Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Mormons against the Bible! Message-ID: Date: 6 Dec 90 08:56:29 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Houston -- Department of Mathematics Lines: 297 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article farkas@eng.sun.com (Frank Farkas) writes: >In article , wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: >>Neither can an adult unbeliever make such a decision, for he is 'dead >>in his transgressions and sins' (Ephesians 2). Conversion is no less >>miraculous in the adult than it is in an infant. It might be more >>miraculous, because the adult has had plenty of time to harden his >>heart. >Your premise, if it would be true, would remove anything on our part which >would have anything to do with our salvation. Meaning that predestination >would be in effect, meaning that God would predestine us for either salvation >or to condemnation. Predestination is explicity taught in the Bible. If you say you don't believe in predestination, then you don't beleive the explicit words of Scripture. We might discuss what sort of predestination there is, but if you reject any kind of predestination, you reject the word of God. I admit that predestination is difficult to understand, and that to some people it sounds harsh. But you seem to prefer to ignore the problem by ignoring the Scriptures. "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those *who have been called according to his purpose*. For those God foreknew he also *predestined* to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he *predestined*, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified." --Rom 8:28-30. So if you claim to believe the Bible, tell us what you believe this Scripture teaches -- what is its *doctrine*? I'll tell you what I think. The context of this passage is given in Rom 8:18: "I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us." So he wrote this part of Romans to comfort those who are suffering, or being persecuted, or will be persecuted. He writes to tell the Chrisians to hang on their faith, that God is in control of things, and to keep their sights on the eternal reward God has predestined them for. Similarly in Ephesians 1:3-8 we read: "Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he *chose* us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he *predestined* us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will -- to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding." v. 11-14: "In him we were also *chosen*, having been *predestined* according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you were also included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory." So from the Scripture, it is clear that God chose, or predestined some to be believers in Christ, to be saved. Scripture does NOT teach, however, that God chose some to be unbelievers and to be damned. In fact in 1 Tim. 2:4 we read that God wants all men to be save and to come to a knowledge of the truth. Paul even says that we should pray for "kings and all those in authority" -- namely, those persecuting the church at that time -- either so that the kings etc. will be save, or so that the church will be permitted to do the work Christ gave to it. So now we come to the hard part. If God wants all men to believe and be saved, why don't all men believe? The answer that Scripture seems to teach is that some, first of all, never hear the Word, and secondly, some resist the Holy Spirit -- See Acts 7:51. So while the unbeliever is dead in his transgressions and sins (Eph 2:1) and cannot make himself alive again, but God must make him alive with Christ -- Eph. 2:4,5 -- he can resist the Holy Spirit. >I believe that you are being carried away with your logic and you push >ideas and concepts to their logical conclusion, where they get distorted. >It is one thing to say that we are saved by the grace of God, and another >that we have no role to play in it at all. Based on your logic, if I will >be condemned to go to hell, it is not my fault at all. It is God's fault >because he didn't save me. It is you who is pushing ideas and concepts to their logical conclusion, without support from Scripture. I say God chooses the believers, which Scripture teaches explicitly. I have no particular reason to believe this except that it is in Scripture. But you use reason to say, 'then God chooses who is to be damned' even where I deny it and so does Scripture. A good example is given in Scripture, in the person of the Paraoh of Egypt who dealt with Moses. In Ex 7:3 we read: "But I will harden Pharaoh's heart." which show's God's foreknowledge of what will happen. Nine times in Exodus the hardening of Pharaoh's heart is ascribed to God - 4:21; 7:3; 9:12; 10:1,20,27; 11:10; and 14:4,8. Another nine times the pharaoh is said to have hardened his own heart: 7:13-14,22; 8:15,19,32; 9:2,34-35. Not until the sixth plague did God confirm the pharaoh's willful action, as we read in 9:12: "But the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart and he would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the Lord had said to Moses." So I believe that Pharaoh was responsible for the hardening of his own heart. God foreknew that he would not believe, but Pharaoh hardened his own heart agaist God, and then God confirmed the hardening. Likewise God has foreknowledge that some people will resist His Spirit, but that hardness of heart is their own responsibility. I don't see determinism in this, especially because we are not privy to God's foreknowledge. >Free agency is one of the very basic principles which is in effect on both >in heaven and on earth. Denying free agency is one of the most evil part >of Satans plan. Without free agency we are reduced to a thing, and it >denies that we have been called to be joint heirs with Christ. Kindly show me one word of scripture in support of 'free agency'. >However, you have ignored my comments and pertaining scriptures that the >thief didn't go to heaven. He went where Christ went "today". The scripture >explicitly states that Jesus did't go to his Father. Peter explained that >he went into the spirit world to preach the gospel. The bottom line is that >the thief went to heaven is on of the many para scriptures which we believe >in, which is in fact not true at all. It seems that you missed one of my articles in which I did respond to your comments. If you can't find it, it is the predecessor to my article 'Preaching to the Dead?'