The Folk Prophet Posted April 21, 2017 Report Share Posted April 21, 2017 1 hour ago, Carborendum said: You might be forgetting that Rob only believes in a Heaven and Hell as well. That's why it is as confusing to him as it would be to non-Mormons. Yeah...interesting how when someone disbelieves the doctrines of the church to which they are supposedly devout that they find said doctrines confusing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted April 21, 2017 Report Share Posted April 21, 2017 47 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said: Yeah...interesting how when someone disbelieves the doctrines of the church to which they are supposedly devout that they find said doctrines confusing. What can I say, on the one hand I know this is the true church with the proper authority, and on the other hand I also know we have some basic fundamental problems with our doctrine. Ive seen in these forums where almost any topic on salvation goes on and on and on. Its just not me that notice the contradictions or problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted April 21, 2017 Report Share Posted April 21, 2017 16 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said: Anything is confusing if people don't understand it. That doesn't make the thing itself confusing. If I saved you from a burning building would you presume that meant that I'd saved you from drowning? Saved requires a "from". The only reason there's any confusion is because in the so-called "Christian" world there is only heaven and hell...hence only one "saved". The tradition of that has confused some people who haven't bothered to actually think about the matter, but then again, it doesn't exactly require much depth of thought. In point of fact, only those who are trying to explain things in "Christian" ways and fit it into the gospel cause any confusion in the matter. Everyone else simply knows that saved means exalted and there's no reason to confuse the matter beyond that for most discussions. "Saved" in the scriptures means to be saved from physical and spiritual death. It means one is ultimately saved from the eternal hell and into the kingdom of heaven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted April 21, 2017 Report Share Posted April 21, 2017 (edited) 15 hours ago, JohnsonJones said: Saved apparently means different things to different Mormons. Saved is something similar to every Christian, which is that you are saved from Sin (and Hell) and physical death (hence resurrection). Because of the Atonement we are not automatically going to Hell, and we can be saved from our sins and Hell as well as death itself (resurrection). We are SAVED by the great mercy of the Lord. He is the one that saves us. Using the word in CONTEXT, rather than what some LDS ascribe it to, the word Damn as in the New Testament means condemned to suffer eternal punishment in Hell, or condemned to a spiritual death away from heaven. Yes, we are saved from Damnation in that idea, but that's the same as being Saved from Hell. What SOME Mormons are thinking is more like a DAM (which is something that can hold back water or is a barrier to something) which is a barrier in their minds to eternal exaltation/advancement which is entirely different. The idea of LDS exaltation, as some are using it, is mostly a FOREIGN concept in the Christian world, and some would indicate it would be heresy in most Christian Religions. Salvation on the otherhand, as understood by Christian Religions, which is being saved in the Kingdom of the Lord, or saved from our Sins and Hell is very similar. As per Russell M. Nelson, he explains it thus April 2008 Russell M. Nelson's Salvation and Exaltation And from the LDS org under it's guide to the scriptures it states... Guide to the Scriptures - Salvation Though it appears some may have various definitions and ideas in these regards. As you have mentioned, "damnation" only has one meaning and it is to be condemned to hell or the state of the condemned in hell. Somewhere in our Mormon past the word and definition of "dam" came to the table to take place of certain instances of "damn". The problem however is that it is wholly unwarranted and creates a lot of contradictions. One of those is, according to Bruce R. McConkie, that it is possible to be saved into a state of damnation- to be saved and damned at the same time. Thats obviously a huge stretch and completely wrong. If one is saved, its always being saved from damnation when speaking of the gospel and pkan of salvation. It is impossible to be saved into damnation. Edited April 21, 2017 by Rob Osborn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Folk Prophet Posted April 21, 2017 Report Share Posted April 21, 2017 16 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said: Its just not me that notice the contradictions or problems. Of course not. You're not the only one who has problems with doctrines. Especially in online forum world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Folk Prophet Posted April 21, 2017 Report Share Posted April 21, 2017 11 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said: "Saved" in the scriptures means to be saved from physical and spiritual death. It means one is ultimately saved from the eternal hell and into the kingdom of heaven. Most the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted April 21, 2017 Report Share Posted April 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said: Most the time. Whenever the scriptures are in duscussion of the plan of salvation, to be saved always means to be saved from hell and into heaven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runewell Posted April 24, 2017 Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 On 4/21/2017 at 