Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

On what points of doctrine do LDS and protestants differ?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 101-125 of 895 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 8:30:06 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
Yes, BV, I know. I have probably quoted that part of 1 Corinthians more than anyone else on Amazon Christianty forum.

Of course if you want I will argue with you for fun, but right now it seems we are in agreement.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 9:06:45 AM PST
BJ -- http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com

From the site you referenced:
"Holocaust: A term that for years was defined as any devastating event. It was specifically used to describe World Wars I and II, in general.
More recently this term has been "hi-jacked" by the Jews who use it, incorrectly, to describe the purported treatment of the Jews at the hands of the Germans during World War II. Actually, it better describes the Post-World War II treatment of the German citizens by the Allies (the U.S., U.K and USSR), who were taking their orders from International Jewry,"

Anyone see a problem here? Anyone? Anyone? Beuller?

Site problems aside; yes the Bible is plain when we have illumination by the Holy Spirit. That said, I don't think we will or can TOTALLY understand ABSOLUTELY all of it with PERFECT clarity (that would require perfection which does not exist in our world in its present state). Which is why I posted that the MAIN things are the PLAIN things. Remember that Jesus did "open the Scripture" to His disciples. And when we are unregenerate, unsaved and dead in sin, there is very little there that we can comprehend. But there is enough there to convict any sinner and make them see their need for Jesus Christ.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 9:16:10 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012 9:20:41 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
Jeremy have to disagree with you on part of this.

But glad you read the site.

I also don't agree with everything in the site. I rarely agree with everything on a fundamentalist site.

Good for you.

You are not gullible like the one who started this thread, who takes everying on the sites he reads as "gospel."

Jeremy: Which is why I posted that the MAIN things are the PLAIN things.

Response: and Paul clearly stated what he thought the main things are.

Again, your challenge now is to prove that the LDS teach another gospel than these main things.

Good luck to you.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 9:56:09 AM PST
BV says:
BJ - "Of course if you want I will argue with you for fun, but right now it seems we are in agreement."

Nah, I'd rather be in agreement. Besides, I'm sure something else will come up that we might disagree on!

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 9:58:08 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
:)

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 10:17:55 AM PST
BV says:
BJ - "your challenge now is to prove that the LDS teach another gospel than these main things"

I think part of the answer may lie in Galatians 1 verses 6 through 12. In Gal. 1:12, Paul says "I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ."

Of course Joseph Smith claimed to have received the Book of Mormon through a revelation from God, but everyone else received it from a man - Joseph Smith. And unless the Book of Mormon is in 100% agreement with what Paul's writings say, without adding anything to them, it is a different gospel.

Those are just my thoughts. I know it's not the "proof" everyone's looking for.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 10:47:51 AM PST
BJ -- Again, your challenge now is to prove that the LDS teach another gospel than these main things.

The Mormon church presents a different Jesus. A created Jesus. In Mormon theology Jesus Christ is a god. Whereas the Biblical view is that there is One God in Three Persons all co-equal and co-existent, the Mormon god is three separate gods with Jesus being created by the Father.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 11:24:18 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
My point is not to say the LDS are right, but that the gospel is limited to the things that Paul talks about.

If someone says the LDS are wrong about Jesus, then I pretty much leave them alone, but if they quote Paul who says that you shoud not teach another gospel then he has preached, then you should use the criteria whcih Paul himself uses for the gospel.

The beginning of 1 Corinthains 15 is what Paul decribes as the gospel he has preached.

Interestingly, I did not recognize 1 Corinthians as describing the basic principles of the gospel until someone I was arguing with quoted these verses years ago. I first argued with them, then I realized they were right. And it was a Protestant who made the argument,

So are you up to it Jeremy, can you show how the LDS preach anothr gospel than Paul has preached?

Good luck to you.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 11:29:57 AM PST
BJ -- Paul's gospel

Ok, I get it. You seem to be intimating that Paul's gospel was NOT Christ's gospel.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 11:39:04 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
No, actually, I am not.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 11:44:15 AM PST
Ok, I apologize for mis-reading you then.

So, to address your question: can you show how the LDS preach anothr gospel than Paul has preached?

What would the "sufficient evidence" of that be, in your opinion?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 11:55:58 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012 11:56:51 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
As Paul said it is bad to preach another gospel.

And Paul described the gospel message he preached in the beginning of 1 Corinthians 15 (I later learned that some scholars think this came from the earliest Christian creedal statement so it may have not come from Paul alone).

To show that the LDS teach another gospel, you need to show that the LDS have a view contrary to what Paul said.

To help you I will quote the same verses already quoted:

1 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

So you could make a valid argument that the LDS are preaching another gospel as described in Galatians 1: 8 if they teach another gospel than Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 15.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 12:08:29 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012 12:30:15 PM PST
I just went back to your previous post and re-read what you stated here:

BJ -- If someone says the LDS are wrong about Jesus, then I pretty much leave them alone, but if they quote Paul who says that you shoud not teach another gospel then he has preached, then you should use the criteria whcih Paul himself uses for the gospel.

I apologize for my confusion. I thought I had stated that the Mormon Jesus is a different (wrong) Jesus, but that was probably addressed to a different poster.

From what I can see the Mormon church says: "Have faith in Christ", the question then goes to "Who, exactly is this Christ"?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 12:24:26 PM PST
BV says:
BJ - "To show that the LDS teach another gospel, you need to show that the LDS have a view contrary to what Paul said"

....or added some extra stuff to it.

Like, do "X" (something Paul or Jesus preached) PLUS "Y" (something Paul or Jesus did not preach), AS A CONDITION FOR SALVATION.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 12:29:31 PM PST
B. Josephson says:
Jeremy: From what I can see the Mormon church says: "Have faith in Christ", the question then goes to "Who, exactly is this Christ"?

Response: And the statement of Paul is this only:

that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaamwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 12:32:19 PM PST
B. Josephson says:
BV: ....or added some extra stuff to it.

Response: Unfortunately Paul did not say that.

But maybe you think that part of the Bible was lost. Hey that's what some LDS say about the Bible...

Are you secretly LDS BV?

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 12:42:28 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012 12:51:22 PM PST
B. Josephson says:
Here is something from John McKenzie's dictionary of the Bible on the gospel:

That the gospel had a definite content is indicated by the use of such words as announce, declare, preach, speak, know, teach, hear, receive (1 Co 15: 1; 9: 14; 2 Co 11: 7; Gal 1: 11; 1: 12; 2: 2; Col 1:23; Eph 6: 19; 1 Th 2: 2; 9+). This content is summarized brierly as "concerning the Son, descended from David according to the flesh, designated Son of God in power according to the spirit of righteousness by his resurrection from the dead" Rom 1: 3 f, that Christ died for our sins, was buried and that he appeard to the disciples. (1 Co 15; 3-5)....

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 12:45:38 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012 12:49:25 PM PST
bunso says:
the most glaring difference between Protestantism (all branches of Christianity, when it comes right down to it) and Mormonism is that it is a doctrine of the LDS religion that men can become gods, and that the god who created this universe was once a man. Whether Jesus was born of a virgin, or God is a trinity, etc are all secondary compared to the belief in Mormonism that men become gods, and that God used to be a man. This is blasphemy, and makes Mormonism a non-Christian religion.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 12:59:39 PM PST
B. Josephson says:
Bruno, now is your chance to define blashpemy by the Bible.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 1:15:22 PM PST
bunso said: "the most glaring difference between Protestantism (all branches of Christianity, when it comes right down to it) and Mormonism is that it is a doctrine of the LDS religion that men can become gods, and that the god who created this universe was once a man. Whether Jesus was born of a virgin, or God is a trinity, etc are all secondary compared to the belief in Mormonism that men become gods, and that God used to be a man. This is blasphemy, and makes Mormonism a non-Christian religion."

Jeff's reply: So you are saying the belief that man can become gods and the belief that God who created the universe was once a man disqualifies us as Christian?

The belief the man can become gods is called divinization, theosis, or deification in the Orthodox and Catholic worlds. Are you saying that Orthodox and Catholics are not Christian because of that?

Your second point is even more disturbing. Are you familiar with the concept of the Incarnation? That is considered a fundamental belief in Christianity. Christ is God and is the creator. Christians believe that He was born of the Virgin Mary and became a man. He later died, was resurrected, and became a glorified resurrected being. Basically, God used to be a man. Do you believe that Christ is God? So I think you just said that if you believe in the Incarnation, then you are not a Christian. This point disqualifies the rest of the world's Christians from being Christian.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 1:38:34 PM PST
bunso says:
Jeff's reply: So you are saying the belief that man can become gods and the belief that God who created the universe was once a man disqualifies us as Christian?

bunso replies: that's what I'm saying. Orthodox theosis is a belief in human participation in the divine nature, not a belief that human beings become gods and create their own universes.

the second part of my post was much less clear, sorry about that. I mentioned those, because these are some other issues with Mormonism that differentiate them from historical (orthodox, small o) Christianity. Mormon doctrine does not allow for the Trinity and the doctrines surrounding the conception of Christ are not orthodox, either. These are problematic, but not as egregious as the belief that human beings can become gods, or that God was once a man on the planet Kolob. Or any other planet. It is such a huge wrong. It is blasphemy.

I believe the Lord Jesus is God, along with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, three in one. Jesus was God while on earth. He did not become God by being resurrected. He is the God/Man, fully divine and fully human from conception, to death, to resurrection, and now in His place as King of the World, at the right hand of the Father.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 2:01:36 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012 2:05:31 PM PST
Kevin Bold says:
Jeffrey says: So you are saying the belief that man can become gods and the belief that God who created the universe was once a man disqualifies us as Christian?

Yes, it does, among other things.

"The belief the man can become gods is called divinization, theosis, or deification in the Orthodox and Catholic worlds. Are you saying that Orthodox and Catholics are not Christian because of that?"

Even if your misunderstanding of the Early Fathers were actually correct, the Triune God of Christianity was never a man. You reduce God to one of the turtles on which the universe rests in the pagan myth ("Oh, no, sir, there's no ground; it's turtles, turtles, turtles, all the way down. . .")

"Christians believe that He was born of the Virgin Mary and became a man. He later died, was resurrected, and became a glorified resurrected being."

Christians believe that Christ was always God, and after His incarnation, was both fully God and fully human. He never stopped being God.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 2:07:34 PM PST
Raulito says:
bunso,

"that men can become gods, and the god who created this universe was once a man"

If men are created by God, its impossible for men to become gods. A created being is a created being.

"..and that the god who created this universe was once a man..."

If this god was created by another god, then its not a god. Its a creature.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 2:11:34 PM PST
BJ -- And the statement of Paul is this only:

That is correct. But, who IS this Jesus?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 2:15:54 PM PST
Jesus4us says:
lds: Condemning the Book of Mormon, is by association, condemning the Bible.

spl: LOL!
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Christianity forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  40
Total posts:  895
Initial post:  Jan 16, 2012
Latest post:  Jun 1, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions