silvermoon383
Well-Known Member
So uss_bigd, would it be a fair assumption that you don't do anything that isn't in the Bible?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Fish hunter
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...r-madhatter85-lds-bible-word.html#post1152486
1 on 1 you and me
Fish hunter
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...r-madhatter85-lds-bible-word.html#post1152486
1 on 1 you and me
Hello,
I have basically focused on Fish-Hunter's posts in this thread. I have been critical of a general sloppiness and failure to give any type of wherefore for many of his charges: example, and example. I have also noted a fundamental category mistake in his stance that undercuts the whole tenor of his postion: post. Even so, I noted this statement at the head of your challenge: "Due to the extremely annoying level of anti-mormonism eminating from the lips of Fish-Hunter i will challenge him to a 1 on 1 about how the LDS view the Bible so he will shut up." Fish-Hunter believes his view is the correct one and Mormonism is flawed. He is also passionate about his views. I think that is fine, a free exchange of ideas is a good thing. For what it's worth, I don't think Fish-Hunter intends to be annoying, nor does he strike me as any kind of bigot or a nasty fellow.
I have also noted a fundamental category mistake in his stance that undercuts the whole tenor of his postion: post.
the way he words his statements are definitely passive aggressive. he does nto wish to know more but rather to "prove us wrong" and ignore the questions he can't answer.
So uss_bigd, would it be a fair assumption that you don't do anything that isn't in the Bible?
I agree. While attempting to debate with him may be like talking to a brick wall, he has not been overly antagonistic or hateful. But I guess we, me and Orontes, are more accustomed to extremely more vehement posters than Fish-Hunter.Hello,
I have basically focused on Fish-Hunter's posts in this thread. I have been critical of a general sloppiness and failure to give any type of wherefore for many of his charges: example, and example. I have also noted a fundamental category mistake in his stance that undercuts the whole tenor of his postion: post. Even so, I noted this statement at the head of your challenge: "Due to the extremely annoying level of anti-mormonism eminating from the lips of Fish-Hunter i will challenge him to a 1 on 1 about how the LDS view the Bible so he will shut up." Fish-Hunter believes his view is the correct one and Mormonism is flawed. He is also passionate about his views. I think that is fine, a free exchange of ideas is a good thing. For what it's worth, I don't think Fish-Hunter intends to be annoying, nor does he strike me as any kind of bigot or a nasty fellow.
This the best you can come up with in reply?
I disagree.That was how you were consistently replying to my post. so let me ask you
Is disagreeing the best you can come with in a reply? :slap:
Welcome Marie! And good luck getting an answer to what you asked. I've been here for four months, and am still wondering.New here.
Why on earth does anybody (specifically the Fundamentalist Christians) feel they have the right to tell the members of the LDS Church that they are not Christians and why would you bother to waste your time to do so when you can do so much more for the world and Christianity?
Well, if you don't do anything that isn't found in the Bible, why are you sitting at your desk (or wherever) and using a computer? I can find no mention of a computer anywhere in the Bible.That is fair ... why do you ask?
Fish-hunter, Sola'lor already answered me that some of their doctrines were "given" to Joseph Smth directly by THEIR Christs.
his exacts words were "JS did not write @#$%% doctrine while reading the NT, Jesus told JS himself"
So, you already won....
Yeah, I kind of thought you'd find something wrong with them. Well, to me the gospel of Jesus Christ encompasses all of these things: the resurrection, salvation, love, and obedience. Those are the things Paul was writing about.
Forgive the misunderstanding, Fish. For some reason, I thought you wanted us to address Paul's 13 epistles. I can't imagine where on earth I would have gotten that idea. Now, we're just supposed to zero in on Romans 1 through 4. I guess that's the "LDS Challenge." I'd better get right on it before you change your mind again and tell me to address one verse in particular since the rest really aren't part of "the Biblical gospel according to the Apostle Paul." These moving targets can be so frustrating!
If you do them for righteousness then yes. If you do them to receive or contribute to salvation then yes it is an insult because the price for your salvation has been paid in full.
No, keeping His commandments is good but to imagine that it is necessary to supplement the atonement with these is.
Well you can't get any cheaper than free, but it is only free to us, it cost God the death of His only begotten Son, nothing cheap about that.
Epistle to Romans 9:30-32 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
It is plain in the passage above that righteousness is attained by faith, faithfulness is not mentioned here. Faithfulness is what you often talk about i.e keeping the commandments, persevering etc. These things are good and right in their proper usage but to seek righteousness by them is folly for righteousness comes by faith and no other way. Righteousness is the gift of God received at justification which we receive when we believe and at that moment, before we do any good deeds at all. Christ Himself is our only righteousness and the only righteousness acceptable to God for He is perfect. Even our best good deeds are tainted with our sinful hands.
For clarification, we are using the 13 Epsitles of Paul in regards to the Gospel of God's grace. Romans chapter 1 through chapter 4 is specific in regards to the gospel of Christ. Yet, the gospel is found throughout the 13 Epistles, especially the Book of Galatians and Romans. Paul speaks on other topics too in the 13 Epistles, but we are focusing on the gospel in the thesis statement found in Romans 1:16-17.
Romans 1:16-17:
I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."
To begin with, I think a lot of people (Mormons and non-Mormons) use the terms "sola fide" and "sola gratia" interchangeable...