Jason15 wrote:No Offence Maklelan, but I have an odd sense about you. I most likely would have answered your queries if they had been one or two at a time but I actually feel bombarded.
After copying and pasting that article for me to respond to, you feel bombarded?
Jason15 wrote:I am not trying to cop out here but actually for some reason don't trust you. Can't explain why just a feeling...could be wrong as I don't go by feelings. It's too bad as that was not my initial reaction to you. I will stick to the archeologists and historians etc that are well respected in their fields and leave it at that.
If you think fundamentalist Christians are well respected in the fields of archaeology and history then you very clearly don't know a thing about archaeology or history.
Jason15 wrote:There will always be contrarians no matter what the topic and that is why I stick to the experts and not those who think they are the experts. Hope that makes sense. Take care
But I am one of the experts, Jason, and my position on the Bible's historicity is pretty much in agreement with the overwhelming academic consensus. Biblical scholarship is obviously not your field, so please don't presume to speak on its behalf.
Jason15 wrote:Sorry Megacles....my statement is not a double-negative..... I will make it clearer for you ....Mormons are not Christian......They follow a different Jesus, a different God than Orthodox Biblical Christianity. Please don't twist my words when the information I have presented does not indicate in any way "So that means ALL Mormons are Christian!" That would be called deception. I didn't take you for that kind of person from your initial posts.
Tobin I expected to be attacked by deceptive people....not unlike Joseph Smith. I am not surprised at all how Mormons twist thing around. I mean really I would have a very hard time believing anything Mormons tell me....after all their founder Joseph Smith lied about men living on the moon. He fabricated what they looked like, he fabricated what they wore etc. Then Brigham Young comes along and teaches that the sun is inhabited. COME ON and then your Mormons expect me to believe anything you say when your follow goon that stuck his head in a hat and translated the Book of Mormon using a peep stone and EVEN translated the same errors as the KJV of the Bible. Then he translated the Book of Abraham which turned out to be another fabrication and lie. How can you people believe anything this lunatic says. He is the founder of your organization. He has been proven to be a FALSE prophet.
Jason15 wrote:Thanks Megacles... no worries and thanks for your kindness.
To answer your question with a question----- Is the Bible the only trusted source of truth and inspiration for Christians? The Bible is the "foundation" for all truth for Christians. Yes God does speak, through Ministers every week otherwise people may as well stay home. But for Christians, the Bible is to be our criteria to "compare" truths. That is why a great minister will say don't automatically believe everything I say but TEST it against the Word of God....
But the Bible--there's something you've gotta automatically believe for no reason.
Jason15 wrote:ie does it line up with the Word of God in the Bible. I have heard many Pastors and Ministers say this. If what we hear does not match up with the Bible – Isaiah says if they speak not according to this Word – the law and the testimony – that’s the word of God – there is no light in them. So we’re to measure everything.
So what about when the Bible doesn't match up with the Bible? What about Acts 15:16-17, where James defends taking the gospel to all the nations by quoting a Greek mistranslation of Amos 9:11-12? The entire point of the verse is completely changed and has nothing to do with the Hebrew. James was demonstrably wrong when he said he was quoting the words of the prophets. So what do we do now that we know James and the author of Acts don't match up with the Bible? Do we actually acknowledge it, or do we pretend there actually isn't any incongruity at all?
Albion wrote:megacles, I was not so much interested in the issue of whether or not you consider yourself a Christian as much as attempting to demonstrate the huge gulf between Mormon theology and that which is believed by the larger Christian church which is the underlying cause of this debate. For instance, it was interesting to see that you mentioned Christ dying for sinful man, you mentioned his suffering, but said nothing of the cross, instead emphasizing the Garden of Gethsemane. More and more in recent years, I hear Mormons emphasizing the Garden as the place of atonement. Is this now official Mormon doctrine or just something that has crept into Mormonism and is repeated as if it is doctrine. That premise alone, which IMV only serves the adversary's contempt for the cross and Christ's blood shed there, marks a major distinction that separates Mormonism from the Christian family. So often, it seems to me, Mormons use terms and expressions which in and of themselves make them sound very mainstream. It is only on further examination that we discover how very different the meaning and understanding of those things is from normally accepted Christian doctrine.
Albion
Thanks for the discussion. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that there is a large enough gulf between LDS beliefs and those of traditional Christianity as to render LDS beliefs non-Christian.
May I interject a question for you? Does this gulf also exist between, say, the Westboro Baptist Church and Plymouth Brethren?
I know little of the actual theology of either group you mention and do not see what it matters to the point I am making which is that it is the vast difference between Mormon theology and the normative expression of Christianity that results in the perception of the general Christian population that Mormonism does not fit under the Christian umbrella.
Albion wrote:I know little of the actual theology of either group you mention and do not see what it matters to the point I am making which is that it is the vast difference between Mormon theology and the normative expression of Christianity that results in the perception of the general Christian population that Mormonism does not fit under the Christian umbrella.
As I've pointed out to you, research definitively shows that the perception of the general Christian population is that Mormon does indeed fit under the Christian umbrella. Your entire point is fabricated.
Albion wrote:I know little of the actual theology of either group you mention and do not see what it matters to the point I am making which is that it is the vast difference between Mormon theology and the normative expression of Christianity that results in the perception of the general Christian population that Mormonism does not fit under the Christian umbrella.
As I've pointed out to you, research definitively shows that the perception of the general Christian population is that Mormon does indeed fit under the Christian umbrella. Your entire point is fabricated.
Does this general Christian population know that Mormonism is the one and only true Church at the point they were 'researched'?
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
Jason15 wrote:To answer your question with a question----- Is the Bible the only trusted source of truth and inspiration for Christians? The Bible is the "foundation" for all truth for Christians. Yes
Jason15, on page one of this thread you said
Jason15 wrote:Christians use the Bible and only the Bible as their source of truth.
(underlining mine)
These two statements are quite different. Is the Bible the source of truth, or is it only the foundation for truth?
If the Bible is the only source of truth, then you must reject the creeds because they are not in the Bible. To reject the creeds is to, according to you, separate yourself from Christianity.
Megacles wrote:If the Bible is the only source of truth, then you must reject the creeds because they are not in the Bible. To reject the creeds is to, according to you, separate yourself from Christianity.
It also raises the question of how he knows what the Bible says, since no one in any corner of the universe can read a word of the text without academic training deriving from non-biblical sources. If linguistic knowledge cannot be considered to be truth because it doesn't come from the Bible, who can know for sure what the Bible says at all?
maklelan wrote:It also raises the question of how he knows what the Bible says, since no one in any corner of the universe can read a word of the text without academic training deriving from non-biblical sources. If linguistic knowledge cannot be considered to be truth because it doesn't come from the Bible, who can know for sure what the Bible says at all?
Good point. I think it also goes back to that old circular argument "the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true."