Dear Christians,

1) You claim that "Christianity" is composed of the Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox traditions? But, did you know that the RC Church taught for almost 500 years that all Protestants were doomed to eternal hell-fire? Did you know that the Eastern Orthodox Churches still teach this?

2) Evangelicals are Protestants. WHO have YOU the right to determine who is Christian and who is not?

3) What sins can you commit after you are saved/born again, and still go to Heaven when you die (murder, incest, rape, bestiality....)?

4) If "a Christian would never do such sins" then please list the sins a Christian CAN DO and yet still be saved. Can you list them please?

5) You're so sure the Book of Mormon is bogus because it makes claims that are against science, yet your Bible says that whales were created BEFORE the Sun and Stars, that Joshua made the Sun stand still (the Sun does not move...according to science), and that all races and animals came from the Ark, which science says is utterly impossible. Can you explain this contradiction?

6) YOu believe that Mormons can't be "Christians" because they believe men may become Gods, but the early Christians believed that, and the Orthodox Churches still do, are THEY not Christians either?

7) You believe that one is "saved" eternally by believing in one's' heart that Jesus is their Savior, and making a mouth confession. Ok...then WHY continue go to Church and study the Bible and pay a pastor a nice salary to preach for 90 minutes a week, if one is already "saved"?

8) Some Evangelicals believe that their NON-Christian loved ones will also be saved because "God is merciful". Why is God so merciful to your loved ones who are not Mormons, but also not Christians, but NOT to Mormons who are also your loved ones?


Please answer...if you can.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2013 02:26AM by Susan I/S.

One who also questions Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dear Christians,
>
> 1) You claim that "Christianity" is composed of
> the Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Eastern
> Orthodox traditions? But, did you know that the RC
> Church taught for almost 500 years that all
> Protestants were doomed to eternal hell-fire? Did
> you know that the Eastern Orthodox Churches still
> teach this?

Let me respond to this one last.

> 2) Evangelicals are Protestants. WHO have YOU the
> right to determine who is Christian and who is
> not?

Evangelicals in the contemporary American sense grew out of the Protestant tradition. Historically, Protestantism was defined by the "solas"- grace only, faith only, scripture only, Christ only. These were meant to contrast with the sale of indulgences and "sacred works", eg, veneration of relics, necessary to release a soul from purgatory, either a dead person's or yours in advance. Purgatory and getting out of it were the crux of the Protestant Reformation. If you've read much of the Bible you know there was no basis in OT or NT scripture for purgatory.
The broad definition of Christianity is belief in Jesus of Nazareth as the son of God and the Messiah, whose death atoned for the sins of humanity. If you've never done anything wrong in your life, intentionally or unintentionally, then I congratulate you. The rest of us are very grateful for forgiveness.
I grew up with a mormon church that called believing neighbors "gentiles" and their churches "abominations", except for the RCC that was called "the great whore of Babylon." Personally, I dislike judgement on anyone's faith- that's between the individual and his or her Creator, but we are encouraged to distinguish between true and false prophets; JS Jr. fits the latter.

> 3) What sins can you commit after you are
> saved/born again, and still go to Heaven when you
> die (murder, incest, rape, bestiality....)?
That's just it- there is no "list". According to Christ in the NT, only one sin is "unforgivable" and that is "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." What that means varies in how different churches interpret it. For some, evangelicals come to mind, that's using God's name in vain. In more traditional churches, it's the sin of unbelief in the Holy Spirit.
This is tough territory for many Christians because it means death bed acceptances are as valid as that of people who believe and serve their entire lives. In theory, Hitler could have repented and believed at the last moment and been redeemed. That's difficult for Christians of many denominations but look at the parable in Matthew 20: "Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?" We also look at this to mean God wants as many people saved as possible. The next question usually is along the lines of 'why not be as bad as you want and repent at the last moment of your life?' This is my answer only, but I would miss all the years of joy in the Lord I have in this life.

