Christian Discussion Forums | Christian Forums | Christian Chat http://forums.carm.org/vbb/ Christian discussion forums with a Christian apologetics slant. en Wed, 16 May 2012 20:03:26 GMT vBulletin 62 http://forums.carm.org/vbb/images/misc/rss.png Christian Discussion Forums | Christian Forums | Christian Chat http://forums.carm.org/vbb/ <![CDATA[Morality and premarital sex, from a Mormon's perspective]]> http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100068-Morality-and-premarital-sex-from-a-Mormon-s-perspective&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 19:39:06 GMT All Bible followers know that adultery and fornication are wrong. Yet we all see it violated in our society quite frequently and openly and we know... All Bible followers know that adultery and fornication are wrong. Yet we all see it violated in our society quite frequently and openly and we know they aren't all atheists. The rate of babies born out of wedlock is skyrocketing!

God's commandments, being raised in the CoJCoLDS, faith, my testimony of the true gospel of Jesus Christ, and God's help, gave me enough motivation, strength, and the reason .... to remain morally clean before (and after) marriage. Plenty of us stumble and sin, and therefore, we are grateful for the principle of repentance and for Christ's atonement. I am so grateful for the morality lessons I have received all my life at church. I am also grateful my children received the same, and have chosen the same path.

Immorality cannot be justified. Yet plenty of people apparently feel it IS justified somehow. How is that? ]]> Mormonism (LDS) Brenda http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100068-Morality-and-premarital-sex-from-a-Mormon-s-perspective <![CDATA[Credo: "I Believe...in God"]]> http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100064-Credo-quot-I-Believe-in-God-quot&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 19:10:28 GMT *God is the only Supreme Being with no gods created before or after Him in all of existence, in all places, in all time (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6;...
God is the only Supreme Being with no gods created before or after Him in all of existence,

in all places, in all time
(Isaiah 43:10; 44:6; 44:8; 1 Tim. 1:17).

He has always been God and was never anything else
(Psalm 90:2).

He is Holy
(Rev. 4:8),

Eternal
(Isaiah 57:15),

Omnipotent
(Jer. 32:17,27),

Omnipresent
(Psalm 137:12),

Omniscient
(1 John 3:20); etc.

He is Love
(1 John 4:8, 16);

Light
(1 John 1:5);

Spirit
(John 4:24);

Truth
(Psalm 117:2);

Creator
(Isaiah 40:12,22,26), etc.

He is to be worshiped
(Gen. 24:26; Ex. 4:31; 2 Chron. 29:28; 1 Cor. 14:25;Rev. 7:11).

He is to be served
(Matt. 4:10;1 Cor. 6:19; Phil. 3:7; 1 Thess. 1:9; Heb. 9:14).

He is to be declared
(Matt. 28:19f.; John 14:15f.; Acts 1:8).
]]> Apologetics sonofHilkiah http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100064-Credo-quot-I-Believe-in-God-quot <![CDATA[Credo: "I Believe...the Word of God"]]> http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100062-Credo-quot-I-Believe-the-Word-of-God-quot&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 18:52:17 GMT *The Bible is the Word of God, and that its original manuscripts are free from errors and contradictions. It is the one and only infallible,...
The Bible is the Word of God, and that its original manuscripts are free

from errors and contradictions.

It is the one and only infallible, authoritative, and trustworthy rule for

faith and life. (2 Peter. 1:21, 2 Tim. 3:16).

The Roman Catholic Apocrypha is not inspired scripture

and is not part of the canon of scripture.

The Bible is to be taken as literally as possible except where obviously figurative.

Genesis, for example, is literal, and Adam and Eve were actual people.
 ]]> Apologetics sonofHilkiah http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100062-Credo-quot-I-Believe-the-Word-of-God-quot For Lease: The Mark Of The Beast http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100059-For-Lease-The-Mark-Of-The-Beast&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 18:36:10 GMT Ad on the Livingston (MI) SDA Church website:

"For Lease
Livingston SDA Church—Great Location at 5210 Highland Road, Howell.
5000 sq. ft church building with 4 classrooms, library, pastors study, baptismal pool, mothers room, full kitchen and fellowship hall built in 2004. Sanctuary seats 160. Available Sunday’s and for mid-week services. 1200.00/mo. Please call (name omitted) at ### or (name omitted) at ### for more information or to schedule a tour."

How can SDA churches on one hand officially teach that Christians who assemble on Sunday to worship Jesus will receive the mark of the beast while on the other hand offer to lease their churches to Christians to assemble on Sunday to worship Jesus? ]]> Seventh Day Adventism Freeatlast http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100059-For-Lease-The-Mark-Of-The-Beast <![CDATA[Former Jehovah's Witnesses]]> http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100058-Former-Jehovah-s-Witnesses&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 18:25:35 GMT This video describes many former witnesses. High ranking ones! Check out the info. What do you think? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AuXDy4kqDs This video describes many former witnesses. High ranking ones! Check out the info. What do you think?

]]> realist http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100058-Former-Jehovah-s-Witnesses <![CDATA[Once more, