantine. We see Catholic documents as early as the didache which is around the same time the gospel of Mark was writen. You err in that you think Constantine set up a "Christian Government". He did not establish Christianity as the "official Roman Religion". He with co-emperor Licinius signed the Edict of Milan which was an edict of Christian toleration within the empire. The gift of Vatican hill to the Christian Church (which at the time the Orthdox Christian church called herself Catholic to, as Tradition goes back to Ignatius a disciple of the Apostles, differentiate herself from Arius and his followers known as Arians.) was a victory for Christian because it was in that same hill that christians were put to death for the entertainment of the crowds. Also there are two authoritative forms the word of God takes: Tradition known as the Deposit of Faith; and Scriptures. Period. Councils only define things that have been consistently taught from the begining. You are propigating falsehoods about the Catholic Church. I thought I'd clear it up.

 

You seem to be reinforcing my position: most of the argument uses extra-biblical information for doctrine. Mormonism is false per Revelation 22:19-20. The holy see falls for the same reason: adding to or taking away the scripture.

True Christianity has never been really tolerated by the world nor the religions of the world--unless they recanted or conformed. Conformed to the world--that is the problem in most so-called churches today--that is why we are not persecuted. We are preaching another gospel than the one the Apostle Paul preached. We have watered down "sin, righteous, and judgement to come." We have a religion which conforms to our livestyle rather than a lifestyle which conforms to our religion.

Historically: if one follows the scriptural history of the churches in the Book of Acts along with the Seven Churces of Asia in Rev. 2,3, and compares this to the secular history which has been throughly hacked by the religious powers that be, one must conclude: someone is not being honest. All of these man-made doctrines and traditions not found in scripture cannot be from God. "Let God be found true and every man-----------lying"

While it is true that many of the false doctrines go back to the first century, that does not somehow make them true. It is possible to be very authentically ancient yet still false. Example: the words of Satan in the Garden of Eden, "You shall not surely die..." are certainly authentic------and false.

The NT scripture plainly teaches that there were already antichrists and there would be more--DO NOT BELIEVE THEM. Apparently some did not heed the warning. If a lie is repeated long enough, somehow it becomes truth--I do not think so. Things that were false in the first century are still false today--regardless of how many times they are catechized and reformed by the Most Right and Reverend Doctors of Divinity and the current Magisteriums.
The doctrines of God do not change--He knows that depraved humans cannot deal with Truth. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. There are none righteous, not one.

Now what?
Peace,
Bro. James

 

I mean that you are expressing your belief or disbelief in something. </opionion>

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1827410&postcount=77
I have added additional material below...

So you don't sin?

So you do sin... Ok. But this doesn't address the biblical idea of purgation of temporal sins. You are describing a well formed conscience which, by the way, is a good thing.

Look. We agree that when Jesus exclaimed from the cross “It is finished” meant that his perfect and unique sacrifice had been fully accomplished. We also agree that His perfect sacrifice was infinitely sufficient to satisfy God’s justice and atone for the sins of humanity.

Yet, the Bible speaks of a third place that is neither Heaven nor hell. It’s known variously as Sheol, Hades, the Netherworld, and Paradise.

Purgatory is the place, or process, or state (however you wish to think of it) in which the fire of God’s love purifies us from the temporal effects due to sin. Take a look at Paul’s explanation of Purgatory in 1 Corinthians 3: 10-15.

“10According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.“

…but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. Hmmm…

Additionally, Hebrews 12:22-23 says that as one approaches God’s presence in heaven, one encounters angels as well as the “spirits of just men made perfect.” Clearly, their being made perfect took place before they entered heaven, since nothing unclean or imperfect (in however a minor way) can exist in heaven before the throne of God.

Further, let’s look at Matthew 12:32:
“Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”

This verse implies that some sins can be forgiven in this age or the age to come, just not the sin against the Holy Spirit. So where could one go in the next world to be forgiven of sins? Could it be Hell? No – there is no forgiveness there. Is it heaven? No – no one with any sins can enter into Heaven.

Does this help?

WM

 

Psalms 103:12 As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us.
--past tense.
He remembers them no more
--past tense.
He has cast them into the sea.
--past tense.

When I came to Christ he forgave all my sins; cleansed me from all of them: past, present and future. It took place at the time I trusted Christ many years ago. They are all forgiven. It is in the past.

See above. Scripture is very clear.
What did Christ say as he died? It is finished! The work of Christ is finished. There is nothing more to do. The sinner must accept what is done or reject it. It is not a process. One either accepts what Christ has done, the payment he provided for the forgiveness of all of his sin, or like the soldiers, the Jews, and even the other thief on the cross--mock him, spit on him, rail on him, and find the same fate as they did in hell. There are only two choices.

Your analogy isn't correct. Right now you are not only broken, you are drowning in sin, perishing, unable to save yourself. You need someone stronger then yourself to pull you out of a sea of wickedness and set you on solid ground where you will be safe for a raging sea that will swallow you up completely and destroy you. That person is Christ. He is the only one that can save. And when he does he forgives and removes. He forgives the sins and removes the hurt. He is all sufficient.

They are gone. They are under the blood. They are buried at the bottom of the sea never to be remembered again.

Because I believe the Bible. There is not one word, not one doctrine connected with Purgatory that can be supported by the Bible. It is a blasphemous heretical doctrine unsupported by Scripture.

 

If you believe in this heresy and still attend a Baptist church which doesn't, that makes you a hypocrite doesn't it. Why not join the Catholic church if you believe in Catholic doctrine.
In our church every member must adhere to the statement of faith. Why would they join if they don't agree. If they believe in Presbyterian doctrine naturally they would find a Presbyterian church to join. You are inconsistent.

 

This is false, and you will have a hard time finding Scripture to back it up. Prove your assertions through the Word of God.

Just unproven opinion. You have no foundation in the Word of God for such strange ideas.

Judaism is also an apostate religion. They aren't believers. And what you describe for Judaism still isn't in the Bible is it?

He didn't. You have misunderstood Scripture along the way somewhere.

The audience is identified--those that were disobedient just before the flood.
The place is identified. It was the same place where all the unsaved of the OT went: Sheol. The picture is given in Luke 16. There are two compartments with a chasm fixed between. The rich man (with the unsaved) is in one, and Lazarus, Abraham, and the other saints are in the other called paradise. In the other compartment (referred to as Hell, were also these spirits). Christ went there and proclaimed his victory. The word "preached" simply means to proclaim. He proclaimed his victory over death. There is no purgatory.

Read Albert Barnes for a good understanding on this passage.

 

I don't see how. For instance Doctrine is established before scripture was writen. Jesus orally taught his disciples and doctrine was formed long before the first gospel was even penned IE at least (at a minimum) 20 years. This is attested to by the writings of the Apostles in the NT. Therefore doctrine is established by the inspired verbal words of the apostles. Some of the things they taught were written for prosperity which we consider scripture because of the plenary inspiration of those apostles who wrote them.

This is entirely untrue. Mormonism is wrong because Joseph Smith is wrong and its based on his teaching. Its wrong for the same reason Islam is wrong. However, Revelation 22:19-20 is making an attestation to the book of revelation which was common among Jewish Apocalyptic literature. Look at what the passage actually says:

This passage isn't refering to the entire NT or attesting to the NT or even the OT just to its own book. What you've done is taken that passage and applied it to a canon not established by John the Revelator but to his own book of Prophesy which is singularily the book of Revelation. Thus you have expanded the meaning beyond the context of the passage which isn't a very good way of dealing with scriptural passage. Canon was set many years later by church leaders.

I agree with this and to state that the reformers couldn't bear True Christianity either because they wanted to have multiple sex partners (Zwigili), or wanted to re-create the faith in their own image and use favorable theories (humanism) to help establish their personal theories (John Calvin), Or just couldn't handle their emotional ups and downs and paranoia (Martin Luther). And since the former two could not abide something they couldn't understand the historical understanding of the Eucharist as passed down by the Apostles was put to the wayside in favor of rationalism making the human intellect God rather than Keeping God on his throne. Just some thoughts for you.

I'm sorry Catholics are constantly persecuted in fact 3 Catholic Churches in Nigeria were blown up during Sunday services, Catholics are taken as slaves from Southern Sudan to Northern Sudan, Italians are stealing the Eucharist from Churches so they can desicrate them. It happens so often that now consecrated bread must be placed under lock and Key. The United States is trying to pass a bill that will force Catholics to act against their conscience, During the Cistero War the Mexican Government persecuted Catholics. Egyptians kidnap Catholic Girls and rape them forcing them into Islamic Marriages, and several Catholics have been killed by Egyptians, in Pakistan Catholics suffer violence and now are forced to be judged under Sharia law, a Catholic educational compound and disablity center in Indonesia was attacked and a village was burned down displacing 1,000 catholics. Saudi Arabia now wants to destroy all Catholic Cathedrals on the Arabian Peninsula. And on and on it goes.

Catholic Church takes sin pretty seriously and constantly talks about judgement. In fact I think the Catholic Church takes sin much more seriously than many protestant churches. Who think nothing is wrong with Contraseption, divorse, the M word etc.... Whereas the Catholic church does.

Now both protestants and Catholics have this issue. Many Catholics are Catholics in name only like Nancy Pelosi and practically all Catholics in Canada since their bishops have not followed Orthodoxy that a review of their bishops is currently underway. These are what I call liberal and they don't want to worship God but want to feel good about themselves and sing snappy praise songs. Both groups need to repent.

Did you ever consider the fact that true doctrines go back to the first century?

No. The fact that they are true and that they are attested to by every writing of credible Christian leaders of their day does.

Yet is is also more likely to rely on modern philosophies and be wrong like humanism (start of the reformation), rationalization, etc...

Yes but didn't God say before satan and more ancient that "of all the trees in the garden thou mayest eat of. Yet the tree in the middle of the garden, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou mayest not eat for thou will surely die" ? And didn't Adam pass God's command to Eve verbally and even probably added "don't even touch it" because Eve says to the serpent. " but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’” though God had said to Adam "“You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” note nothing about touching it. Yet Eve believed that part was from God too.

Yes you are quite right. Paul wanted the early christians to follow his example

and then he discoused how properly to do something in Church

and apparently some of these people who didn't take Paul seriously not only got sick but

Apparently kept it up after Paul was gone

Yep they were there at the beginimg.

Yes it does seem thats how the hetrodox people think.

Yes. but continues to be perpuated by many protestant churches.

Amen, Jesus said what he meant and Mean what he said at the institution of the Eucharist. That will never change.

which is why he is merciful with protestants.

Amen! None of us are righteous we need God and to put our wholeselves at the feet of Jesus.

Well, we should all come to Jesus, repent of our sins, and follow him for the rest of our days. What do you think?

 

Why not read and comment on the following post as it shows biblical support for Purgatory. You might not agree with it, but you should stop calling it "unbiblical".

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1827785&postcount=91

WM

 

Well, I don't believe in heresy. Do you?

Hardly. I go to Church to worship God - not to elevate myself by claiming consensus with a bunch of arrogant people of like minds. However, if that's your deal then by all means - have at it.

Would that make you happy? Hmmm... Which Catholic Church would you recommend? I understand there are approximately 23 different rites and then there is the Eastern/Greek Orthodox...

Well then... I'm glad that I don't belong to YOUR church. I belong to God's church.

That's a social issue and doesn't really mean very much to me. Besides, I don't know anyone as conflicted as you appear to be about this.

Naturally? This really turns you inside out doesn't it.

Right....

WM

 

Both links simply tear Scripture out of context and give no proof for the existence of Purgatory. It is an unbiblical doctrine. If you want to save me the trouble of trying to copy and paste what you want answered, please repost any such material and I will gladly answer it for you with Scripture, or show you how the Scripture is taken out of context.

 

Oh OK... Let's not even address the scripture that I (and TS) provided - even though you asked for them. Let's just proclaim that what I gave you was a "misinformation of Scripture..." and by that infallible proclaimation, deem that no scriptural support exists.

Oh Lordy me... Let me state this again so read slowly please. No one is stating anything like that. It is precisely because of Jesus' sacrifice that sins can be forgivin in the first place. If you read the first few sentences of my post to which you are responding, you will see that point clearly stated.

I seem to recall at least three other places. Ironically, you skipped right over that part didn't you?


A very well thought out response!

WM