Katzpur the Great vs Bible Truth

Katzpur · Apr 26, 2007

Hello, Bible Truth. I'm starting this thread in response to your suggestion that I do so. As I understand it, your claim is that the Latter-day Saints worship a "different Christ" and preach a "different gospel" than do Evangelical Christians. You also claim to base your beliefs solely on the teachings found within the pages of the Bible. I personally use the KJV, but I don't object to your using a different version in this debate.

Since you believe that the Bible also is sufficient to give us a complete knowledge of the Savior and His gospel, I am going to assume that the Bible should also be able to prove false doctrines. If the Latter-day Saints are teaching something that contradicts that which is found in the Bible, I would agree with you that our doctrines are false. My contention is that you will be unable to do so. I would like to start with an analogy to illustrate my point:

Imagine a crime has been committed. We have three descriptions of the suspect. They are as follows:

"The Blue Version": The suspect in this case is said to be a tall, slender, white male around 30 years of age. He has dark hair and brown eyes. One witness reported seeing a man matching this description, in an alley near the crime scene. He was last seen wearing a red sweatshirt and navy blue pants.

"The Green Version": The suspect in this case is described as a 6 feet tall, 180-lb. white male in his mid-30’s. He has dark brown hair, brown eyes and no facial hair. The police’s sole witness claimed to have seen a man matching this description, exiting from an alley a few blocks from the crime scene. He was wearing a solid red sweatshirt with no markings and black pants.

"The Red Version": The suspect in this case is a white male, estimated to be about 6’2” tall and 175 lbs., and between 25 and 30 years of age. He has thick black hair, brown eyes and a mustache. According to witnesses, a man matching this description was seen running down an alley about a half block north of the crime scene. He was last seen wearing a red, Boston Red Sox sweatshirt and jeans.

Would you begin by telling me whether you believe that the Green Version contradicts the Blue Version or that the Red Version contradicts either the Blue Version, the Green Version or both. Please explain the reason for your conclusion.

bible truth · Apr 26, 2007

Dear Jonny, Aqualung, and Katzpur,

Im excited to discuss and debate the official LDS gospel with the Evangelical gospel according to Scripture alone. I will discuss things on your own separate Threads that you have created. However, I think we need to consider this debate to be more than an academic exercise. By faith, lets consider this divine providence, according to the will of God. Please see the Bible passages below.

Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes. Romans 10

I believe you can replace the word Israelites with Mormons, Catholics, Protestants and the verse applies today. I believe this passage applies to Roman Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, and Mormons alike. I believe the visible church (including evangelical churches) is a great mission field. I believe many who attend churches have not been converted. Many have faith not based on knowledge. My goal is to proclaim the gospel of God to you. My prayer is that God will grant you a new heart to receive the truth of the gospel. I hope you have a similar conviction in your faith. If I am missing the Fullness of the Gospel, I hope your desire for me is to know God in a greater and more profound way through revelation that I do not currently embrace.

I believe we should all pray that Gods will is done in our debate. We should all pray that God is glorified through our Threads. This is a mission field for all of us. Either I am missing the Fullness of the Gospel, or you are missing the Living Christ. I believe we should not limit our resources. We should let the Holy Ghost direct and lead us. I want you to be able to ask questions that may not line up with official LDS doctrine. We do not want to grieve the Holy Ghost by putting human restraints on our discussions. I have strong convictions of Sola Scriptura; therefore, what I proclaim to you is grounded in Historical Biblical Christianity. I have posted two links to let you know what I believe to be true. May God be glorified through our Threads!

http://www.t4g.org/T4TG-statement.pdf

http://www.t4g.org/

Sincerely,
In Union with Christ Jesus,
BT

bible truth · Apr 27, 2007

Katzpur said:
Hello, Bible Truth. I'm starting this thread in response to your suggestion that I do so. As I understand it, your claim is that the Latter-day Saints worship a "different Christ" and preach a "different gospel" than do Evangelical Christians. You also claim to base your beliefs solely on the teachings found within the pages of the Bible. I personally use the KJV, but I don't object to your using a different version in this debate.

