LDS beliefs and the Bible

[Fish-Hunter]

Originally Posted by madhatter85

How can you recieve a Book as the Final authority from god when there was never made such a statement from the bible itself.

All authority does not lay within ANY book. In the words of esteemed New Testament scholar N. T. Wright, “The risen Jesus, at the end of Matthew’s Gospel, does not say, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth is given to the books you are all going to write,’ but [rather] ‘All authority in heaven and on earth is given to me.’ “In other words, “Scripture itself points . . . away from itself and to the fact that final and true authority belongs to God himself.” - Jeffery R Holland

Matthew 28:
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Sure, we finally agree on something. N.T. Wright is a historical Bible Christian too. We know all authority in Heaven and earth belongs to God. It always has and always will be. That is why I have brought up the sovereignity of God, because He rules and reigns with complete authority and sovereignty.

How does the One True God communicate or reveal Himself to mankind. Biblical Revelation is called special revelation. General or natural revelation is non-saving revelation given by God to all mankind (Pslam 19, and Romans 1). I think you are trying to debate how God reveals Himself. The Bible claims to be God-breathed or the Word of God. The context of this thread is defined within Biblical revelation only. If you want to debate authority and extra-biblical revelation, you need to start a new thread.

[madhatter85]

Originally Posted by Fish-Hunter

Sure, we finally agree on something. N.T. Wright is a historical Bible Christian too. We know all authority in Heaven and earth belongs to God. It always has and always will be. That is why I have brought up the sovereignity of God, because He rules and reigns with complete authority and sovereignty.

How does the One True God communicate or reveal Himself to mankind. Biblical Revelation is called special revelation. General or natural revelation is non-saving revelation given by God to all mankind (Pslam 19, and Romans 1). I think you are trying to debate how God reveals Himself. The Bible claims to be God-breathed or the Word of God. The context of this thread is defined within Biblical revelation only. If you want to debate authority and extra-biblical revelation, you need to start a new thread.

the problem is that you think the Bible is all God would give to his children, when clearly It is not a place for people to make "common ground" because each person interpits each passage of scripture differently as to destroy all confidence in them. it is far from "common Ground" but rather a Battleground unfortunately.

hence why we need continuing revelation for our time. because if the scriptures were "so plain and clear" then why would everyone have thier own interpitation?

[Fish-Hunter]

Originally Posted by madhatter85

the problem is that you think the Bible is all God would give to his children, when clearly It is not a place for people to make "common ground" because each person interpits each passage of scripture differently as to destroy all confidence in them. it is far from "common Ground" but rather a Battleground unfortunately.

hence why we need continuing revelation for our time. because if the scriptures were "so plain and clear" then why would everyone have thier own interpitation?

Actually, the Holy Bible is God's revelation to His elect only. Biblical truth is concealed to many, and revealed to some. Why do you think Jesus spoke in parables? The answer to that question can be found in the Holy Bible.

1. Matthew 11:25 At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.
2. Luke 10:21 At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.

Why do you think Jesus spoke in parables? The answer is found in the Bible. Click the link below to find out for yourself.

Bible Resources, Online Bible, Read the Bible, Search the Bible, Bible Study Plan, Passage Search, Keyword Search

In addition, only those who have been born from above, and united to Christ have the privledge to call God "Father". The old humanity or those still united to Adam are called children of disobedience, children of wrath, children of the devil, and children of darkness according to the Holy Bible. That sure does not line-up with Mormon doctrine, does it?

10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God. - John 1

Ephesians 2

Made Alive in Christ

1As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature[g] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. 4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Ephesians 2:2:

2in which you (A)formerly walked according to the course of (B)this world, according to (C)the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in (D)the sons of disobedience. - NASB

[Orontes]

Originally Posted by zippythepinhead

Not to interrupt, but hello Oro. Long time no see fellow master of the horse
Carry on. I agree with what Oro said

Howdy!

[Orontes]

Originally Posted by Fish-Hunter

Okay, before we move to the sovereignty of God according to Scripture, please post Scripture references from the 14 Epistles of Paul to support the Mormon understanding of the gospel of God's grace. These are not new issues that I have presented to you. Biblical Christians have always claimed that the Mormon Church teaches a works righteousness gospel, which is not the gospel of God's grace according to the Bible or the Apostle Paul.

Posts 824, 825 and 826 have not been responded to. Given your pattern, I assume you cannot respond or cede the points made until I see otherwise. Post 827 you quote, but don't actually engage, so I assume the points there are ceded.

To your post:


I'm not sure what a "gospel of God's grace" is as I'm not sure how you are using gospel. Are you using gospel as a synonym for doctrine? I also don't know what a Biblical Christian is. Is this simply an Evangelical like yourself? If so, then you should say Evangelical as there are no Christians I know of you don't use the Bible, so Biblical Christian would include all, or near all Christians: including Mormons which would make your statement incoherent. If by "works righteousness gospel" you mean that Mormons believe good acts actually exist and can be recognized as such: guilty as charged. If helping old women cross the street constitutes a good act and someone performs that act, then ipso facto, they have performed a good act.

To your request, you strike me as a Book of Romans man. Evangelicals typically see Romans 7 and 8 as the heart of Romans, so maybe I should give a reference from there. How about Romans 7:19-25 to Romans 8 1:2:

The passage:

19For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

20Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 21I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. 22For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 23But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. 1There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

The above is a great scripture. Now, my guess is that were I to ask one like yourself the meaning I would get something like: the above demonstrates the fallen and miserable state of man. Paul speaks as a victim of his own sinful nature: constantly born down by the evils of the flesh. This wretched man can only hope for the redeemer Christ to pull him from his despair. And thus we can see it is not anything Paul, as a fallen man can do (and thus we reject the pride of any works based approach), but only through Christ that any hope is possible. Am I close?

The exegesis:

I have noted you state a few times that context is important. I agree. Context does not simply mean the verses that surround a chosen passage or even the book or the Bible proper, but actually entails the entire socio-cultural milieu any piece of literature was written in. The Greco-Roman World is the context. Paul as a Hellenized Jew was fully able to communicate to a Greek speaking audience on their own terms. A simple example would be his referencing the Greek poet Aratus when speaking to the Aeropagus on Mars Hill (Book of Acts). In Romans a similar tact is taken.

If I asked 'what is going on in verse 19?' My guess is the reply from yourself would be something connected to the notion of Original Sin and man's sinful falleness. This would be an anachronistic reading of the text that is only possible by one divorced from the linguistic-cultural context of the passage. I'll illustrate: if I asked what does "to be or not to be" mean? Some might give a response on existential angst. Most would tie it to Shakespeare. Some may even tie it to Hamlet. The above phrasing from verse 19 would have a similar impact on a Greek speaking audience. The phrase is a medean turn. What does that mean? It refers to Medea from Greek Tragedy.* The phrase is most commonly found in Euripides's "Medea':

"I am being overcome by evils. I know that what I am about to do is evil but passion is stronger than my reasoned reflection "

It can also be found in the larger literature of contemporary's and near contemporary's of Paul. For example. Epictetus:

"What he wants to do he doesn't do, and what he doesn't want he does."

Ovid's Medea:

I see the better and approve it, but I follow the worse"

Verse 24's phrase Paul's uses is almost an exact phrasing of his contemporary Seneca who wrote in his Medea Trajedy:

"O wretched woman that I am!" The phrase is "talaiporos ego anthropos".

What is going on here? Why would Paul refer to a figure from Greek myth and why this specific phrasing? The reason is because the figure of Medea and the phrasing was commonly used in the Greco-Roman world to illustrate akrasia which refers to weakness of the will or lack of self mastery. Attaining self mastery was a central principle in Greek and Roman Thought. This is why writers in Athens would often sing the praise of their mortal enemies the Spartans (often seen as those most able at self mastery). It is one of the reasons why Stoicism became the dominant ethos of the Roman world. It is also why Greco-Romans might become interested in Jewish Thought. The Law of Moses was portrayed as a vehicle for self mastery (Philo is a simple example of this). What Paul is skillfully doing in the passage is both showing how it is pathe that leads to wrong doing (hamartein), but also he is engaging in a trope when he turns the notion back on his audience. "Medea" was used as an illustration of the dangers of the foreign: the evils that can occur when the other is let within. The Romans/Greeks were very aware of the barbarorum and sought to maintain the divide. Paul's use turns the Romans/Greeks into the other vis-a-vis the Law of Moses. They are compared to the foreign Medea, the ones who have gone against the good and corrupted themselves. Once this is established, Paul then is able to show it is not adherence to a foreign law of Moses that will bring self mastery, but rather through Christ via the spirit.

The Conclusion

Now what you should notice is there is none of the stark divide between a grace vs. works dynamic which is a complete misreading of Paul's rhetoric. This also means that the very question of a "gospel of grace" is a failure to understand the text and ties into a larger mistaken Justification Theology that makes stark distinction between the saved and the other. This is common with Evangelical readings because they approach Paul as a believer and then begin to mine the text as a believer, rather than understanding who the text was actually written for and the rhetoric employed. The problem is then compounded by the base unfamiliarity with Greco-Roman Thought. The rub is basically that for the Greco-Roman, as for the Mormon, Paul's work was/is concerned with bringing the person into a relation with Deity, not drawing arbitrary justification lines in the sand and declaring who is or isn't worthy.

[Orontes]

Originally Posted by Fish-Hunter

Actually, the Holy Bible is God's revelation to His elect only. Biblical truth is concealed to many, and revealed to some. Why do you think Jesus spoke in parables? The answer to that question can be found in the Holy Bible.

1. Matthew 11:25 At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.
2. Luke 10:21 At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.

Why do you think Jesus spoke in parables? The answer is found in the Bible. Click the link below to find out for yourself.

Alas, the two verses speak to an esoteric element, but do not say anything about the Bible or the Bible being for the elect. You have committed a hasty induction. This is a logical fallacy.

[madhatter85]

Fish hunter, how does anything you said relate to my post?

[Fish-Hunter]

Originally Posted by Orontes

Alas, the two verses speak to an esoteric element, but do not say anything about the Bible or the Bible being for the elect. You have committed a hasty induction. This is a logical fallacy.

Hi Orontes,

Are you ready to discuss the sovereignty of God according to the Holy Bible? We have to leave our own personal wisdom, and seek biblical revelation on the subject. We should be consistent with the opening post, right? Could you post the official LDS position on the subject of the sovereignty of God, free will, etc...and post scripture proofs to support the LDS doctrine on the topic? I will get off the site for the day, and look for your posting tomorrow morning. ..Lord willing.

[Fish-Hunter]

Originally Posted by madhatter85

Fish hunter, how does anything you said relate to my post?

Hi madhatter...that's a cool name. I'm not trying to ignore you, but I have too many discussions right now with other religiousforum members. I honestly don't remember your post that you mentioned. Do you mind debating the topic of the sovereignty of God revealed in scripture with your LDS brother?