my brother became a Mormon and my mom is freaking out

[miknik5]

the " grace revolution" or any other revolutions of what the word of God says, and yeah i believe the entire bible, its Just that the 4 gospels, have to be the first and foremost in order to understand the rest is what im saying. God bless you though either way. its alright with me if people dont think lds are christians, i know better though, because i took the time to actually read thier book, and sit and discuss many times the bible , was very sceptical to begin with, after many talks though, i beliueve them to be a denomination of christianity.

Based on the information in the book of mormon, do i advise anyone to convert no, am i mormon, no, would i suggest anyone read the bom no, im saying I have and do believe they are a denomination of christianity like catholic, protestant or any other. and Jesus will sort out each individual regardless of thier label or denomination accroding to His word. and its not our place to exclude things we havent done the research on. that was the only point i had until folks insisted the things they have here concerning me .


but God bless you t this thread, i kind of see no fruit in it, i hope to find some different subjects we can agree on at another time, Grace and peace to you in the Lord Jesus

So you loving your neighbor as your own soul accept these as brothers and sisters in the LORD and advise others to do so as well

Yet the Book of Mormon which they base their understanding on, you do not advise other brothers and sisters to read?

Shouldn't we concern ourselves in what they are teaching others?
if we claim to love others as our own soul, do we validate teachings that go beyond what is written when GOD's WORD clearly tells us not to?

do you agree that there is only ONE TESTIMONY and TRUTH?

 

[miknik5]

It all depends on how you define "Christian." If you define a Christian as someone who shares fellowship with you, Mormons wouldn't be Christians in your perspective. From my perspective anyone who claims to be a disciple of Jesus Christ would be a Christian. I don't think that term refers to fellowship or salvation--merely discipleship: "And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch." (Acts 11:26) Of course, that's my perspective. What's really important is what God's perspective is on who is or who is not a Christian.

Almer

GOD's perspective would be he who is for ME is not against ME
And he who gathers does not scatter

 

[miknik5]

naw im in no need to understand the difference, like i said ive already read the bom, i have first hand Knowledge of what it says, im good with allowing Jesus to do the sorting Out. judgement or door keeper isnt my call. would i ever convert...naw no way. do I suggest anyone else convert ? nope. but i would suggest that they dont convert to alot of denominations of Christianity.

Im 100 percent good with my take on it, others should also go with thier own belief. ill welcome anyone who believes the Holy bible kjv and accepts what it says, the judgement and things while others may have some calling to do that, definately not mine, im too busy with spreading the words of Jesus in the 4 gospels. and encouraging others to go believe them also. the gospel the apostels preached, WAS those 4 gospels the gospel of Gods Kingdom. ive spent the time, had the discussions read the book. so im good where i stand on this, ill accept a catholic Mormon, presbyterian, lutheran, protestant on and on if they acceopt the Jesus Christ in the four gopels, and what He says. because that is christianity.

and they do. now hey is there possibly many lds cults? im sure there is, is there many christian cults ? yep Jim jones and jonestown comes to mind, david koresh and waco comes to mind,even Hitler was basing His beliefs on the bible. that doesnt make the bible evil. my point was way back in the start of this thread. ive read the book, I study the bible daily, and the bom doesnt part with the gospel, its not as much but what they believe about Jesus Christ the same who came and died in Jerusalem, is absolutely the same as the bible teaches....probably because the bible is official doctrine


theres no difference to me and some of the theology on this site following teachings from grace revolution authors, that stuff parts sharpky from Jesus words without question to the point they necessatate ommission of "everything said before the cross" or they teach that Jesus taught the mosaic Law 2.0 lol that stuff is wacky and will het folks out of order, the bom WHILE I AM IN NO WAY ENDORSING ANYONE TO CONVERT OR EVEN READ THE BOOK, the books principles does not part, and i find it perfectly believable that Jesus appeared elsewhere because its clear in the bible He was there, then gone then there then Gone again. do i believe it for myself? no, i have the Bible and need nothing more. but those who find Jesus through the bom and the bible, i accept as christians.

thats my belief and im comfortable calling anyone who Believe Jesus a brother, especially those who have the fruit to back up the name, and many lds do have those fruits because they believe the things He taught, and dont make up revolutions as some " christian authors and pastors do.

HE had to fulfill all the righteous requirements of the law

Pentecost would have occurred in Jerusalem
HIS SPIRIT was poured out upon HIS first apostles there

no where else because it would be through the apostles testimony and witness of CHRIST that THE GOSPEL would be preached to men

So no

HE didn't appear elsewhere but in Jerusalem

 

[Almer]

So no HE didn't appear elsewhere but in Jerusalem

Except for the Sea of Galilee, Emmaus, the road to Damascus, wherever He appeared to 500 people, in Paul's prison cell, and the Isle of Patmos to John.

Almer

 

[resurrection33]

Exactly!

desiring to know nothing but CHRIST and HIM crucified and the power of HIS RESURRECTION

Didn't you know that Paul, by CHRIST's SPIRIT so powerfully at work in him, said these TRUTHS?