. It begins as a response to Gary Hipp, so you might have missed it. The title is, Re: Validity of Baptism . I had asserted that the thief was saved, apparently without baptism, because Jesus had told him "today you will be with me in paradise." This is a clear passage. Most scholars that I've read really don't know what to make of Christ preaching to the spirits in prison. The Scriptures do not say exactly when this happened. The passage at hand, Luke 23:43, says that the thief, together with Christ, went to 'paradise'. This word appears in the NT only here and in 2 Cor 12:4 and Rev 2:7: "And I know that this man--whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows--was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell." Apparently 'paradise' is the same as 'the third heaven' -- which is not defined in Scripture. But what Paul describes is comparable to what happened to Daniel , and other prophets, who saw visions of heaven, and were told to seal up, and not reveal parts of the revelation. "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God." I think this defines 'paradise' pretty well. Now I answered your objection that Christ could not have gone to paradise before his resurrection, by saying that when he said "I have not yet returned to my Father" he referred to his bodily ascenscion. It was, in fact, his body that Mary Magdalene was holding on to, and not his spirit :-) . This interpretation is very consistent; more so than yours, for you are forced to say that paradise is not paradise, all so that you can say that the thief was not saved? Why are picking on that poor thief? :-) >The principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ are: > > 1. First, faith in the lord Jesus Christ. > 2. Second, repentance. > 3. Third, baptism with water. > 4. Fourth, laying on of the hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. > >The order is important. We can't speak of repentance with out faith in the >Lord Jesus christ before faith, we cant speak of baptism before faith and >repentance, etc. Can you document the order of this from Scripture? And where did Christ command the laying on of hands? NB, it is somewhat difficult to baptize someone without laying hands on them. I suppose we could pour a pitcher of water over them, but that would be unusual. >I don't know why you are saying that baptism for the dead is unscriptural. >Paul didn't find it unscriptural, why do we? In fact Paul used it to support >the idea of resurrection when he said: > >I Corint 15:29 >-------------- >"Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise >not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?" Does Paul, Christ, or anyone else *command* baptism for the dead? >If you would say that it is not taught or believed by most Christians today, >it would be correct. Only the LDS church teach it and practise it. You need >to remember that the N.T. is not a manual of discipline, which tells us in >great detail of the ordinaces of the early Christian church. This is one >reason why we need revelation that things which got lost may be restored. >This is what Peter had in mind when he said the following: > >Acts 3:21 >========= >"Whom the heavens must receive until the times of restitution of all things, >which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world >began" > >Peter, the apostle, and eye witness of Jesus Christ, who received the keys >to bind or to loose on the earth, looks forward to the restoration of *all* >things. Christ did not give the keys only to Peter. He gave them to the disciples, e.g., the church, 'wherever two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for'. Matthew 18:18,19. Frank, I don't see what point you are trying to make here. If the revelation we have in the Bible is one which is made complete in the BOM, etc., and this is what Peter was looking forward to, then I have to conclude that Christ has returned, Judgement Day has come, I am in heaven, and I suppose you are in 'paradise' :-). For in modern English Acts 3:21 says: "He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets." You seem to think Joseph Smith, or Brigham Young is the prophet like Moses, spoken of in Acts 3:22, and Deut 18:15. But Peter is talking about Christ, and urging the Jews to follow Christ, lest they 'be cut off from his people.' Joseph Smith was a far cry from either Moses or Christ. It is interesting that you suggest that God's revelation in the Bible is incomplete. I suppose this is why Joseph Smith added verses to the Bible, to produce his 'Inspired Version'. For example the IV as an added section in Genesis that describes Adam's baptism by immersion (Gen 6:67, IV). Gen 1:6 of the IV has God speak in the first person: "And I God, said, Let there be light". Other verses are added to teach the pre-existence if the souls of all men (Gen 1:6,9 IV), that if man had not sinned he would not have been able to propagate himself (Gen 6:56, IV), that the children of Canaan were made black as a curse for their sins (Gen 7:10, IV). Genesis 7:72, IV teaches that the earth shall have rest for a thousand years after the Lord returns. Another addition in Gen 50 seems to prophesy the coming of Joseph Smith "And that seer will I bless ... and his name shall be called Joseph, and it shall be after the name of his father... for the thing which the Lord shall bring forth by his hand shall bring my people unto salvation." (Gen 50:33, IV). The Reorganized LDS church accepts the Inspired Version as its official text. The (main) LDS church accepts the regular KJV, but Joseph Fielding Smith, of the Council of Twelve Apostles, said: "The reason why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has not published the entire manuscript (of the Inspired Version of the Bible) is not due to any lack of confidence in the integrity of Joseph Smith, or doubt as to the correctness of the numerous additions and changes which are not in the Authorized Version of the Bible. The members of the Church do accept fully all of these and additions as having come by divine revelations to he Prophet Joseph Smith." --Joseph Fielding Smith, "Answers to Gospel Questions" 3 Vols. (Salt Lake City, Desert Book Co., 1958), II, 207. Joseph Fielding Smith, nephew of Joseph Smith and sixth president of the Mormon Church, also made the following statement: "The revision of the Bible which was done by Joseph Smith at the command of the Lord was not a complete revision of the Bible. There are many parts of the Bible in which the Prophet did not change the meaning where it is incorrect... However, all that he did is very helpful for the major errors have been corrected. --Joseph Fielding Smith, "Doctrine of Salvation", 3 Vols. (Salt Lake City, Bookcraft, 1956), III, 191. Now maybe you don't accept the IV 'corrections' as inspired, and that would be good. But their seems to be plenty of evidence that Joseph Smith did make those 'corrections', and that various Mormons did and do accept them. So is Joseph Smith a prophet, or simply a revisionist? David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran. "God's Word is our great heritage And shall be ours forever; To spread its light from age to age Shall be our chief endeavor. Through life it guides our way, In death it is our stay. Lord, grant while worlds endure, We keep its teachings pure Throughout all generations." --'Guds Ord det er vort Arvegode' --Nikolai F. S. Grundtvig, 1817 From 'The Lutheran Hymnal' #283. My opinions and beliefs on this matter are disclaimed by The University of Houston.