LDS Christian challenge of historic Biblical Christians

[Clear]

ChristianPilgrim claimed

“If we are okay by living the best to our ability, then Christ suffered and died in vain, right?”

Clear asks ChristianPilgrim:

“I’m not sure why your interpretation of Christianity believes that “living to the best of one’s ability mean’s that Christ’s suffering and death was in vain”. This specific claim does not make sense to me.

God cannot justly expect more of men than their “best”, nor may God justly punish men for doing the “best” that they can, given the various circumstances God provided them. I do believe that Sola’lor is correct that God cannot expect one to live any better than they know how.

For example: God cannot justly punish millions of individuals for not accepting Jesus IF they lived and died without being given the chance to learn of of Jesus due to the very circumstances God placed them in (i.e. when and where they were born, mental capacities, limited life span, etc.) If one is an infant, or mentally unable to obtain moral knowledge and make a free choice, then there simply is NO condemnation that a just God can apply to such individuals.

I believe the agnostics and other types of theists are justified in their complaints regarding “unjust” interpretations of Christianity that condemns those who have not done wrong (infants, the mentally infirm, and all those who have insufficient knowledge or insufficient opportunity to make adequate choices, etc, etc.).

ChristianPilgrim comments

"God requires perfect obedience to the law of God, and sinlessness to enter the kingdom of God. Did God provide what we could not provide for ourselves? Here is the Christian gospel in a nutshell:

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God - 2 Cor 5:21

This is why our best efforts are not good enough:

ChristianPilgrim, I’m not sure if it’s necessary to point out the obvious, but in your response, you simply repeated a claim that people must be sinless to enter the kingdom of God and then you simply quoted a scripture regarding Christ. You still have not explained why your personal interpretation of Christianity means that Christ’s suffering is “in vain” (since millions HAVE been left to live to the best of their ability). You say "our best efforts are not good enough" and yet that is ALL that God has given many billions who have lived. God cannot justly and horribly punish individuals for not having what he did not allow them to have.

"Did God provide what we could not provide for ourselves?

This IS part of the point : God DID NOT provide the ability for ALL people to accept Jesus in this life. Billions have lived and died without having an opportunity to accept Jesus. These billions were left to “live to the best of their ability”. Still, there are vast numbers today who continue to live and die without being able to accept Jesus.

Why does the fact that billions have been left “to do their best” without gaining knowledge of Christ in their lifetimes, “make his suffering and death in vain” in your personal interpretation of Christianity? In your interpretation, Jesus suffering and death is "in vain". In other interpretations, his suffering and death "is NOT in vain". Given the fact that billions have lived, WITHOUT being provided the opportunity to accept Jesus in their lifetimes, WHY does this make Jesus suffering and death "in vain" in your Christianity?


Clear
eidrse88h

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

This thread is uninteresting for two reasons:

1. We don't play the same word games the anti-Mormons do;

2. The thread is obviously evolving into another platform for anti-Mormons to play their own word games.

I think if you removed all the personal comments and discussed doctrine only, then you would have nothing to post. BTW.. I like Wolverine. We can discuss official doctrine or we can discuss the new Star Trek movie.

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

Clear asks :

“I’m not sure why your interpretation of Christianity believes that “living to the best of one’s ability mean’s that Christ’s suffering and death was in vain”. This specific claim does not make sense to me.

God cannot justly expect more of men than their “best”, nor may God justly punish men for doing the “best” that they can, given the various circumstances God provided them. I do believe that Sola’lor is correct that God cannot expect one to live any better than they know how.

For example: God cannot justly punish millions of individuals for not accepting Jesus IF they lived and died without being given the chance to learn of of Jesus due to the very circumstances God placed them in (i.e. when and where they were born, mental capacities, limited life span, etc.) If one is an infant, or mentally unable to obtain moral knowledge and make a free choice, then there simply is NO condemnation that a just God can apply to such individuals.

I believe the agnostics and other types of theists are justified in their complaints regarding “unjust” interpretations of Christianity that condemns those who have not done wrong (infants, the mentally infirm, and all those who have insufficient knowledge or insufficient opportunity to make adequate choices, etc, etc.).ChristianPilgrim comments : ChristianPilgrim, I’m not sure if it’s necessary to point out the obvious, but in your response, you simply repeated a claim that people must be sinless to enter the kingdom of God and then you simply quoted a scripture regarding Christ. You still have not explained why your personal interpretation of Christianity means that Christ’s suffering is “in vain” (since millions HAVE been left to live to the best of their ability). You say "our best efforts are not good enough" and yet that is ALL that God has given many billions who have lived. God cannot justly and horribly punish individuals for not having what he did not allow them to have.

That is, Billions have lived and died without having an opportunity to accept Jesus. These billions were left to “live to the best of their ability”. Still, there are vast numbers today who continue to live and die without being able to accept Jesus.

Why does the fact that billions have been left “to do their best” without gaining knowledge of Christ in their lifetimes, “make his suffering and death in vain” in your personal interpretation of Christianity? In your interpretation, Jesus suffering and death is "in vain". In other interpretations, his suffering and death "is NOT in vain". WHY is his suffering in vain in your interpretation of Christianity?


Clear
eidrse88h

What is your understanding of biblical justification according to Scripture? The doctrine of justification is the heart of the gospel of God's grace, God is just and the justifer at the same time when you look into the cross of Christ. The cross is so glorious if you are able to see it. Please study Romans chapters 1 through 4, and the book of Galatians to continue on the topic of justification and the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

 

[Watchmen]

I think if you removed all the personal comments and discussed doctrine only, then you would have nothing to post. BTW.. I like Wolverine. We can discuss official doctrine or we can discuss the new Star Trek movie.

The problem is when an LDS attempts to discuss doctrine and the anti-Mormon plays word games.

I'm not interested in discussing anything with you - official doctrine or movies.

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

The problem is when an LDS attempts to discuss doctrine and the anti-Mormon plays word games.

I'm not interested in discussing anything with you - official doctrine or movies.

The main reason why you are unwilling to discuss official doctrine is that Mormon Doctrine cannot stand the test of Holy Scripture. We all know that. The Mormon Faith is never based on Scripture as final authority. The Mormon Faith hinges on Prophet Joseph Smith to be a true Prophet of God. Christendom boldly proclaims Joseph Smith to be a false prophet of God. But this thread is not about the Mormon Faith. This thread is about Mormon Christians examining Christian beliefs and doctrine in light of Scripture truth.

 

[Clear]

ChristianPilgrim originally claimed:

“If we are okay by living the best to our ability, then Christ suffered and died in vain, right?”

Clear points out that "Billions have lived and died without having an opportunity to accept Jesus. These billions were left to “live to the best of their ability”. Still, there are vast numbers today who continue to live and die without being able to accept Jesus."

Clear repeats the question to ChristianPilgrim :

"Why does the fact that billions have been left “to do their best” without gaining knowledge of Christ in their lifetimes, “make his suffering and death in vain” in your personal interpretation of Christianity? In your interpretation, Jesus suffering and death is "in vain". In other interpretations, his suffering and death "is NOT in vain". WHY is his suffering in vain in your interpretation of Christianity?

Christian responds:

"What is your understanding of biblical justification according to Scripture? The doctrine of justification is the heart of the gospel of God's grace, God is just and the justifer at the same time when you look into the cross of Christ. The cross is so glorious if you are able to see it."

ChristianPilgrim, I have to point out that again, you have not explained anything. You have simply asked a question and made two more claim, you claimed that "God is just" and claimed that the "cross is glorious". I also believe that the true God IS just. What I cannot understand is how you are able to claim that a JUST God UNJUSTLY punishes. And, I am trying to discover some principle that might allow your initial claim to make sense.

ChristianPilgrim; Please, if you are unable to answer my question, it is ok, there are others who know the answer. I will not be angry nor belittle you for this.

BUT, I don’t want to waste time considering a person's interpretation of Christianity that teaches that it is just for God to create an individual; then place the individual into circumstances whereby the individual will be punished horrible and eternally for not being ABLE to accept Jesus when billions of people have fallen into this very category.

I do not want to consider a person's interpretation of christ whose suffering and death is “in vain” simply because individuals are not able to hear about him and accept him. (Others might be interest, but I am not) I want to look for information in christianities that teach a truly JUST God and have a JUST mechanism for both reward and condemnation of individuals.


Perhaps it will be easier for you to answer if I can make this more simple by examples of the type of situation BILLIONS of individuals in history have found themselves in :

If I lived in egypt before the time of Abraham, and had never heard of Jesus Christ in my lifetime. If I lived all of my life according to the best and finest moral principles that God had given me ability to live am I punished by your version of God for not having accepted Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? Remember, God did NOT give me the opportunity to accept Jesus in this life.

Or, If I had been born perfectly normal infant, who smiled and giggled like any other infant at two months, doing no harm nor evil in any way, but, upon sustaining meningitis, either becoming a non-thinking vegetable, or actually dying, am I punished by your version of God for not having accepted Jesus while I lived according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? Again, you should remember that God did NOT give me the opportunity to accept Jesus in this life.

Are such people punished for not accepting Jesus in this life in your personal interpretation of Christianity?


Clear
(I'm going to be gone for a few hours. Please CP, Think about this question BEFORE answering as I really would rather have the best answer you have rather than a quick answer, or especially, a "non-answer". IN anycase, I do thank you for your time and effort in explaining your claim ChristianPilgrim)
eifuei76r

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

ChristianPilgrim originally claimed:

Clear points out that "Billions have lived and died without having an opportunity to accept Jesus. These billions were left to “live to the best of their ability”. Still, there are vast numbers today who continue to live and die without being able to accept Jesus."

Clear repeats the question to ChristianPilgrim :

Christian responds:

ChristianPilgrim, I have to point out that again, you have not explained anything. You have simply asked a question and made two more claim, you claimed that "God is just" and claimed that the "cross is glorious". I also believe that the true God IS just. What I cannot understand is how you are able to claim that a JUST God UNJUSTLY punishes. And, I am trying to discover some principle that might allow your initial claim to make sense.

ChristianPilgrim; Please, if you are unable to answer my question, it is ok, there are others who know the answer. I will not be angry nor belittle you for this.

BUT, I don’t want to waste time considering a person's interpretation of Christianity that teaches that it is just for God to create an individual; then place the individual into circumstances whereby the individual will be punished horrible and eternally for not being ABLE to accept Jesus when billions of people have fallen into this very category.

I do not want to consider a person's interpretation of christ whose suffering and death is “in vain” simply because individuals are not able to hear about him and accept him. (Others might be interest, but I am not) I want to look for information in christianities that teach a truly JUST God and have a JUST mechanism for both reward and condemnation of individuals.


Perhaps it will be easier for you to answer if I can make this more simple by examples of the type of situation BILLIONS of individuals in history have found themselves in :

If I lived in egypt before the time of Abraham, and had never heard of Jesus Christ in my lifetime. If I lived all of my life according to the best and finest moral principles that God had given me ability to live am I punished by your version of God for not having accepted Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? Remember, God did NOT give me the opportunity to accept Jesus in this life.

Or, If I had been born perfectly normal infant, who smiled and giggled like any other infant at two months, doing no harm nor evil in any way, but, upon sustaining meningitis, either becoming a non-thinking vegetable, or actually dying, am I punished by your version of God for not having accepted Jesus while I lived according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? Again, you should remember that God did NOT give me the opportunity to accept Jesus in this life.

Are such people punished for not accepting Jesus in this life in your personal interpretation of Christianity?


Clear
(I'm going to be gone for a few hours. Please CP, Think about this question BEFORE answering as I really would rather have the best answer you have rather than a quick answer, or especially, a "non-answer". IN anycase, I do thank you for your time and effort in explaining your claim ChristianPilgrim)
eifuei76r

Do you believe all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God without exception. Please consider Romans chapters 1 through 3 before you respond. A Christian needs to understand the real bad news of God before he can understand the great good news of God about His Son. Accepting Jesus into your heart, a sinner's prayer, or altar calls are all man-made ideas not supported in the Scriptures. Please meditate on John chapter 3 and the new birth. If anybody wants justice, then justice they will receive. I'd rather not demand justice but plead for mercy and grace. Please read Romans chapter 5 to see the status of infants before God. I believe elect infants who die are washed by the blood of Christ and are in Heaven.

 

[edward]

The problem is when an LDS attempts to discuss doctrine and the anti-Mormon plays word games.

CFR and what "anti-Mormon?"

I'm not interested in discussing anything with you - official doctrine or movies.

So why are you posting here? For harassment? To derail the thread? To get your message count up to a certain level? I am truly curious.

 

[Clear]

Clear commented and asks:

”.... What I cannot understand is how you are able to claim that a JUST God UNJUSTLY punishes. And, I am trying to discover some principle that might allow your initial claim to make sense.... I don’t want to waste time considering a person's interpretation of Christianity that teaches that it is just for God to create an individual; then place the individual into circumstances whereby the individual will be punished horrible and eternally for not being ABLE to accept Jesus when billions of people have fallen into this very category....

...Perhaps it will be easier for you to answer if I can make this more simple by examples of the type of situation BILLIONS of individuals in history have found themselves in :

If I lived in egypt before the time of Abraham, and had never heard of Jesus Christ in my lifetime. If I lived all of my life according to the best and finest moral principles that God had given me ability to live am I punished by your version of God for not having accepted Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? Remember, God did NOT give me the opportunity to accept Jesus in this life.

Or, If I had been born perfectly normal infant, who smiled and giggled like any other infant at two months, doing no harm nor evil in any way, but, upon sustaining meningitis, either becoming a non-thinking vegetable, or actually dying, am I punished by your version of God for not having accepted Jesus while I lived according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? Again, you should remember that God did NOT give me the opportunity to accept Jesus in this life.

Are such people punished for not accepting Jesus in this life in your personal interpretation of Christianity?

ChristianPilgrim responded

“I believe elect infants who die are washed by the blood of Christ and are in Heaven.”

I do not know what an “elect infant” is or I would have known to specify that both of the individuals in my example are NOT special. They are “ordinary” individuals just as the vast majority of individuals are “ordinary”.

According to my examples:
1) I Am simply an adult Egyptian, never having had the opportunity to accept Jesus Christ in my lifetime. I lived my life according to the best and finest moral principle that God had given me an ability to live by. Am I punished by God for not having accepted Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, I lived the most moral life I could according to the limited knowledge God had given me. I am NOT “elect” nor “special” in any other way other than I lived the best that I could while in this life. (remember, God did NOT give me sufficient knowledge of jesus in this example.)

2) As a “non-elect”, but simple and ordinary infant who smiled and giggled like any other infant. Doing no harm nor evil in any way, but having become a vegetable or having died, am I, as a “non-elect”, an “ordinary infant” (like the kind born every day in nurseries all over the world), Am I punished by God for not having accepted Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, as an infant, I simply “did the best I could” according to the limited moral knowledge God had given me. I am not special nor “elect” other than having “lived the very best moral standard” an infant may live (whatever that is...)

Am I, as an adult egyptian and as a “non”elect and very “ordinary” infant, PUNISHED by God for not having accepted Jesus while I was alive?

Clear

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

Clear commented and asks:
ChristianPilgrim responded

I do not know what an “elect infant” is or I would have known to specify that both of the individuals in my example are NOT special. They are “ordinary” individuals just as the vast majority of individuals are “ordinary”.

According to my examples:
1) I Am simply an adult Egyptian, never having had the opportunity to accept Jesus Christ in my lifetime. I lived my life according to the best and finest moral principle that God had given me an ability to live by. Am I punished by God for not having accepted Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, I lived the most moral life I could according to the limited knowledge God had given me. I am NOT “elect” nor “special” in any other way other than I lived the best that I could while in this life.

2) As a “non-elect”, but simple and ordinary infant who smiled and giggled like any other infant. Doing no harm nor evil in any way, but having become a vegetable or having died, am I, as a “non-elect”, an “ordinary infant” (like the kind born every day in nurseries all over the world), Am I punished by God for not having accepted Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, as an infant, I simply “did the best I could” according to the limited moral knowledge God had given me. I am not special nor “elect” other than having “lived the very best moral standard” an infant may live (whatever that is...)

Am I, as an adult egyptian and as a “non”elect and very “ordinary” infant, PUNISHED by God for not having accepted Jesus while I was alive?

Clear

Before we continue, what is the basis of your understanding of Christianity. You keep referencing the idea of "accepting Jesus". What do you mean by that, and do you have Scripture references to support what you are sharing? We are all commanded to repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ regardless of being an Elect of God or not.

 

[Clear]

ChristianPilgrim, it doesn’t matter whether I am Christian, or Agnostic, or Athiest, or Muslim or Hindu. The questions don’t really care and they are VERY, VERY simple. Pretend I am athiest if you want. It doesn't matter. I'm simply asking if the ancient egyptian and the infant are punished? After all, neither of them believed in Jesus.


You claimed “If we are okay by living the best to our ability, then Christ suffered and died in vain, right?” - I’ve asked several times why, in your personal interpretation of Christianity, Christ suffered and died in vain if individuals were “ok” by living according to the best of their moral ability. I pointed out that God cannot justly punish individuals for not living according to laws unless he gives them knowledge and understanding sufficient to obey these laws.


It was difficult to get an answer on this question so I tried to make this simple. I’ll again reword the questions for you.


1) I Am simply an adult Egyptian having lived in the times before Abraham and never having had the opportunity to even hear the name “Jesus Christ” in my lifetime, nor did I ever believe in a “Jesus Christ” (having NEVER so much as heard his name in my lifetime). Because of these circumstanced, I NEVER believed in Jesus as a savior (having known NOTHING about him), NEVER sought a relationship with him, nor uttered a single prayer regarding Jesus. I NEVER EVEN GAVE JESUS A SINGLE THOUGHT in my entire life. YET, I lived my entire life according to the best and finest moral principle that God had given me an ability to live by.

The question remains: Am I punished by God for not having believed in Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, I lived the most moral life I could according to the limited knowledge God had given me. Still, I was NOT “elect” nor “special” in any other way other than I lived the best that I could while in this life.


2) As a “non-elect”, but simple and ordinary infant who smiled and giggled like any other infant. Doing no harm nor evil in any way, but having become a vegetable or having died, am I, as a “non-elect”, an “ordinary infant” (like the kind born every day in nurseries all over the world),

Am I punished by God for not believing in Jesus as a savior or redeemer in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, as an infant, I simply “did the best I could” according to the limited moral knowledge God had given me. I am not special nor “elect” other than having “lived the very best moral standard” an infant may live (whatever that is...)



Both the ordinary adult egyptian and the very “ordinary” infant, lived and DIED WITHOUT EVER EVEN HAVING GIVEN JESUS A SINGLE, SOLITARY THOUGHT. Are they PUNISHED by God for not having heard of, believed in, had faith in Jesus, nor having given him a single, solitary thought? What happens to them in your interpretation of Christianity?

Clear
eiacse77hh

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

ChristianPilgrim, it doesn’t matter whether I am Christian, or Agnostic, or Athiest, or Muslim or Hindu. The questions don’t really care and they are VERY, VERY simple. I'm simply asking if the ancient egyptian and the infant are punished? After all, neither of them believed in Jesus.


You claimed “If we are okay by living the best to our ability, then Christ suffered and died in vain, right?” - I’ve asked several times why, in your personal interpretation of Christianity, Christ suffered and died in vain if individuals were “ok” by living according to the best of their moral ability. I pointed out that God cannot justly punish individuals for not living according to laws unless he gives them knowledge and understanding sufficient to obey these laws.


It was difficult to get an answer on this question so I tried to make this simple. I’ll again reword the questions for you.


1) I Am simply an adult Egyptian having lived in the times before Abraham and never having had the opportunity to even hear the name “Jesus Christ” in my lifetime, nor did I ever believe in a “Jesus Christ” (having NEVER so much as heard his name in my lifetime). Because of these circumstanced, I NEVER believed in Jesus as a savior (having known NOTHING about him), NEVER sought a relationship with him, nor uttered a single prayer regarding Jesus. I NEVER EVEN GAVE JESUS A SINGLE THOUGHT in my entire life. YET, I lived my entire life according to the best and finest moral principle that God had given me an ability to live by.

The question remains: Am I punished by God for not having heard or NOR believed in Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, I lived the most moral life I could according to the limited knowledge God had given me. Still, I was NOT “elect” nor “special” in any other way other than I lived the best that I could while in this life.


2) As a “non-elect”, but simple and ordinary infant who smiled and giggled like any other infant. Doing no harm nor evil in any way, but having become a vegetable or having died, am I, as a “non-elect”, an “ordinary infant” (like the kind born every day in nurseries all over the world),

Am I punished by God for not having heard of, nor understood anything about and thus NEVER believed in Jesus as a savior or redeemer in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, as an infant, I simply “did the best I could” according to the limited moral knowledge God had given me. I am not special nor “elect” other than having “lived the very best moral standard” an infant may live (whatever that is...)



Both the ordinary adult egyptian and the very “ordinary” infant, lived and DIED WITHOUT EVER EVEN HAVING GIVEN JESUS A SINGLE, SOLITARY THOUGHT. Are they PUNISHED by God for not having heard of, believed in, had faith in Jesus, nor having given him a single, solitary thought? What happens to them in your interpretation of Christianity?

Clear

Imaginary examples are not good ways to discuss Christianity. The best way to understand Christianity is through the Holy Bible. Do you believe the Bible to be the Word of God?


Trust in the Lord with all your heart,
and do not lean on your own understanding.
In all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make straight your paths.
Be not wise in your own eyes;
fear the Lord, and turn away from evil. - Proverbs 3

 

[Clear]

Clear asked the same question, again:

“ChristianPilgrim, it doesn’t matter whether I am Christian, or Agnostic, or Athiest, or Muslim or Hindu. The questions don’t really care.

You claimed “If we are okay by living the best to our ability, then Christ suffered and died in vain, right?” - I’ve asked several times why, in your personal interpretation of Christianity, Christ suffered and died in vain if individuals were “ok” by living according to the best of their moral ability. I pointed out that God cannot justly punish individuals for not living according to laws unless he gives them knowledge and understanding sufficient to obey these laws.

It was difficult to get an answer on this question so I tried to make this simple. I’ll again reword the questions for you.


1) I Am simply an adult Egyptian having lived in the times before Abraham and never having had the opportunity to even hear the name “Jesus Christ” in my lifetime, nor did I ever believe in a “Jesus Christ” (having NEVER so much as heard his name in my lifetime). Because of these circumstanced, I NEVER believed in Jesus as a savior (having known NOTHING about him), NEVER sought a relationship with him, nor uttered a single prayer regarding Jesus, nor even gave Jesus A SINGLE THOUGHT in my entire life. YET, I lived my entire life according to the best and finest moral principle that God had given me an ability to live by.

The question remains: Am I punished by God for not having heard or NOR believed in Jesus in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, I lived the most moral life I could according to the limited knowledge God had given me. Still, I was NOT “elect” nor “special” in any other way other than I lived the best that I could while in this life.


2) As a “non-elect”, but simple and ordinary infant who smiled and giggled like any other infant. Doing no harm nor evil in any way, but having become a vegetable or having died, am I, as a “non-elect”, an “ordinary infant” (like the kind born every day in nurseries all over the world),

Am I punished by God for not having heard of, nor understood anything about and thus NEVER believed in Jesus as a savior or redeemer in this life according to your personal interpretation of Christianity? That is, as an infant, I simply “did the best I could” according to the limited moral knowledge God had given me. I am not special nor “elect” other than having “lived the very best moral standard” an infant may live (whatever that is...)



Both the ordinary adult egyptian and the very “ordinary” infant, lived and DIED WITHOUT EVER EVEN HAVING GIVEN JESUS A SINGLE, SOLITARY THOUGHT. Are they PUNISHED by God for not having heard of, believed in, had faith in Jesus, nor having given him a single, solitary thought? What happens to them in your interpretation of Christianity?

Clear

ChristianPilgrim’s answer is :

“ Imaginary examples are not good ways to discuss Christianity. The best way to understand Christianity is through the Holy Bible. Do you believe the Bible to be the Word of God? ‘

I hope you will not request proof that babies have died in the past; DO die in our day and age and babies will die in the future without ever reaching an understanding of Jesus, without having given him a thought. Clinician's in pediatric hospitals in multiple nations will testify that infant deaths are very real.

I hope also, that you realize that there are adults to whom the same thing happens. I have friends who went to non-imaginary Tanzania, met real, live, non-imaginary aborigines who have not ever heard of Jesus. They’ve simply never even given Jesus a single thought.

Please, ChristianPilgrim, if you don’t know the answer, or if you simply don’t want to admit it, or for some other reason don’t want to say what you think. Just say so. I’ve already spent numerous posts in an attempt to have you answer this single, very simple, and very obvious question.

You say that the best way to understand Christianity is through the bible, yet I believe most agnostics who’ve never read the bible, already know the answer to this simple principle.


Perhaps we could ask the forum?
TO ANY ATHIEST OR AGNOSTIC (OR ANYONE ELSE READING THIS THREAD)

DOES ANYONE BELIEVE THAT IT IS JUSTICE FOR GOD TO PUNISH INDIVIDUALS FOR NOT OBEYING A PRINCIPLE IF GOD DOESN’T GIVE THEM KNOWLEDGE OF AND SUFFICIENT UNDERSTANDING OF AND ABILITY TO OBEY THE PRINCIPLE FOR WHICH THEY WILL BE PUNISHED?

ANYONE?

Clear

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

I can give you my answers, but if my answers cannot be supported in the Scriptures, they are only speculative answers. Please share your view on the Scriptures.

 

[Clear]

ChristianPilgrim replies :

“I can give you my answers, but if my answers cannot be supported in the Scriptures, they are only speculative answers. Please share your view on the Scriptures. “

This post is the 15th post between us since I first asked the simple question, and it has taken this long just to get you to admit that you might have an answer for what has been obvious for some time. At this point, your pattern of obscuring and reluctance to admit the answer to a simple question (one that was obvious to many readers early on) robs me of interest to keep a conversation going with you.

It is NOT that I dislike you ChristianPilgrim, but I simply don’t HAVE the time and energy to wait 15 posts before being told that you might possibly tell me an answer to what are very simple questions. I simply HAVE to stay with individuals who want to make more progress in understanding one another.

I don’t believer you really need to offer an answer. The many other christians, and even athiests do not really need you to tell them the answer. They already know the answer.

I hope you don’t mind but I’d like to withdraw from our conversation and move on to someone else.

Thank you for your time.

Clear
twtwse77ou

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

ChristianPilgrim replies :

This post is the 15th post between us since I first asked the simple question, and it has taken this long just to get you to admit that you might have an answer for what has been obvious for some time. At this point, your pattern of obscuring and reluctance to admit the answer to a simple question (one that was obvious to many readers early on) robs me of interest to keep a conversation going with you.

It is NOT that I dislike you ChristianPilgrim, but I simply don’t HAVE the time and energy to wait 15 posts before being told that you might possibly tell me an answer to what are very simple questions. I simply HAVE to stay with individuals who want to make more progress in understanding one another.

I don’t believer you really need to offer an answer. The many other christians, and even athiests do not really need you to tell them the answer. They already know the answer.

I hope you don’t mind but I’d like to withdraw from our conversation and move on to someone else.

Thank you for your time.

Clear
twtwse77ou

It seems you have very little interest with what God reveals through biblical revelation. I'm not sure what you mean in your religion title of "deeply Christian". How can you be "deeply Christian" apart from a desire to understand biblical revelation from above? My wild guess is that you are a Mormon Christian, correct? I have no desire to discuss speculation and personal opinions as professing Christians. Truth is revealed by the Spirit of God through illumination of the Scriptures. When you want to search the Scriptures together as Christians, we can answer all the questions that you have based on biblical revelation. I did answer your questions with scripture passages and chapters which you probably did not study.

 

[Clear]

I’ve noticed that often in these forums, individuals try to make comparisons, such as “Judaism” and “Christianity”, but historically, to be accurate one must specify which “ancient Christianity” and at what time period since the various Christianities and their doctrines have evolved. Modern and various christianities are NOT a monolithic group with exactly the same beliefs, and certainly even before the apostles died, Christianity was starting it’s breakup into various sects and various doctrines evolved, some “winning out” over other doctrines for the enviable position of “orthodoxy”.

I do have interest in the earliest historical theological principles espoused by ancient Christianity and the shared relationship with several groups of sacred literature, and doctrines shared by various religions. I’ve noticed that “pre-existent religions”, (i.e. those having data and doctrine as to what happened before the world existed), including ancient “pre-existent Christianities” share certain doctrines and principles. Certain “themes” which recur among them that are often lost to religions having little knowledge and few doctrines concerning what was happening before the creation of the world.

I have read the Pearl of Great Price, and the D&C but confess I am no expert. I would like to ask an LDS member regarding parallels between these documents and between ancient “pre-existent Christianity” (P.E. Christianity).

For example, the LDS share a belief with ancient “pre-existent Christianity” who also believed in creation from chaotic matter rather than the doctrine of creation out of “nothing” (ex-nihilo creation) that became popular in later christianities. For example: Justin Martyr, in his First Apology, explains this early Christian doctrine by saying:

"We have been taught that He in the beginning did of his goodness, for man's sake, create all things out of unformed matter” (ex amorphou hyles). First Apology, 49.

. The LDS also share this early doctrine of creation from chaotic matter that Justin said was taught by Christians in his day. I believe both of these groups are correct in this specific belief.