Since you believe that the Bible also is sufficient to give us a complete knowledge of the Savior and His gospel, I am going to assume that the Bible should also be able to prove false doctrines. If the Latter-day Saints are teaching something that contradicts that which is found in the Bible, I would agree with you that our doctrines are false. My contention is that you will be unable to do so. I would like to start with an analogy to illustrate my point:

Imagine a crime has been committed. We have three descriptions of the suspect. They are as follows:

"The Blue Version": The suspect in this case is said to be a tall, slender, white male around 30 years of age. He has dark hair and brown eyes. One witness reported seeing a man matching this description, in an alley near the crime scene. He was last seen wearing a red sweatshirt and navy blue pants.

"The Green Version": The suspect in this case is described as a 6 feet tall, 180-lb. white male in his mid-30s. He has dark brown hair, brown eyes and no facial hair. The polices sole witness claimed to have seen a man matching this description, exiting from an alley a few blocks from the crime scene. He was wearing a solid red sweatshirt with no markings and black pants.

"The Red Version": The suspect in this case is a white male, estimated to be about 62 tall and 175 lbs., and between 25 and 30 years of age. He has thick black hair, brown eyes and a mustache. According to witnesses, a man matching this description was seen running down an alley about a half block north of the crime scene. He was last seen wearing a red, Boston Red Sox sweatshirt and jeans.

Would you begin by telling me whether you believe that the Red Version contradicts either or both of the other versions (the Blue and Green). Please explain the reason for your conclusion.

Passage 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.

Good morning Katzpur,

It's an unusual early morning for me. Having been blessed with 3 teenage boys can leave a dad restless at night. I thought I'd take the time to post since I'm up early today. I'm glad your son was not seriously hurt.

I think you summarized our debate accurately. I can agree to everything with your opening post. I know Jesus wrote in parables to illustrate spiritual truths. However, I try to stay away from analogies to illustrate spiritual truths, because I find that they fall way short from the truth. For instance, have you debated the Trinity with someone who tried to use an analogy? If I understand you correctly, we should focus on the gospel and the person of Jesus Christ in our debate? I have posted of the Thread you created: "Are Mormons Christians", that our essential difference is the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Should our particular Thread consists of debating the person and work of Jesus Christ? - BT

Katzpur · Apr 27, 2007

bible truth said:
I know Jesus wrote in parables to illustrate spiritual truths. However, I try to stay away from analogies to illustrate spiritual truths, because I find that they fall way short from the truth.

I can understand why you hesitate to answer the quesion I posed in my OP, Bible Truth. You clearly know the direction I'm heading and its somewhere you have no desire to go. I have, nonetheless, asked a simple, straightforward question. If you are either unwilling or unable to answer it, I will be forced to conclude that once the questions become tougher, you will be even less willing and less able to answer them. As much as I am looking forward to this debate, I refuse to waste my time by asking questions that you refuse to answer or raising points you refuse to address. You may consider me to be a complete heretic, but please don't make the mistake of consider me to be a stupid one. This is supposed to be a dialogue, not two monologues.

If I understand you correctly, we should focus on the gospel and the person of Jesus Christ in our debate? I have posted of the Thread you created: "Are Mormons Christians", that our essential difference is the person and work of Jesus Christ. Should our particular thread consist of debating the person and work of Jesus Christ?

Yes, I am proposing that you attempt to prove that what the Latter-day Saints believe about Jesus Christ is false, and to do that using the Bible and nothing else. This is something at which I believed you are bound to fail. I challenge you to me where LDS doctrines on the person and the work of Jesus Christ contradict what is taught in the Bible. In order for me to know for sure that you understand what I am asking of us, I am asking once again that you respond to the question I posed in my OP. Once that question has been answered to my satisfaction, we can proceed to actually debate the topic at hand.

bible truth · Apr 28, 2007

Katzpur said:
I can understand why you hesitate to answer the quesion I posed in my OP, Bible Truth. You clearly know the direction I'm heading and its somewhere you have no desire to go. I have, nonetheless, asked a simple, straightforward question. If you are either unwilling or unable to answer it, I will be forced to conclude that once the questions become tougher, you will be even less willing and less able to answer them. As much as I am looking forward to this debate, I refuse to waste my time by asking questions that you refuse to answer or raising points you refuse to address. You may consider me to be a complete heretic, but please don't make the mistake of consider me to be a stupid one. This is supposed to be a dialogue, not two monologues.

Yes, I am proposing that you attempt to prove that what the Latter-day Saints believe about Jesus Christ is false, and to do that using the Bible and nothing else. This is something at which I believed you are bound to fail. I challenge you to me where LDS doctrines on the person and the work of Jesus Christ contradict what is taught in the Bible. In order for me to know for sure that you understand what I am asking of us, I am asking once again that you respond to the question I posed in my OP. Once that question has been answered to my satisfaction, we can proceed to actually debate the topic at hand.

________________________________________________________________________
Per Katzpur:

"I would like to start with an analogy to illustrate my point:

Imagine a crime has been committed. We have three descriptions of the suspect. They are as follows:

"The Blue Version": The suspect in this case is said to be a tall, slender, white male around 30 years of age. He has dark hair and brown eyes. One witness reported seeing a man matching this description, in an alley near the crime scene. He was last seen wearing a red sweatshirt and navy blue pants.

"The Green Version": The suspect in this case is described as a 6 feet tall, 180-lb. white male in his mid-30’s. He has dark brown hair, brown eyes and no facial hair. The police’s sole witness claimed to have seen a man matching this description, exiting from an alley a few blocks from the crime scene. He was wearing a solid red sweatshirt with no markings and black pants.

"The Red Version": The suspect in this case is a white male, estimated to be about 6’2” tall and 175 lbs., and between 25 and 30 years of age. He has thick black hair, brown eyes and a mustache. According to witnesses, a man matching this description was seen running down an alley about a half block north of the crime scene. He was last seen wearing a red, Boston Red Sox sweatshirt and jeans.

Would you begin by telling me whether you believe that the Red Version contradicts either or both of the other versions (the Blue and Green). Please explain the reason for your conclusion."
_________________________________________________________________________
Hey Katzpur,

I see possible contradictions due to the limited vision the witnesses had of the crime. There accurate knowledge of the crime was partially concealed due to various reasons. If this analogy is to illustrate spiritual truths, this parital concealment of truth is intentional. Why did Jesus speak in parables?

If you accept me as a Christian, I will exhort you and all other Mormons that I am personally debating with 1 Peter 3:18.

But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect... 1 Peter 3:18

I sense an apparent sharing with a lack of gentleness and respect. This is just a personal observation. Let's continue my friend. - BT

Katzpur · Apr 28, 2007

bible truth said:
I see possible contradictions due to the limited vision the witnesses had of the crime. There accurate knowledge of the crime was partial concealed due to various reasons.

There are absolutely no contradictions between the red and the blue versions. None. And this is critical to our discussion. If you cannot see it, perhaps other posters reading this thread will be able to. This debate is, after all, as much for their benefit as it is for ours. I know that neither of us is likely to convince the other of anything. That is becoming more and more clear all the time. So, for the benefit of anyone following this thread.

Here is what we we learn about the suspect from the two eyewitness accounts. He is described as:

tall about 62 tall
slender 175 lbs
white male white male
around 30 years of age between 25 and 30 years of age

The red version is more specific than the blue, but that is all.

One witness reported... According to witnesses...
dark hair thick black hair
brown eyes brown eyes
a mustache

In one account, additional details were specifically mentioned by one witness, but the wording clearly implies that there were other witnesses. The other version indicates that more than one witness described the suspect in the same way. Most significantly, while the one account specifically mentioned a mustache and the other didn't, the one that didn't did not say that the man was clean-shaven, which would leave open the possibility that he had a mustache.

in an alley near the crime scene
running down an alley about a half block north of the crime scene

Again, the one version provides a few more details. In it, we pick up the fact that the man seen was not just in the alley, but that he was running. Knowing precisely where, in relationship to the crime scene, the alley actually was would also be helpful to the police.

wearing a red sweatshirt red, Boston Red Sox sweatshirt and jeans
and navy blue pants and jeans

Again, we simply pick up additional important details from the second account. The first one does not mention that the sweatshirt bore the Boston Red Sox logo or that the navy blue pants were actually jeans.

I'm not going to go through this same exercise with respect to what the green version, except to say that the red and the green version clearly contradicted one another. The suspect could not have both "no facial hair" and a "mustache." The sweatshirt either had markings on it or it didn't.

For the purpose of this debate -- not so much for your benefit as for the benefit of other, more objective readers -- I may occasionally refer back to this post. I am going to describe the blue version of the eyewitness account to the Holy Bible. The red version of a different eyewitness account of the same events represents the Book of Mormon. We can dispense with the green version.

If you accept me as a Christian, I will exhort you and all other Mormons that I am personally debating with 1 Peter 3:18.

There has never been any question in our minds that you are a Christian. We accept you as our brother, regardless of the fact that you do not extend the same courtesy to us.

But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect... 1 Peter 3:18

Click to expand...

I sense an apparent sharing with a lack of gentleness and respect. This is just a personal observation. Let's continue my friend. - BT

That is one of my favorite scriptures. I'm glad you quoted it. We may need to remind ourselves of it as this debate continues. I hope that will not be the case. As to my not showing a gentleness and respect to you, BT, I'm glad you mentioned that it was just your own opinion. I was not the one to describe your view of Jesus in the derogatory way in which you described mine (I am referring to what you said in the "Are Mormons Christians?" thread and not to anything you have said here.) We can leave it to our readers to decide which of us, if either, is showing a lack of gentleness and respect for the other.

I'm ready to move ahead if you are. Please begin by stating one difference between the person you describe as the "Mormon Jesus" and the person you describe as the "Biblical Jesus." Then tell me where the LDS scriptures contradict the Bible with regards to this one difference.

(Aside... For the benefit of any BYU fans out there, you may also consider the colors I used to represent BYU and the University of Utah. Watch to see the red triumph.

)

bible truth · Apr 28, 2007

Katzpur said:
There are absolutely no contradictions between the red and the blue versions. None. And this is critical to our discussion. If you cannot see it, perhaps other posters reading this thread will be able to. This debate is, after all, as much for their benefit as it is for ours. I know that neither of us is likely to convince the other of anything. That is becoming more and more clear all the time. So, for the benefit of anyone following this thread. [/font]

Here is what we we learn about the suspect from the two eyewitness accounts. He is described as:

tall about 62 tall
slender 175 lbs
white male white male
around 30 years of age between 25 and 30 years of age

The red version is more specific than the blue, but that is all.

One witness reported... According to witnesses...
dark hair thick black hair
brown eyes brown eyes
a mustache

In one account, additional details were specifically mentioned by one witness, but the wording clearly implies that there were other witnesses. The other version indicates that more than one witness described the suspect in the same way. Most significantly, while the one account specifically mentioned a mustache and the other didn't, the one that didn't did not say that the man was clean-shaven, which would leave open the possibility that he had a mustache.

in an alley near the crime scene
running down an alley about a half block north of the crime scene

Again, the one version provides a few more details. In it, we pick up the fact that the man seen was not just in the alley, but that he was running. Knowing precisely where, in relationship to the crime scene, the alley actually was would also be helpful to the police.

wearing a red sweatshirt red, Boston Red Sox sweatshirt and jeans
and navy blue pants and jeans

Again, we simply pick up additional important details from the second account. The first one does not mention that the sweatshirt bore the Boston Red Sox logo or that the navy blue pants were actually jeans.

I'm not going to go through this same exercise with respect to what the green version, except to say that the red and the green version clearly contradicted one another. The suspect could not have both "no facial hair" and a "mustache." The sweatshirt either had markings on it or it didn't.

For the purpose of this debate -- not so much for your benefit as for the benefit of other, more objective readers -- I may occasionally refer back to this post. I am going to describe the blue version of the eyewitness account to the Holy Bible. The red version of a different eyewitness account of the same events represents the Book of Mormon. We can dispense with the green version.

There has never been any question in our minds that you are a Christian. We accept you as our brother, regardless of the fact that you do not extend the same courtesy to us.

That is one of my favorite scriptures. I'm glad you quoted it. We may need to remind ourselves of it as this debate continues. I hope that will not be the case. As to my not showing a gentleness and respect to you, BT, I'm glad you mentioned that it was just your own opinion. I was not the one to describe your view of Jesus in the derogatory way in which you described mine (I am referring to what you said in the "Are Mormons Christians?" thread and not to anything you have said here.) We can leave it to our readers to decide which of us, if either, is showing a lack of gentleness and respect for the other.

I'm ready to move ahead if you are. Please begin by stating one difference between the person you describe as the "Mormon Jesus" and the person you describe as the "Biblical Jesus." Then tell me where the LDS scriptures contradict the Bible with regards to this one difference.

(Aside... For the benefit of any BYU fans out there, you may also consider the colors I used to represent BYU and the University of Utah. Watch to see the red triumph. )

Thanks Katzpur for your answer,

Our systematic theologies differ greatly; therefore, it would be wise to take things very slowly if we are going to understand each other. I believe all true Christians are sinners in process. The Bible talks about the indwelling sin in converted sinners. I believe Romans 7 that Paul describes is the Christian experience. Before we continue, I want to give you the opportunity to answer my question about why Jesus spoke in parables. This is an important question to help all understand your analogy above in another light.

Please post your answer regarding why Jesus spoke in parables. Thereafter, we will begin discussing the person and work of Christ. BT

Go Ducks! (UO).

Katzpur · Apr 28, 2007

Man, you're fast! Since you mentioned in another thread that it was your son's birthday, I did not expect to see a reply quite so soon.

bible truth said:
Please post your answer regarding why Jesus spoke in parables. Thereafter, we will begin discussing the person and work of Christ.

Jesus often spoke in parables in order to illustrate a point to His audience. His parables made use of situations, characters and customs that would have been familiar to His audience. All of His parables were intended to convey a spiritual message, but because parables, by their very nature, generally have muliple layers of meaning, those listeners who were more spiritually mature would have been able to derive a greater, more in-depth meaning from them than would those whose understanding was less mature. I hope that is sufficient. I can go into more detail and perhaps give an example or two if you'd like.

bible truth said:
Go Ducks! (UO).

Ducks are no match for Cougers.

bible truth · Apr 28, 2007

Katzpur said:
Man, you're fast! Since you mentioned in another thread that it was your son's birthday, I did not expect to see a reply quite so soon. Jesus often spoke in parables in order to illustrate a point to His audience. His parables made use of situations, characters and customs that would have been familiar to His audience. All of His parables were intended to convey a spiritual message, but because parables, by their very nature, generally have muliple layers of meaning, those listeners who were more spiritually mature would have been able to derive a greater, more in-depth meaning from them than would those whose understanding was less mature. I hope that is sufficient. I can go into more detail and perhaps give an example or two if you'd like.

Ducks are no match for Cougers.

Hey Katzpur,

Thanks for your answer again. Before I comment on your answer of why Jesus spoke in parables, could you please verify if your answer is the official LDS position to my question of "why did Jesus speak in parables"? This is an important point for our debate. Since the LDS church claims "apostolic succession", I will need to know if your answers are official LDS positions.

I'm not really a Duck fan. I was born and raised in southern California. I think USC has dominated the Cougars over the years. I once visited the LDS Temple in Salt Lake City on a business trip too. I need to sign off for the weekend. Please clarify your answer to why Jesus spoke in parables in light of an offical LDS answer. I will look for your answer on Monday. - BT

Katzpur · Apr 28, 2007

bible truth said:
Thanks for your answer again. Before I comment on your answer of why Jesus spoke in parables, could you please verify if your answer is the official LDS position to my question of "why did Jesus speak in parables"? This is an important point for our debate. Since the LDS church claims "apostolic succession", I will need to know if your answers are official LDS positions.

Unless I specifically state otherwise (i.e. to say in effect, "This is my own personal interpretation."), I will always attempt to represent my Church's "official position" as to our doctrine. Depending upon the amount of latitude you wish to grant me, I can, if you wish, stick entirely to scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price). Otherwise, I can also provide you with statements made by our living and past prophets and apostles, although technically speaking, these would be considered commentaries on doctrine as opposed to doctrine itself. (FYI, for the sake of consistancy in this debate, I will always put citations from the Bible in blue text and citations from the other LDS scriptures in red text.)

The clearest statement of LDS doctrine I am personally aware of comes from the Savior himself. According to Matthew 13:13, "Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand."

And from Matthew 13:34-35: "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world."

We find one additional statement in Mark 4:9-12 "And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable. And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand..."

I believe these explanations are entirely consistent with my earlier answer. I'm afraid that I am unaware of any official statement our leaders have made on why Jesus spoke in parables. I guess they figured that His own explanation was better than any they might come up with.

bible truth · Apr 28, 2007

Matthew 13 -The Parable of the Sower

That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat by the lake. Such large crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat in it, while all the people stood on the shore. Then he told them many things in parables, saying: "A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop—a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown. He who has ears, let him hear."

The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?"

He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. This is why I speak to them in parables:

"Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand. In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
" 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
For this people's heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts

and turn, and I would heal them.' But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.

"Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is the seed sown along the path. The one who received the seed that fell on rocky places is the man who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away. The one who received the seed that fell among the thorns is the man who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful. But the one who received the seed that fell on good soil is the man who hears the word and understands it. He produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown."

Katzpur,

Can we agree that Biblical truth is intentionally revealed to some sinners and intentionally concealed to other sinners? - BT

Katzpur · Apr 28, 2007

bible truth said:
Can we agree that Biblical truth is intentionally revealed to some sinners and intentionally concealed to other sinners?

I don't believe we can. I believe (i.e. it is the official position of my Church) that God is no respecter of persons. He does not want to lose any of His children and would not intentionally conceal anything from them that they are prepared to learn. He does not, however, reveal to them that which they are unable to understand, but may not reveal something to one person at the same time as He reveals it to someone else. He has all the patience we lack, but chooses to condemn no one without giving him ample opportunity to understand his word.

1 Corinthians 3:1-2 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

2 Nephi 28:30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.

bible truth · Apr 28, 2007

Katzpur said:
I don't believe we can. I believe (i.e. it is the official position of my Church) that God is no respecter of persons. He does not want to lose any of His children and would not intentionally conceal anything from them that they are prepared to learn. He does not, however, reveal to them that which they are unable to understand, but may not reveal something to one person at the same time as He reveals it to someone else. He has all the patience we lack, but chooses to condemn no one without giving him ample opportunity to understand his word.

1 Corinthians 3:1-2 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

2 Nephi 28:30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.

Hey Katzpur,

We are starting to see the big divide between the LDS Church and evangelical Christianity. You are bound by official LDS doctrine as compared to what is proclaimed by Scripture alone. I will get off this site until Monday. Here is your homework. Who are the children of God? What does the Bible say about the 2nd Adam? The LDS church takes a very big departure from biblical revelation on these two essential issues. - BT

Katzpur · Apr 28, 2007

bible truth said:
We are starting to see the big divide between the LDS Church and evangelical Christianity.

Starting to see? Holy cow, where have you been?

You are bound by official LDS doctrine as compared to what is proclaimed by Scripture alone.

Yes, we are bound by LDS doctrine while you are bound by Evangelical doctrine. It's just that our "scriptures" are more comprehensive than yours. And, just in case you missed my first, second, third, and fourth requests for an answer, I will ask for a fifth time: Where does the Bible claim to be "sufficient" for truth? And why, if it really is, do some 30,000 different Christian denominations -- the vast majority of which believe in Sola Scriptura -- not interpret the Bible in the same way?