10:07 AM, Rob Osborn said: What can I say, on the one hand I know this is the true church with the proper authority, and on the other hand I also know we have some basic fundamental problems with our doctrine. Ive seen in these forums where almost any topic on salvation goes on and on and on. Its just not me that notice the contradictions or problems. That is quite the contradiction. How can the true church have doctrinal problems? Even though we all will pick some church to go to, people are going to invariably come to different interpretations of scripture. So it is unrealistic to think that any one church has the answers 100% correct. It is important to get the most important things right; other things might be less important and more up for debate (my church says they hope to "major on the majors") The sources and numerous revisions to the book of Mormon and Abraham already have serious problems. So how do you know the church is true? I have heard many ex-LDS say that is that if you aren't sure about something, you are encouraged to pray about it and trust feelings - in a sense you need to convince yourself that it is right or put your concerns away on a shelf and not listen to anything to the contrary. If the church's teachings are true, why are they so afraid of opposing viewpoints? Quote I Thessalonians 5: 20Do not treat prophecies with contempt 21but test them all; hold on to what is good, Quote Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the ‘prophets, seers, and revelators’ of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostasy Quote "Personal opinions may vary. Eternal principles never do. When the Prophet speaks, sisters, the debate is over.” (Ensign, November 1978, page 107) Quote “Always keep your eye on the President of the church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, even if it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it…” (quoted by Marion G. Romney, Conference Report, October 1960, page 78). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted April 24, 2017 Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 51 minutes ago, runewell said: That is quite the contradiction. How can the true church have doctrinal problems? Even though we all will pick some church to go to, people are going to invariably come to different interpretations of scripture. So it is unrealistic to think that any one church has the answers 100% correct. It is important to get the most important things right; other things might be less important and more up for debate (my church says they hope to "major on the majors") The sources and numerous revisions to the book of Mormon and Abraham already have serious problems. So how do you know the church is true? I have heard many ex-LDS say that is that if you aren't sure about something, you are encouraged to pray about it and trust feelings - in a sense you need to convince yourself that it is right or put your concerns away on a shelf and not listen to anything to the contrary. If the church's teachings are true, why are they so afraid of opposing viewpoints? Im not really sure what you are getting at. I ask- how can the true church have imperfect leaders? The true church has the proper authority and not necessarily the perfect doctrine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just_A_Guy Posted April 24, 2017 Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 Mod note: If guests have issues with some aspects of Joseph Smith's life and want to know how Mormons reconcile themselves to those issues--that's a fair question, and they are welcome to bring it up. However, they are not welcome to merely trot out those issues as purportedly conclusive rebuttals of wholly unrelated points (i.e. "Mormonism' claims to priesthood are false because Joseph Smith married a divorced woman"). That's just mudslinging; and we won't put up with it. Further posts of that tenor will be subject to moderator action in accordance with this site's rules of conduct. yjacket, Vort and mordorbund 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yjacket Posted April 24, 2017 Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 6 hours ago, runewell said: So how do you know the church is true? Well, the answer to that question depends on your worldview. If you believe that God can talk to men and can talk to each of us individually and guide us in the direction we should go and that that guidance is found by first living life in accordance with His revealed word and then by asking him, how else would you know except through prayer and asking Him to tell you? If you don't believe that God can talk to men and that we can only know truth through empirical evidence-then the way to know if the Church is true is by testing it's fruits and by abiding by the precepts it teaches and see if that guides us to the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runewell Posted April 25, 2017 Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said: Mod note: If guests have issues with some aspects of Joseph Smith's life and want to know how Mormons reconcile themselves to those issues--that's a fair question, and they are welcome to bring it up. However, they are not welcome to merely trot out those issues as purportedly conclusive rebuttals of wholly unrelated points (i.e. "Mormonism' claims to priesthood are false because Joseph Smith married a divorced woman"). That's just mudslinging; and we won't put up with it. Fair enough. Do the LDS support marrying people that are already married? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runewell Posted April 25, 2017 Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 6 hours ago, Rob Osborn said: Im not really sure what you are getting at. I ask- how can the true church have imperfect leaders? The true church has the proper authority and not necessarily the perfect doctrine. We are all sinful and imperfect -as were Christ's disciples. Nevertheless Jesus used them to propogate his message which lives on today. For a church to practice knowingly imperfect doctrine however is problematic. If you build your house on a shaky foundation the waves will come and level it to the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just_A_Guy Posted April 25, 2017 Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 21 minutes ago, runewell said: Fair enough. Do the LDS support marrying people that are already married? No. But then, Joseph Smith didn't do that either. To the extent that he is accused of engaging in polyandry, once these cases are examined in a case-by-case basis it becomes clear that they are generally divisible into two categories: cases where Smith married women who considered themselves divorced, or cases where he was platonically sealed to women who continued to cohabit only with their civilly-married husbands. Vort 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted April 25, 2017 Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 30 minutes ago, runewell said: We are all sinful and imperfect -as were Christ's disciples. Nevertheless Jesus used them to propogate his message which lives on today. For a church to practice knowingly imperfect doctrine however is problematic. If you build your house on a shaky foundation the waves will come and level it to the ground. Lots of things are problematic because we are an imperfect people- all of us, we all make mistakes. Even prophets, ancient and modern, make mistakes. God still loves us and works with our imperfections and our false philosophies. I would challenge you to find just one perfect organisation on this earth filled with perfect people who have the perfect truth of all things. I will bet all I own that you cant even find one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runewell Posted April 25, 2017 Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said: Lots of things are problematic because we are an imperfect people- all of us, we all make mistakes. Even prophets, ancient and modern, make mistakes. God still loves us and works with our imperfections and our false philosophies. I would challenge you to find just one perfect organisation on this earth filled with perfect people who have the perfect truth of all things. I will bet all I own that you cant even find one. I will bet that you are correct! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted April 25, 2017 Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, runewell said: I will bet that you are correct! And I would thus wager that God can and does vest his authority and spirit in people and organizations that are imperfect and have less than true beliefs or practices in all things. Im proud to be LDS coming from ancestors who came over on the Mayflower, fought in the Civil War, joined the early church, came west with Brigham Young, died along the way, had polygamous wives, etc. Im proud of my heritage. Im proud and yet deeply humble for all of their sacrafices they gave so that I may stand boldly in defense of the gospel and Jesus Christ. No one can take that fight away from me. Im like a raging river, the roar of a lion and yet humble and soft as a lamb. I know where I stand and I have that as my rock. Edited April 25, 2017 by Rob Osborn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wenglund Posted April 27, 2017 Report Share Posted April 27, 2017 On 4/24/2017 at 6:22 PM, runewell said: For a church to practice knowingly imperfect doctrine however is problematic. Not only isn't it problematic, it is inevitable and necessary for imperfect people who wish to progress. Quote If you build your house on a shaky foundation the waves will come and level it to the ground. If your foundation is fixed, your tiny house cant be developed by Christ into one of the many mansions. A doctrinal reed that cannot bend will break when the winds of increased knowledge and understanding blow. Were their no allowance for imperfection (incompleteness) in doctrine, then the doctrines of the Old Testamant could not have been subsumed by the doctrines of the New Testament. Thanks. -Wade Englund- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Just now, Armin said: The Club of Rome...? All eggheads with an IQ more than 160. They can't be wrong. Now I own all you have! Have you read Stephen Hawking's pronouncements over the past few years on God, alien life, and machines taking over civilization? Pretty goofy stuff coming from supposedly the world's smartest man. This is strong evidence that, just because you have an IQ over 160, you are not perfect, nor do you know everything. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 13 minutes ago, Armin said: No, I haven't. I think it's some of his later publications or pronouncements, and I only remember some of his former statements, i.e. where he stated that there was no graveyard for dead computers (guess he's not absolutely wrong with this assertion) and much of those things (he compared the human mind with a computer). By the way, isn't the poor devil's IQ only 159, one point less than Isaac Newton's...? I don't know what his IQ is, but he says the strangest things sometimes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Just now, Armin said: As one of the former holders of the Lucasian chair (Cambridge) he's surely a brilliant mathematician, but maybe not the best writer. You can't dance on two wedding parties at the same time, as we use to say here. I thought he did an excellent job on his appearance on Dilbert the cartoon series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.