First, does the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believe that all material things were created from matter in the same way that this earliest Christian Apologist (Justin Martyr) taught, (i.e. unformed - chaotic matter), and

Secondly, If the original pre-existent Christians (as well as the LDS) were correct regarding creation from “unformed matter”, I have wondered if the LDS realize the implications of this belief or have teaching regarding the implications of this ancient type of Christian belief.

For example: The philosophers and theists have argued for centuries regarding why God “created” evil. But almost always they have done so from the context of ex-nihilo christianity (which creates the doctrine that God is responsible for evil’s existence - having created all things)
The later ex-nihilo doctrine (i.e. God creates from “nothing&#8221 forces the logic that God is responsible for evil (since evil did not exist before God having created - in that model). Mohammed (pbuh) did retain some remnants of pre-existence history in the Quran (such as the fall of Lucifer), but then most Muslims I’ve studied with follow the later Christianities preference for “creation out of nothing”.

However, this is NOT the case with ancient “pre-existent Christianity” (including the LDS). For example: The ancient Christian Pistis Sophia discusses “self willed matter”. I believe it is the ancient Christian term for “intelligence” spoken of in the D&C. If the ancient P.E. Christians were correct, that some matter is “intelligent” and “self-willed” and eternal in it’s nature, then this ancient doctrine has the potential to change the entire context of centuries of arguments.


Do the LDS even follow such philosophical arguments?

Do they understand the wonderful implications of this single shared doctrine between them and the ancients?

Do they understand the implications of “creation from matter” in relation to solving the centuries of arguments regarding the origin of evil and Gods responsibility?

Clear
twfuse77hb

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

I’ve noticed that often in these forums, individuals try to make comparisons, such as “Judaism” and “Christianity”, but historically, to be accurate one must specify which “ancient Christianity” and at what time period since the various Christianities and their doctrines have evolved. Modern and various christianities are NOT a monolithic group with exactly the same beliefs, and certainly even before the apostles died, Christianity was starting it’s breakup into various sects and various doctrines evolved, some “winning out” over other doctrines for the enviable position of “orthodoxy”.

I do have interest in the earliest historical theological principles espoused by ancient Christianity and the shared relationship with several groups of sacred literature, and doctrines shared by various religions.

I’ve noticed that “pre-existent religions”, (i.e. those having data and doctrine as to what happened before the world existed), including ancient “pre-existent Christianities” share certain doctrines and principles. Certain “themes” which recur among them that are often lost to religions having little knowledge and few doctrines concerning what was happening before the creation of the world.

I have read the Pearl of Great Price, and the D&C but confess I am no expert. I would like to ask an LDS member regarding parallels between these documents and between ancient “pre-existent Christianity” (P.E. Christianity).

For example, I think the LDS share a belief with ancient “pre-existent Christianity” who also believed in creation from chaotic matter rather than the doctrine of creation out of “nothing” (ex-nihilo creation) that became popular in later christianities. For example: Justin Martyr, in his First Apology, explains this early Christian doctrine by saying: . The LDS seemed also to have retained this early doctrine of creation from chaotic matter that Justin said was taught by Christians in his day. I believe both of these groups are correct in this specific belief.

First, does the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believe that all things were created from matter in the same way that this earliest Christian Apologist (Justin Martyr) taught, (i.e. unformed - chaotic matter), and

Secondly, If the original pre-existent Christians (as well as the LDS) were correct regarding creation from “unformed matter”, I have wondered if the LDS realize the implications of this belief or have teaching regarding the implications of this ancient type of Christian belief.

For example: The philosophers and theists have argued for centuries regarding why God “created” evil. But almost always they have done so from the context of ex-nihilo christianity (which creates the doctrine that God is responsible for evil’s existence - having created all things)

The later ex-nihilo doctrine (i.e. God creates from “nothing&#8221 forces the logic that God is responsible for evil (since evil did not exist before his creation in that model). Mohammed (pbuh) did retain some remnants of pre-existence history in the Quran (such as the fall of Lucifer), but then most Muslims I’ve studied with follow the later Christianities preference for “creation out of nothing”.
However, this is NOT the case with ancient “pre-existent Christianity” (including the LDS). For example: The ancient Christian Pistis Sophia discusses “self willed matter”. I believe it is the ancient Christian term for “intelligence” spoken of in the D&C. If the ancient P.E. Christians were correct, that some matter is “intelligent” and “self-willed” and eternal in it’s nature, then this ancient doctrine has the potential to change the entire context of centuries of arguments.


Do the modern LDS follow such philosophical arguments?

Do they understand the wonderful implications of this single shared doctrine between them and the ancients?

Do they understand the implications of “creation from matter” in relation to solving the centuries of arguments?

Clear
twfuse77hb

Hi Clear,

I appreciate you zeal and passion, but I think you are way off the thread topic. Could you please stay on the thread topic? Actually, this thread is for LDS Christians to challenge historic biblical Christians in what they believe. Since I am a biblical Christian, my source of divine revelation is contained within the Holy Bible.

 

[Clear]

I have taken note of ChristianPilgrims suggestion (in the last post) about this being a place for LDS to challenge early Christian doctrines (although I must admit that it makes no sense to start a thread where Christianity is encouraged to challenge Christianity....). So, I will try to take ChristianPilgrims advice and be more argumentative and attempt to add argumentative questions to my post to assist you LDS in your challenging duties. (I’m sorry if I’m new to arguing...so pleeeez bear with me) If any LDS would like to challenge or make snide comments regarding the ancient Christian belief of creation of "material things" from "matter", let me know? Anyone? Anyone? C'mon, put yer dukes up!, yeeeaah, that's what I thought!)
I will try to place future argumentative challenges in bold in case anyone wants to skip the data and just argue.

Having said that:


I’ve noticed that often in these forums, individuals try to make comparisons, such as “Judaism” and “Christianity”, but historically, to be accurate one must specify which “ancient Christianity” and at what time period since the various Christianities and their doctrines have evolved. Modern and various christianities are NOT a monolithic group with exactly the same beliefs, and certainly even before the apostles died, Christianity was starting it’s breakup into various sects and various doctrines evolved, some “winning out” over other doctrines for the enviable position of “orthodoxy”.

I do have interest in the earliest historical theological principles espoused by ancient Christianity and the shared relationship with several groups of sacred literature, and doctrines shared by various religions. (Do any LDS want to argue about this last sentence?)

I’ve noticed that “pre-existent religions”, (i.e. those having data and doctrine as to what happened before the world existed), including ancient “pre-existent Christianities” share certain doctrines and principles. Certain “themes” which recur among them that are often lost to religions having little knowledge and few doctrines concerning what was happening before the creation of the world. (How about this sentence, any LDS want to argue about it?)

I have read the Pearl of Great Price, and the D&C but confess I am no expert. I would like to ask regarding parallels between these documents and between ancient “pre-existent Christianity” (P.E. Christianity). (Do any LDS want to argue about this last sentence?)

For example, I think the LDS share a belief with ancient “pre-existent Christianity” who also believed in creation from chaotic matter rather than the doctrine of creation out of “nothing” (ex-nihilo creation) that became popular in later christianities. For example: The great Christian Apologist Justin Martyr (100-165 a.d.), in his First Apology, explains this early Christian doctrine by saying:

"We have been taught that He in the beginning did of his goodness, for man's sake, create all things out of unformed matter” (ex amorphou hyles). First Apology, 49

. The LDS seemed also to have retained this early doctrine of creation from chaotic matter that Justin said was taught by Christians in his day. I believe both of these groups are correct in this specific belief. (Is there any LDS that wants to argue that they are not correct on this specific doctrine? Anyone? Yeah, I thought so!)

First, does the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believe that all things were created from matter in the same way that this earliest Christian Apologist (Justin Martyr) taught, (i.e. unformed - chaotic matter), and

Secondly, If the original pre-existent Christians (as well as the LDS) were correct regarding creation from “unformed matter”, I have wondered if the LDS realize the implications of this belief or have teaching regarding the implications of this ancient type of Christian belief.

For example: The philosophers and theists have argued for centuries regarding why God “created” evil. But almost always they have done so from the context of ex-nihilo christianity (which creates the doctrine that God is responsible for evil’s existence - having created all things)
The later ex-nihilo doctrine (i.e. God creates from “nothing&#8221 forces the logic that God is responsible for evil (since evil did not exist before his creation in that model). Mohammed (pbuh) did retain some remnants of pre-existence history in the Quran (such as the fall of Lucifer), but then most Muslims I’ve studied with follow the later Christianities preference for “creation out of nothing”.

However, I BELIEVE that this is NOT the case with ancient “pre-existent Christianity” (including the LDS). For example: The ancient Christian Pistis Sophia discusses “self willed matter”. I believe it is the ancient Christian term for “intelligence” spoken of in the D&C. If the ancient P.E. Christians were correct, that some matter is “intelligent” and “self-willed” and eternal in it’s nature, then this ancient doctrine has the potential to change the entire context of centuries of arguments. (Is there any LDS that wants to argue about this?)


Do the modern LDS follow such philosophical arguments?

Do they understand the wonderful implications of this single shared doctrine between them and the ancients?

Do they understand the implications of “creation from matter” in relation to solving the centuries of arguments?

(Finally, so that I fulfill ChristianPilgrims suggestion that this is an area where LDS can challenge the ancient Christian Doctrines, I must add as a "historic biblical Christian", Is there any LDS person wanting to argue about the correctness or the impact of this ancient doctrine of creation from matter?)

Clear
twfusi77hg

 

[Katzpur]

(Finally, so that I fulfill ChristianPilgrims suggestion that this is an area where LDS can challenge the ancient Christian Doctrines, I must add as a "historic biblical Christian", Is there any LDS person wanting to argue about the correctness or the impact of this ancient doctrine of creation from matter?)

I think you might find a few people who were interested if it were not a debate with Christian Pilgrim. All of us have pretty much had our fill of his tactics, and can't be bothered with him any more.