I will get off this site until Monday.

I've seen close to a dozen posts since you last said that. I understand; this place is addicting.

Who are the children of God?

In a very strict sense, He is the Father of the spirits of all of us; we are all His offspring. That does not mean that all of His children will be deemed worthy to return to His presence following their resurrection.

Where does the Bible say about the 2nd Adam?

Nowhere that I am aware of, so why don't you just enlighten me? I seriously don't have time to try to look for the hidden clues you want me to find. I've already responded to your quote about Romans 5:14 in the "Are Mormons Christians?" thread, if that's the verse you're referring to.

The LDS church takes a very big departure from the biblical revelation on these two essential issues.

In terms of the existence of a second Adam, we clearly disagree, although you have not yet shown me where the Bible speaks of this individual. In terms of who God considers His children, you've kind of jumped the gun on me. You ask whom we believe the children of God to be, and then, before I even answer, you tell me that I'm departing from scripture. Please just state where you believe our beliefs contradict those in the Bible so we can get on with this debate. That's what I said in my OP that I wanted you do so. So far, you've not produced one shread of evidence that our scriptures contradict yours. I'm afraid I'm starting to lose patience and do not intend to continue to waste my time much longer.

bible truth · Apr 29, 2007

quote=bible truth;806659]

Summary of beliefs

Joseph Smith was asked about the basic beliefs of the Church. He summarized the teachings and doctrines in 13 basic points which are known as The Articles of Faith of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are:

We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adams transgression.
We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.
We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.
We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.
We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.
We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.
We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon this the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.
We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of PaulWe believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

____________________________________________________________________
Dear Mormon friends,

I am proclaiming that 10 of the 13 points of faith above are not true according to the Holy Bible. You guys are making it impossible for me to answer of all your great questions. I don't have the personal time to participate in 3 one on one debates with Jonny, Aqualung, and Katzpur, debate on the Thread of "Are Mormons Christians" created by Katzpur. Comprehend and me also are having our own discussion at the same time. I need your help if you want to continue our discussions. Can someone from the LDS church please create a new Thread where we can debate the LDS "Statement of Faith" above? I will only participate on the newly created Thread. I can only take one point at a time to post my biblical response to refute it. Lets call the new Thread LDS 13 points of faith verses Sola Scripturaor something like that, okay?

My goal is not to convert you to what I believe. My goal is to objectively show you that a faith defined by the doctrine of Sola Scriptura will proclaim a different gospel and different Christ than what is declared by official teaching of "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints". At the end of our debate, you will have to either believe in the restoration of the apostate historical church, or reject this distinctive proclaimed by your church. At the end, you will either embrace the claim of apostolic succession made by the LDS church, or you will reject this essential claim.

Written with the love of Christ and united in Him by faith alone,
BT[/quote]

Katzpur · Apr 29, 2007

bible truth said:
I am proclaiming that 10 of the 13 points of faith above are not true according to the Holy Bible. You guys are making it impossible for me to answer of all your great questions. I don't have the personal time to participate in 3 one on one debates with Jonny, Aqualung, and Katzpur, debate on the Thread of "Are Mormons Christians" created by Katzpur.

And yet every one of these threads was created at your request, Bible Truth.

Can someone from the LDS church please create a new Thread where we can debate the LDS "Statement of Faith" above? I will only participate on the newly created Thread. I can only take one point at a time to post my biblical response to refute it. Lets call the new Thread LDS 13 points of faith verses Sola Scripturaor something like that, okay?

I'll create such a thread. I'll call it, "The 13 Articles of Faith." You can then have a go at proving them to be Biblically false. Good luck. Based on what we've all seen so far, you're going to need it.

Katzpur the Great vs Bible Truth

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon

bible truth

Active Member

bible truth

Active Member

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon

bible truth

Active Member

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon

bible truth

Active Member

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon

bible truth

Active Member

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon

bible truth

Active Member

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon

bible truth

Active Member

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon

bible truth

Active Member

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon