I have a question for you. I have never met a Mormon who will openly debate constantly like you. I’ve been in quick conversations with Mormons, but they don’t get too in-depth in a debate.

Serious question, and please be honest, because I have drawn this conclusion over the years. Is there an unwritten rule that Mormons should not debate their faith? It’s either that, or they are not as knowledgeable about their faith as you. I’m not just talking about this message board, I’m talking about in general. I’ve always been real curious about this.

Posted By EEE on 02/03/2008 12:55 AM

Well, you are right and this is what the Bible teaches. So why don’t you just believe what you just said?

In reference to what you posted, can you please explain these two passages especially the bolded parts:

Isaiah 43:10-11: "You are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour."

Notice the Predestination in God doing the choosing for Israel to know, believe, and understand him in what I italicized.

Isaiah 44:6, 8: "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God...Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."

Posted By EEE on 02/03/2008 12:55 AM
I disagree and I think Romans 11:6 says it best:

“But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.”

I know you have seen this popular verse many times, but really examine it:

And Ephesians 2: 8-10

8) “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,”

The Bible teaches that not only Grace is a gift but also the faith is a gift. Non Calvinist disagrees and believes only the grace is a gift.

9) “not a result of works, so that no one may boast. “

If the Mormon and Roman Catholic view is correct, why don’t you boast in your good works? You should, since you had something to do with your salvation. If you are consistent, you have to believe it wasn’t 100% Christ, it was some of your doings too, so you can boast. But as you can see, verse 9 tells us it’s not the results of works.

10) “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

The good works you do were prepared by God, so the thought of your good works attributing to your salvation is not biblical.

I believe in a compatibalistic will. There are many examples in the bible of this.

Posted By EEE on 02/03/2008 12:55 AM
I disagree and I think Romans 11:6 says it best:

“But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.”

I know you have seen this popular verse many times, but really examine it:

And Ephesians 2: 8-10

8) “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,”

The Bible teaches that not only Grace is a gift but also the faith is a gift. Non Calvinist disagrees and believes only the grace is a gift.

9) “not a result of works, so that no one may boast. “

If the Mormon and Roman Catholic view is correct, why don’t you boast in your good works? You should, since you had something to do with your salvation. If you are consistent, you have to believe it wasn’t 100% Christ, it was some of your doings too, so you can boast. But as you can see, verse 9 tells us it’s not the results of works.

10) “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

The good works you do were prepared by God, so the thought of your good works attributing to your salvation is not biblical.

I believe in a compatibalistic will. There are many examples in the bible of this.

The question that must be addressed is whom in scriptures is sovereign; God or man? If man is truly free, then how can Jehovah truly decree anything and be certain it will come to pass? Is Jehovah at the mercy of the will of man? If man’s free-will decision ultimately decides the outcome of an event or a fate, then would it not be logical to say that man’s will is sovereign over Jehovah’s?

God's Foreknowledge Not a Determining Cause.—"Respecting the foreknowledge of God, let it not be said that divine omniscience is of itself a determining cause whereby events are inevitably brought to pass. A mortal father, who knows the weaknesses and frailties of his son, may by reason of that knowledge sorrowfully predict the calamities and sufferings awaiting his wayward boy. He may foresee in that son's future a forfeiture of blessings that could have been won, loss of position, self-respect, reputation and honor; even the dark shadows of a felon's cell and the night of a drunkard's grave may appear in the saddening visions of that fond father's soul; yet, convinced by experience of the impossibility of bringing about that son's reform, he foresees the dread developments of the future, and he finds but sorrow and anguish in his knowledge. Can it be said that the father's foreknowledge is a cause of the son's sinful life? The son, perchance, has reached his maturity; he is the master of his own destiny; a free agent unto himself. The father is powerless to control by force or to direct by arbitrary command; and, while he would gladly make any effort or sacrifice to save his son from the fate impending, he fears for what seems to be an awful certainty. But surely that thoughtful, prayerful, loving parent does not, because of his knowledge, contribute to the son's waywardness. To reason otherwise would be to say that a neglectful father, who takes not the trouble to study the nature and character of his son, who shuts his eyes to sinful tendencies, and rests in careless indifference as to the probable future, will by his very heartlessness be benefiting his child, because his lack of forethought cannot operate as a contributory cause to dereliction.

"Our Heavenly Father has a full knowledge of the nature and disposition of each of His children, a knowledge gained by long observation and experience in the past eternity of our primeval childhood; a knowledge compared with which that gained by earthly parents through mortal experience with their children is infinitesimally small. By reason of that surpassing knowledge, God reads the future of child and children, of men individually and of men collectively as communities and nations; He knows what each will do under given conditions, and sees the end from the beginning. His foreknowledge is based on intelligence and reason. He foresees the future as a state which naturally and surely will be; not as one which must be because He has arbitrarily willed that it shall be.”

Man Free to Choose for Himself.—"The father of souls has endowed His children with the divine birthright of free agency;He does not and will not control them by arbitrary force; He impels no man toward sin; He compels none to righteousness. Unto man has been given freedom to act for himself; and, associated with this independence, is the fact of strict responsibility and the assurance of individual accountability. In the judgment with which we shall be judged, all the conditions and circumstances of our lives shall be considered. The inborn tendencies due to heredity, the effect of environment whether conducive to good or evil, the wholesome teachings of youth, or the absence of good instruction—these and all other contributory elements must be taken into account in the rendering of a just verdict as to the soul's guilt or innocence. Nevertheless, the divine wisdom makes plain what will be the result with given conditions operating on known natures and dispositions of men, while every individual is free to choose good or evil within the limits of the many conditions existing and operative." — James E. Talmage, “Jesus the Christ,” (Salt Lake City: LDS Church, 1915) pp. 28-29

Posted By Jason on 02/04/2008 1:04 PM
Can I get these posts in audiobook format?

Posted By moinmoin on 02/04/2008 3:52 PM
Thanks for the tip on making quote boxes, EEE! Let me try it out here:

That might be because quick conversations don’t lend themselves to detailed discussions. I think a lot of Mormons are wary of being pounced on by “talking points” people have gotten from anti-Mormon web sites, their pastors, or other sources, and they don’t want to engage in pointless “Bible bashing.”

If there is, I haven’t gotten the memo! Seriously and in all honesty, Mormons are not told not to debate about their faith. They take very seriously Peter’s charge to “be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15). But, they also take seriously the resurrected Christ’s charge when He preached to the people in the Western Hemisphere as recorded in the Book of Mormon: “For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another. Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away” (3 Nephi 11:29-30). This is not always an easy balance to achieve, and I think many Mormons err on the side of caution with respect to avoiding contention.
I don’t like to allow any “uncontested slam dunks” against my faith, but I sometimes can be too contentious and need to repent. I do strive to be civil and diplomatic, but sometimes fall short of this.
It’s also important to keep in mind that Mormonism is not nearly as centered on theology (“right thinking or right doctrine”) as other Christian churches are. Instead of the wrangling over the correct interpretation of the Bible that has led to such diverse subsets of Christianity as Catholicism, Calvinism, Evangelical Protestantism, Pentacostalism, process theology, open theism, etc.; Mormons have in extra-biblical scripture a standard that confirms and shows the correct interpretation of the Bible (my analogy of the board with nails). The endless debate over theological minutiae that characterizes mainline Christianity is absent within Mormonism, Mormons’ faith being centered instead on core doctrines and foundational events linked to the Restoration through Joseph Smith and his successors as prophets (e.g., the appearance of the Father and the Son to Joseph Smith in 1820, the restoration of priesthood authority by the laying on of hands of resurrected prophets, the translation of the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, etc.). All of which is Christ-centered, of course. To Mormons, this greatly simplifies things, because if and when someone gains a witness of the above things through the Spirit, then everything else falls into place. Mormons are also free to disagree and speculate about a host of issues and topics that in other churches are codified in creeds, as long as they believe in a small number of fundamental doctrines (outlined in the 13 Articles of Faith and temple recommend interview). Evolution, life on other worlds, age of the earth/universe, mechanics of the Creation, etc. are not an issue within Mormonism; one can have any range of beliefs on these and many other issues and it won't affect membership, standing, acceptance, and participation in the Church. Vocal and combative opposition to essential, fundamental doctrines will, of course.
As for myself, I have always been very interested in arguments against Mormonism and dealing with them. When I was a teenager, I was terrified at the thought that perhaps we are wrong, after all, and this fueled my research and inquiry. I have always felt strongly that the Spirit has witnessed to me that all of these foundational events really happened and that it’s all true. I attended high school in the Chicago area, where Mormons are not nearly as plentiful as in the intermountain West, and my mission to northern Germany in the mid 1990s was a wonderful experience that allowed me to discuss and defend my beliefs using scriptural and other sources in a foreign language. I enjoy religious discussions and learning in detail about other faiths; I also enjoy correcting misrepresentations and misconceptions about mine and answering questions for those who are interested. However, with all this, I wouldn’t say that other Mormons aren’t as knowledgeable about their faith as I am. Their valuable contributions to dialogue and discussions are their own experiences and explanations in their own words, which are often more profound and poignant than mine, in my opinion.
Long story short: there is no institutional discouragement, formal or unwritten, of Mormons debating or discussing their faith in a debating atmosphere. There are, probably, some factors as outlined above that might make some Mormons hesitant or cautious to do so in such an environment, but they should (hopefully) always be willing to answer questions when posed by curious or sincere people.

Posted By moinmoin on 02/04/2008 5:21 PM
A couple of things here:
1) Is Isaiah addressing the issue of false idolatrous gods of surrounding peoples (e.g., Ba’al, Asherah/Ashteroth, Chemosh, Moloch, etc.), the Mormon heresy to come in about 2700 years, or both? I don’t think he is addressing the Mormon doctrine of eternal progression at all in these verses. In other words, I think these are an apologetic against the false gods of rival, competing religions at the time.

2) Asherah/Ashteroth was worshiped as the wife of El/Yahweh at different times in Canaanite/Israelite history Come to think of it, El and Yahweh were also worshiped as the Most High God at various times in their history. I’m sure you’re aware of the controversy in Bible studies about the “Elohist” and “Yahwist” traditions and emphases within the Old Testament itself. Was El an idolatrous, false god? If so, what are we to make of such things as “El-elohe-Israel (God, the God of Israel, Genesis 33:20) or “El-elyon” (the Most High God, )?
I find the word “beside” in the second passage interesting. Is “beside” in our translation meant to mean “other than,” as you use it, or is this a rebuttal of Asherah worship (i.e., “along side, next to, accompanying”)? This isn't a major point with me, but might be a possibility.

Posted By moinmoin on 02/04/2008 5:37 PM


Paul stresses these things are key for Christian living, and they are. However where does he stress these for salvation? Big Difference.






You have assumed these are Paul's attention, however no scriptural proof.



Four important key points often missed by people who abuse this passage by James:

1) James wrote the letter to believing Jews who were dispersed to flee Christian persecution. They were already saved.

2) As you mentioned in your point #2, the church was confused by newly Jewish converts. The Jews here, knowing that Salvation is through faith alone and not works, thought it was OK do to whatever now. And were walking around saying they have Faith. Which leads to point 3....

3)
James 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?

James was making an examples of these Jews, as you can see by his indirect statement "if someone says he has faith"

4) Finally, if that is not enough, more very clear evidence James is in agreement with Paul that Salvation is by Faith alone and not works.

In the Same Chapter James says:

James 2:23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness"--and he was called a friend of God.


Romans 4:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
Romans 4:3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness."

Genesis 15:6And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness.


Abraham was righteous before the Lord because he believed. The work James said justified Abraham was his offering up of Isaac an event that occurred many years after he first exercised faith and was declared righteous before God. Instead Abraham's offering of Isaac demonstrated the genuineness of his faith and the reality of his justification before God. James is emphasizing the vindication before others of a person's claim to salvation.



Remember you accusing me of not using the whole Piano? Well moinmoin, how about you start with one whole chapter

The key question is: why are we here? Why did God create us? The Pearl of Great Price gives the Mormon answer: “For behold, this is my work and my glory, to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39). As spirit children of heavenly parents, God created the earth so we could come (without being able to remember our pre-earth life, so faith would be essential), obtain a mortal physical body, learn from experience, demonstrate acceptance of His plan, and obtain a perfected, glorified resurrected body through death and resurrection. Jesus provided immortality to all of God’s children, good and evil, all who were sent to earth. Eternal life, or returning to the presence of God, depends upon the degree to which people accept Jesus’ atonement and live His gospel. The crux of the why is that as literal spirit children of our Father in Heaven, we can become like Him, and that’s why we’re here.
For non-Mormons, and especially Calvinists, the question of why is hard to address. Why did God create us at all out of nothing if we are not His literal children? Especially if at the instant of creation He predestined or predetermined every thought, act, and choice, instantly damning or saving those whom He chose? What is the point? It can’t be to glorify Him; He already had all glory from the beginning, what possible glory can we add to him, and how would creating instantly damned people glorify Him at all? None of it really makes sense without true moral agency and true free will. Far from throwing things out of God’s control, the records in the scriptures and people’s own experience shows that God is able to bring about His purposes and offer salvation even within the context of allowing people their full agency.

What is the point? It can’t be to glorify Him; He already had all glory from the beginning, what possible glory can we add to him, and how would creating instantly damned people glorify Him at all?

why are we here? Why did God create us?

OK, so all this happened, how does this disprove the Trinity?

It was difficult for the early church fathers to have a good understanding of the Trinity because many didn't have all 27 book of the New Testament. They had the Gospels but many didn’t have any or all of Paul’s writings. God used Paul to reveal a lot. Paul often uses the word “mysteries” to reveal what was once hidden to the Jews.

I even know a Christian apologist who does moderated debates. He even says it's very difficult to set one up with a Mormon. He has done one, but it is rare.

Then what you are saying is this, "before me there were no false gods formed, and there will be none after me"? Certainly you can see that doesn't work. God is proclaiming his uniqueness - there is only one true God, and He is it.

This is a huge gap between our faiths. Our purpose.

Mormon's purpose: exalt Man
Christian's purpose: exalt God

The Bible said:
Eph 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places,
Eph 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love
Eph 1:5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,
Eph 1:6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.
Eph 1:7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,
Eph 1:8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight
Eph 1:9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ
Eph 1:10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
Eph 1:11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,
Eph 1:12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.
Eph 1:13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
Eph 1:14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

Wow what a beautiful and yet sooo clear picture on how and why we are saved. By Him, For Him.

Col 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things were created through him and for him.

This whole predestination thing, if true, is a smokin’ deal for those He chose to save, and a really lousy deal for those He chose to damn. As a Mormon (which I can’t do anything about; He predestined this, right?), I want a refund!

Why in the Sam Hill did He create us, and predestine some to being the saved elect, and others to being the damned? Couldn't He have just not made me so I wouldn't be damned?

Posted By Jason on 02/04/2008 1:04 PM
Can I get these posts in audiobook format?