> 4) If "a Christian would never do such sins" then
> please list the sins a Christian CAN DO and yet
> still be saved. Can you list them please?
Of course Christians "do such sins". Christianily doesn't produce perfect people and more than rationalism does. Or tscc. Belief requires that we repent from our sins, repent which means "to rethink." I'm going to borrow from a Hasidic rabbi who was asked by one of his students how we know when we've been forgiven of a particular sin. His response was "when we don't commit that sin any longer."
As for a "list", see above.
Mormonism has difficulty embracing what Christ meant when He said, "He who is forgiven much, loves much. But he who is forgiven little, loves little."

> 5) You're so sure the Book of Mormon is bogus
> because it makes claims that are against science,
> yet your Bible says that whales were created
> BEFORE the Sun and Stars, that Joshua made the Sun
> stand still (the Sun does not move...according to
> science), and that all races and animals came from
> the Ark, which science says is utterly impossible.
> Can you explain this contradiction?
Because JS and Cowdery plagerized both the KJV OT and NT so precisely in the BOM, I can't call all of it "bogus." It contains the word of God. But the BOM history of the Hebrews in the new world is discredited on too many levels to be believed. Another angle to look at the BOM is it contains the only prophecies in all of Judeo-Christian history in which a prophet receives a prophecy that elevates himself. I call bogus on that. Look at what John the Baptist, who never was a temple priest, said regarding Christ: "He must increase, but I must decrease."
Remember that the BOM is held up as the most correct book ever written, still is, and every line of it is literal. This leaves no room for interpretations or metaphors, although apparently does allow for rewording. Again I'm going to use the words of a Hasidic rabbi who said the first five books of the OT, the Torah, are meant to be understood on multiple levels. If you want to make a science book out of a faith book, then by the same thinking, pull out a chemistry book and use it for a guide for living.

> 6) YOu believe that Mormons can't be "Christians"
> because they believe men may become Gods, but the
> early Christians believed that, and the Orthodox
> Churches still do, are THEY not Christians
> either?

You're mistaken about early Christians believing in multiple Gods, and that the Orthodox churches still do. Were you referring to saints in the RCC and Orthodox tradition? Not the same. One triune God is common to most, but not all, Christian churches. You brought up science so think of the three states of matter- different but the same. Ice, liquid water, water vapor- all are still H2O.
The exmo in me still cringes when I hear mormons aren't Christian, but I have to admit tscc has the veneer of Christianity and not much more. Tokens at the veil? Atonement at Gethsemane? JS sitting in judgement? Exaltation? Worthiness? These are in direct conflict with the teachings of Christ. But used to be tscc liked it like that, liked being different, as if ignoring anything Jesus said outside of the BOM somehow proved the restoration. Leave it to JS to "restore" one of the temptations of original sin, (you will become like God), and "restore" the separation of God and man at the veil in the temple, contrary to the descriptions of the crucifiction. As tscc tries to mainstream itself, there are catch words used more frequently. "Mercy" and "grace" seem to top the list. But if grace is the undeserved (unearned) love of God, then mormonism understands very little about it.
JS blew it on Elohim. Think of it as the royal we used in the Elizabethan English he was so fond of.

> 7) You believe that one is "saved" eternally by
> believing in one's' heart that Jesus is their
> Savior, and making a mouth confession. Ok...then
> WHY continue go to Church and study the Bible and
> pay a pastor a nice salary to preach for 90
> minutes a week, if one is already "saved"?
Why go to the meeting house and listen to each other's testimonies- to build up faith? Ditto for going to church and studying the Bible, AND to learn how to fulfill better the commandments to love God and and one another. Simple enough.
I look to my church to show me areas to give and to provide opportunities for me to give. Our congregation raised money to build houses in Nicaragua this past year. In cooperation with churches of different denominations, we take our turn providing a meal at a homeless shelter once/month. We provide assistance with utility bills for anyone who comes to us, regardless of church affiliation or beliefs or non-belief. The older ladies make quilts for an infant crisis center run by the Jr. League and the rest of the congregation brings in layettes and diapers. We cook for meals on wheels, tutor inter-city kids at their schools, run a coat drive for a Latin American church- I'm sure I don't know every way we as a church work to alleviate need- it's good the left hand doesn't always know what the right hand is doing. AND we take care of our own. Connecting to this is important to me. Oh, and as a denomination, we built a wing of a hospital, not a luxury mall or any other money making venture. These things don't make us a perfect church but one who is learning to serve better. And by God, it makes us happier.
Mormonism isn't and never was faith vs works, but rather faith vs temple. Very different.
Our paid clergey are able to support the congregation full time. They are well educated and generally know what they're talking about. Typically that 90 minutes is uplifting, hopefully renewing and recentering.

> 8) Some Evangelicals believe that their
> NON-Christian loved ones will also be saved
> because "God is merciful". Why is God so merciful
> to your loved ones who are not Mormons, but also
> not Christians, but NOT to Mormons who are also
> your loved ones?
Ah, there's the rub. See, it doesn't matter if we get every jot of doctrine correct as much as it does that we love God and treat other people with love, including those outside of the church. THAT is the commandment of Christ. What if there are points of the doctrine in my particular denomination that we ultimately find out are wrong? Are we damned then? Of course not. That thinking reduces God to JS's level.
Are mormons damned? Of course not. But they are going to be severely disappointed to find out JS didn't show them the way to a better paradise, and they're going to have to share it with a whole lot of souls they thought they were superior to. Oh, and the harem and a planet of your own are out, too. Read what Christ had to say about existance after the resurrection in Matthew, Mark and Luke.

> Please answer...if you can.
I'll take your first question now. It is true that prior to Vatican II in 1964 that protestants were officially "heretics" to the RCC. Vatican II didn't magically pop out of a hat, but came after years of meaningful discussions between Catholics and Protestants. The official description now of non-Catholic Christians is "departed bretheren." Yes, the RCC considers itself the true church, but Rome in all it's glory doesn't consign the rest of Christendom to hell, or even a lesser kingdom. Personally, we have friends who are Greek Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox, one is a priest, and we've attended church with them. They believe their doctrines are more correct than ours, but they do NOT believe we are "doomed to eternal hell-fire." We've learned to "celebrate our differences."
But, if you want to dredge up the Catholic Church's response to the protestant reformation 500 years ago, then remember that the "restored" church not only didn't exist then, but in its brief history, tscc has abandoned doctrine taught by its living prophets. God-Adam and blood atonement come to mind. Speaking of eternal hell-fire, at the time I walked away from tscc, to hear the JS gospel and reject it was a one-way ticket to some place not so nice, and to leave it made one a "son of perdition," as god damned as they come.
Many TBMs still believe that when it comes to their Christian neighbors, 'the only thing we have in common with them is baptism.' If that's what you think, then open a discussion on all those things mormonism teaches were "restored" to JS, but have been practiced in other denominations for centuries before he was born. We can start with confirmation and the Melchizedek priesthood and go forward from there. Churches and synagogues cooperate on humanitarian aid and work from their common grounds, but mormons can't. Love of God, love of mankind- nothing else comes before these. According to Christ "On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets."

I think that you need to read up on Theosis in the Orthodox tradition and Divinization in the Catholic tradition. They both posit that one can become one with god and thus reach divinity. It isn't as individualistic as Mormon theosis but reaching divine immortality has always been the goal of Christianity.

As far as Paul v James or Faith v Works, I don't know how anyone who has read the NT can pretend that Mormons are the only ones who "deny" the Christ sacrifice by requiring individual worthiness. Again Mormons like to take everything to the extreme but this dispute is not new to Mormons it has been going on since the beginning.

Christian philosophy and dogma isn't near as buttoned up as you have suggested. In the seas of theology Christianity is probably the Pacific Ocean, as varied as it is large. Just because Mormons are in Bering Sea and your Christianity is in the South Pacific doesn't mean that it isn't the same ocean.

Fair enough since I brought up purgatory, "the cleansing." Divination in Catholic theology is more akin to achieving Godhead in eastern religions. Union with God is far different from becoming a god yourelf. These aren't oceans apart, they're, uh, worlds apart. Pop in the premortal existence and the council of gods and you have something quite divergent from the theoists who maintain one supreme being. But I agree, this board isn't appropriate to that discussion.