Well, I've learned a lot from Paul, but Paul isn't my Savior - Jesus is.

 

[resurrection33]

I don't know. Ask the person who mentioned it

This is a misquote. I never asked this question.

 

[resurrection33]

Actually. I don't think I ever told you to be like CHRIST

I told you to keep your eyes on HIM and to remain in HIM
and not go out from HIM

We can't "be like CHRIST" if we're not baptized into HIM, and reborn of HIS life-giving SPIRIT

Well, this conversation is getting so strung out, it's hard to know who said what. You did say, "I desire to know nothing but CHRIST and HIM crucified and the power of HIS RESURRECTION," and I have no problem with that statement.

 

[resurrection33]

Who's talking about the outward denominational church

That was about a hundred posts ago. You are the one who brought it up the second time. I was just answering your question.

 

[resurrection33]

The least and the greatest in THE KINGDOM believe the same thing

and all (in HIM) are ONE in ONE

No disagreement here.

 

[miknik5]

That was about a hundred posts ago. You are the one who brought it up the second time. I was just answering your question.

Never was talking about temporal things


Ever

 

[Almer]

Mormonism is a spirit of anti-Christ. That spirit denies the Christ came in the flesh. Seeing they believe that the Christ is a created being and a brother of the devil, they deny the Christ is very God. So, they deny the Christ came in the flesh. Christ...Christos...means anointed One. So, they have the spirit of anti-Christ and do not follow the true Christ.

We seem to be speaking past each other, SG3. I don’t want to be discourteous but if I’m too direct, it may give that impression. If that comes across, please know I don’t mean to be disrespectful. I also don’t want to write something that’s too long to chew on.

Earlier, you suggested that the Bible provides a definition for “Christian.” I haven’t been able to find anything suggesting such a definition outside of Acts 11:29; and I suggested you provide a biblical definition. Essentially, you provided a few conclusions that come from mistaken premises. Would you mind sticking with me so that I can determine the source of your conclusions?

You wrote:

Mormonism is a spirit of anti-Christ. That spirit denies the Christ came in the flesh.

I confess that I have studied Mormonism for over 50 years and can’t find a single instance where Mormonism denies that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. I’m aware of many affirmations that the foundational doctrine of Mormonism is that Jesus Christ was born of Mary, lived a completely sinless life, died on the cross and rose again the third day. Do you see that concept negated somehow because of other things that Mormons believe about Christ?

You then claimed “they deny the Christ is very God.” (I have to admit I’m a little perplexed by the adverb very in that sentence—I know it exists in many of the creedal statements, but it seems to me to be an unnecessary superlative when referring to God. The Mormon canon references Christ as God sufficiently often and clearly enough to demonstrate that they affirm that Christ is God. The title page of the Book of Mormon claims that one of its purposes is to convince all that “JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD” (caps in the original).

I think your perspective of “created beings” allows you to mistakenly project that idea on to Mormon ideas. Since you believe Lucifer is a created being, you assume that for Jesus to be his spiritual brother, that Jesus too would have to be a created being. In Mormon theology neither Jesus, Lucifer, nor any other spirits are created beings. Their doctrine stipulates that “man was also in the beginning with God.”

You offer as a conclusion, “So, they deny the Christ came in the flesh.” That to me is a non-sequitur and I don’t see it as logically following from any of your previous statements; but only as a reiteration of a previous conclusion. Perhaps you can help me see how you arrive at it?

Almer

 

[preacher4truth]

They believe an addendum. That shows me no discernment of different spirits. A disciple is a follower of Christ. However, we don't follow a created being, that which Mormons state the Christ is and also a brother of the devil, but God the Son.

In no way is a Mormon a christian.

You have to sort through the subtle errors of Mormonism, and there are some misnomers about that cult that people hold to.

Almer is saying Christ is God. "Oh, isn't that wonderful? They must be Christian then, right?

Well, not quite, but since so many "Christians" are nominal believers they are hoodwinked by this false sect.

When Almer and others say Christ is God, they are saying that the Father is a God, the Holy Spirit is a God, Christ is a God, then by implication since they teach Satan is His spiritual brother he would also qualify as a god. And it doesn't end there, there are many other gods as well according to their speculations.

So, being "god" really isn't that special.

There are perhaps millions of them and someday they hope to be one themselves.

Almer also defended Joseph Smith about the "blacks don't have souls" accusation. I am not completely certain that is unfounded, it probably has some legitimacy but I would not say that Smith actually said this. Brigham Young advanced the racism that was a part of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, and Smith isn't innocent as Almer attempts to proclaim. One can study out he and Young's Curse of Cain and Curse of Ham teachings - they were both racists, and of course both are heretics and that organization is not Christianity.

On another note people should also study out how Smith fabricated the Book of Abraham from Egyptians papyri, made a bundle of money off of that. Few in that day could read the hieroglyphics so Smith took advantage of that and simply made up whatever he wanted to say out of them. Later on when others could interpret this they showed Smiths intent to deceive others. That is his track record though when one looks at the book of Mormon, it's errors and lies, you can see where this commenced.

To say Jesus told Smith His church failed is to, IMHO blaspheme Christ. But this is possible when one has a false view of God and is polytheistic.

 

[Muzungu256]

i havent read the book of mormon and im too lazy to do so can someone tell to me what its about????????????? just shortly........

 

[resurrection33]

Never was talking about temporal things


Ever

This conversation has taken so many twists and turns I don't even know now what we were discussing, other than I don't think becoming a Mormon is the worst thing a person can do, and you apparently disagree.

 

[Almer]

Almer is saying Christ is God. "Oh, isn't that wonderful? They must be Christian then, right? Well, not quite, but since so many "Christians" are nominal believers they are hoodwinked by this false sect.

When Almer and others say Christ is God, they are saying that the Father is a God, the Holy Spirit is a God, Christ is a God, then by implication since they teach Satan is His spiritual brother he would also qualify as a god. And it doesn't end there, there are many other gods as well according to their speculations.

So, being "god" really isn't that special.

There are perhaps millions of them and someday they hope to be one themselves.

It isn’t as facile to dismiss as you suggest. Your implications fail for the same reason the ancient Sadducees were mistaken. Unfortunately, you (and SG3) have embraced the same mistaken conclusions brought about the Sadducees. You’ll remember that they rejected the existence of angels, spirits, and the resurrection. Why? Because following the Babylonian captivity, they concluded that the premise behind angels and spirits disallowed strict monotheism.

The religion of the patriarchs posited a God who was the father of spirits—including angels. The Sadducees rejected the idea that God could have children because they concluded that those children would have the same characteristics as their father and consequently God wouldn’t be utterly unique and they would have to be polytheists.

The advent of the Son of God, however, demonstrated that those ideas were mistaken. Angels (who were children of God) announced that God had a Son—demonstrating that angels did exist and that God was able to procreate.

The reason that Jesus was God and Satan isn’t (nor are the angels) is because only Christ has the divine nature—which apparently is shared by God as He deems appropriate.

Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. (2 Peter 1:4)

 

[miknik5]

This conversation has taken so many twists and turns I don't even know now what we were discussing, other than I don't think becoming a Mormon is the worst thing a person can do, and you apparently disagree.

We were discussing ONE TRUTH and ONE FOUNDATION


Anything else but that is dung, yeast, man made material


some recognize the PURE UNADULTERATED BREAD from the yeasty doctrines of men


others don't

 

[miknik5]

It isn’t as facile to dismiss as you suggest. Your implications fail for the same reason the ancient Sadducees were mistaken. Unfortunately, you (and SG3) have embraced the same mistaken conclusions brought about the Sadducees. You’ll remember that they rejected the existence of angels, spirits, and the resurrection. Why? Because following the Babylonian captivity, they concluded that the premise behind angels and spirits disallowed strict monotheism.

The religion of the patriarchs posited a God who was the father of spirits—including angels. The Sadducees rejected the idea that God could have children because they concluded that those children would have the same characteristics as their father and consequently God wouldn’t be utterly unique and they would have to be polytheists.

The advent of the Son of God, however, demonstrated that those ideas were mistaken. Angels (who were children of God) announced that God had a Son—demonstrating that angels did exist and that God was able to procreate.

The reason that Jesus was God and Satan isn’t (nor are the angels) is because only Christ has the divine nature—which apparently is shared by God as He deems appropriate.

One HOLY SPIRIT

Correct?

And when did CHRIST "have the divine nature?"

 

[miknik5]

Almer?

if all the angels had the divine nature of GOD they would have understood the story of salvation



The only angel who did was Satan
and because he didn't want to do his work as a covering angel until the fullness of time would come and the ONE who covers would come, he rather deceived the children of the flesh by speaking against GOD's TRUTH


He fell
but he still causes confusion sowing in lies and suggestions and half truths to men who are ignorant to THE ONE TESTIMONY of GOD

 

[miknik5]

You might be interested in reading Isaiah 8

in this truth that there is only ONE TESTIMONY
And if one does not speak according to THE WORD, they are not speaking according to THE TESTIMONY


And THE TESTIMONY is JESUS


For THE TESTIMONY of JESUS is THE SPIRIT of prophecy

(that means every written WORD of GOD spoken in lower signs and representations pointed us to the HIGHER and HIDDEN APIEOTUAL TRURHS found only IN THE SON)

it is to a man's detriment to add anything more to THE FOUNDATION than CHRIST who is THE FOUNDATION

 

[resurrection33]

We were discussing ONE TRUTH and ONE FOUNDATION


Anything else but that is dung, yeast, man made material


some recognize the PURE UNADULTERATED BREAD from the yeasty doctrines of men


others don't

One truth, one foundation? Well, there are two great commandments (Matt 22:34-40).