The crux of the reformation/revolution wasn't "works" as in James or Micah 6, for examples, which are in line with the two great commandments taught by Christ, but "works" as in the veneration of relics, kissing the steps of a cathedral, pilgrimages, the purchase of indulgences. Throw in the intercession of indulgences on behalf of the dead, and works of this kind are very similar to "temple work" rather than acts of charity. We struggle with understanding the context of the times; to own a relic 500 years ago was a money maker, as the sale of indulgences were of course, and not far off from the full tithing requirement for a temple recommend. In Vatican II, the RCC changed more than the status of protestants, the meaning of purgatory and "works" changed as well. Search the the Vatican website for "the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" between Catholics and Lutherans and you should be able to see clearly the difference.

Cipher, you're right of course, the original post was trolling. The intimation was "you Christians can't answer these questions." So apologies for my lengthy reply. The questions were enumerated.

Ecclesiastes: "He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity into men's minds. Even so they cannot know what God has done from the beginning." He has made us this way, to question, to try to figure it all out, from our science to our queries on the nature of God. I guess this is why science and religion don't seem hostile to one another, to me, because we were made to look for answers, even though we can't fit the entirety together, ie, no religion or church understands the infinite 100% either. "I know there is nothing better for them to do than be happy and do good as long as they live."

I appreciate the response, we happen to disagree. You put the two under a microscope and see many differences, I look at it from 30000 feet and it looks the same to me.

No offense taken. In part, that's what this board is for, if I understand correctly- where questioning brings you to. You look at mormonism and conclude there is no God. 30+ years ago, I looked at it, concluded JS corrupted it, and often for his own benefit.

I didn't really look at Mormonism and conclude that it was wrong. My issue started and ended with god, ditching Mormonism was just a fortunate side effect.

talk about not keeping it simple. Does the OP really want an answer, or do you just want to Crucify Christianity in General? You can thank the Jews for Christianity. That's what Christianity is based on, Christ was Jewish- born to a Jewish family. Some people like to go to church to hear (whatever their version is ) of Christianity to hear the message, some go to church to talk to other people, some people go to church because they HAVE to go, and sometimes people go to church to do evil things under the pretense of goodness. But being a Christian and belonging to a Religious group don't always go hand-in-hand. Back in the day, centuries ago when not everyone owned a Bible and most people did not know how to read and had to rely on whatever preacher was available to teach them the preacher's version of Christianity. The Book of Mormon has no moral teachings or value to it. (there are biblical part plagarized in it tho...) The Story : "The Monkey's Paw" has more moral teaching to it than the book of Mormon.

1. What does God look like?
2. How do you know it's God answering prayers and not some impostor, or just coincidence and luck?
3. Why wasn't Jesus a Christian?

I thought trolling and inciting "religious wars" wasn't allowed here. I'm an atheist, but even so find this post annoying. It's bitchy, silly (I can see easy responses for most questions, some being "Because we don't think that."), and doesn't appear to serve the stated purpose of the board.

Bottom line: some guy had to kill himself so his dad would forgive you for being born. Praise Jesus

One who also questions Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> 6) YOu believe that Mormons can't be "Christians"
> because they believe men may become Gods, but the
> early Christians believed that, and the Orthodox
> Churches still do, are THEY not Christians
> either?

The phrase "the early Christians" is poorly defined. There
were many different early "Christianities" with differing
beliefs. That's one of the reasons for Paul's letters trying
to quash heresies etc.

What finally won out was not representative of all of "early
Christianity." Mormon apologists are fond of finding
something written by an early "Christian" that is similar to
current Mormon doctrine (even if they have to take it out of
context) and saying, "see we're a restoration of early
Christianity."

I thought that the idea of this forum was to help people to free themselves from the shackles of Mormonism. I realise that some possibly need to vent their feelings but should doing that involve attacking the beliefs of & causing offence to, decent Christian people who are as far removed from Mormon ideology as atheists are from Christianity? Having had a raw deal from Mormonism does not give anyone the right to belittle & mock those who have a different worldview; perhaps it’s a hangover from their Mormon past. I’m saddened to find that there are people on this forum who, quite deliberately & maliciously, antagonise those who, because of their beliefs are extremely unlikely to retaliate.

It might be a good idea for those whose knowledge of Christianity appears to vary from extremely limited to zero, to at least make a token effort to understand exactly what it is they’re so critical of before placing themselves in the position of telling others what to believe.
So, having said that, here’s a question for all of those who think it’s clever to mock Christians.
Have you read any of the stories in here concerning the free meals regularly served up for the needy, have you read the tales of the handouts, the soup kitchens, the warm bed for the night, the helping hand offered to those less fortunate? If you haven’t then perhaps you should & if you have then maybe you should feel a little ashamed. It is CHRISTIANS in the main who run those places & do those things because of love for their fellow men!

“I think that you need to read up on Theosis in the Orthodox tradition and Divinization in the Catholic tradition. They both posit that one can become one with god and thus reach divinity.”

Jacob, I have no intention of debating theosis with you, this is neither the time nor the place, suffice it to say that perhaps it’s you who needs to study a little more. If you did you might realise that theosis is not, as you are attempting to make it, some kind of heathen concept whereby a man might achieve divinity & become a God. It is in fact very similar to sanctification, which has been Christian doctrine from the very beginning. Theosis, or partaking of the Divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) does NOT mean becoming a God & it is NOT dogma, it is doctrine (understand the difference) Do you really imagine that you are revealing something new to us?
As for the rest of your comments, it’s enough to refer you to what I said in the second paragraph above.

You are attempting, in typical Mormon fashion, to twist traditional Christian belief into something that is more easily knocked down i.e. you create a straw man.. No, I didn’t say you were a Mormon, I said that like Mormons you, along with many others, are happy to twist & distort Christian theology in order to score points. Not exactly the honourable thing to do is it?
I suppose people have always mocked things they cannot understand & I don’t suppose that’s going to change anytime soon.

What you said.

"If you did you might realise that theosis is not, as you are attempting to make it, some kind of heathen concept whereby a man might achieve divinity & become a God. It is in fact very similar to sanctification, which has been Christian doctrine from the very beginning. Theosis, or partaking of the Divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) does NOT mean becoming a God & it is NOT dogma, it is doctrine (understand the difference) Do you really imagine that you are revealing something new to us?"



What I said.

"I think that you need to read up on Theosis in the Orthodox tradition and Divinization in the Catholic tradition. They both posit that one can become one with god and thus reach divinity. It isn't as individualistic as Mormon theosis but reaching divine immortality has always been the goal of Christianity."


Words you used that I didn't.

heathen
becoming A God (I emphasized A)


I simply point out that theosis is a Christian doctrine that posits that one can become one with god and thus reach (you said participate but I don't see much difference) divinity and isn't all that dissimilar than the individualist doctrine of Mormonism.



As far as the whole idea that Christianity is represented by its works, I disagree. Is the Muslim that gives food to the poor a christian, and would you dare call them a christian?

You called me ignorant and dishonorable how christian of you.

Ageed interested observer



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2013 02:18PM by bona dea.

If you think the post violates what this site is intended for, report it to the admins, they, not YOU, are the ones that make the determination.

Easy:

There is no God. Not 2000 years or 200 years ago, and not now.

There was no Christ, no Holy Ghost, no Savior of mankind. There was also no Resurrection, Second Coming, or dead rising up from the grave when Jesus is said to have done so.

So, quibbling about trifles (aka splitting hairs, removing beams and motes from anyone's eyes, etc), or fighting over whose God is better or chosen people more right, more worthy or gets to go to Heaven by pushing others to the back of the line, is moot.

As is using the Bible to try and prove the Bible is true, is an exercise in futility and ridiculousness, beyond measure.

There. Done. Questions answered.

Now go sit in the corner with your face against the wall for FIGHTING about religion.

How horribly rude and inconsiderate you are. We must allow every preposterous claim in the bible, and each incoherent utterance by theologians go unchallenged, because sometimes christians give food to the poor.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2013 01:34PM by ladell.

Thank you for sharing your opinions. Don't be offended if I choose not to agree.

And I bet Fred Phelps disagrees as well. Don't take offense, but I don't really care what religious people have to say about god, until you have some empirical evidence, you can keep your belief in Thor. Oh, wait, was it Ra that you believed in? Or was was it Zeus?

All of the answers to you questions can be summed up by a few little observations:

"Christianity" is not homogenous. Christians as a group includes the good, bad and the ugly.

No one can rightfully tell everyone else what to believe, or adequately represent the beliefs of anyone but himself or herself.

Christian A saying that Christian B is going to hell is nonsense.
Christian A saying that Christian B believes X is not a reliable source of Christian B's personal beliefs.

"'Christianity' is not homogenous. Christians as a group includes the good, bad and the ugly." Then how come so many Christians claim that it is homogenous?

Jacob
I’m aware of your exact words concerning theosis but it was you who introduced it to a discussion that was concerned with the Mormon belief that men can become Gods. It seemed to me that your intent was to distort Christian doctrine, to align it with LDS belief & that is why I said it was not an honourable thing to do. I did NOT say you were dishonourable, neither did I, at any time, say you were ignorant; if you are thinking that my reference to “extremely limited to Zero” was an attack on your intelligence be assured that I was NOT talking about you, on the contrary you are obviously a very intelligent man. My comments in the first three paragraphs were of a general nature & were not levelled at anyone in particular. By the way, I didn’t say participate in the divine nature I said ‘partake of’ & even though you disagree, that is something quite different. The idea of becoming ‘godlike’ or a god is totally alien to Christian belief.

“It isn't as individualistic as Mormon theosis but reaching divine immortality has always been the goal of Christianity.”
As far as I’m aware there is no such thing as Mormon theosis, the term is entirely Christian & describes something completely different to Mormon belief & as I said previously, it is doctrine held by some Christian Churches, it is NOT dogma otherwise all Christians would believe it.

“As far as the whole idea that Christianity is represented by its works, I disagree. Is the Muslim that gives food to the poor a christian, and would you dare call them a christian?”

I made no comment on works or Christianity. The point I was trying to make was, & I’m sure you know this, that the people (in this instance they happen to be Christians) who are so maliciously mocked & talked down to as if they were idiots happen to be the very people who are doing so much good in the community as a whole.

Ladell said
“How horribly rude and inconsiderate you are. “
Huh? I’m rude & inconsiderate because I defend my beliefs? Sorry, I didn’t realise that was against the house rules. Do you ever read what some (not all) atheists say about Christians in here? I’m sure if you did you might come to realise that some of their comments (again, not all) are not only rude & inconsiderate they are all too often arrogant & downright offensive.

“We must allow every preposterous claim in the bible, and each incoherent utterance by theologians go unchallenged, because sometimes christians give food to the poor.”

Where did I say that, where did I even hint at that? If you think that certain things in the bible are preposterous (& some certainly seem to be) & that theologians should be challenged (I agree 100% that a lot of what they say should be) then it’s fine by me but I am NOT saying, not even hinting, that you or anyone else should have to accept these things because of Christian charity. To be honest the suggestion that I would expect such a thing is more rude & inconsiderate than anything I may have said in my previous post.

+1

The original post was intended as an attack on Christianity.

I'll take what you are saying at face value, and disagree with your premise.

Mine was a response to "bookratt". In fairness, it was jesting your original post.

What you mean is that Christians won't give you an answer you will agree with.

As for #2, I really don't know who IS Christian. Presumably, only God knows for sure, though there are things that give us big hints. One thing I know is that if you deny most all the key tenets of the Christian faith, as taught in the Bible, that probably means you are not a Christian.

You are a Muslim, an atheist, a Buddhist, or a whatever, but you're not a Christian...and the members of all of these groups would agree. Only Mormons would not agree.

NotIntolerant Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As for #2, I really don't know who IS Christian.
> Presumably, only God knows for sure...

Yep, no tokens necessary.

Funny, I don't see many giving any answers to most of the questions. Including you. What I do see is people, presumably christian supporters, bashing him for asking them.

I'll read all this when I have time, but I wonder if the OP even wanted answers to his/her questions.

What I wonder is why Christians just don't answer the questions instead of showing the Christian love and bashing him for daring to ask questions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2013 10:58PM by MJ.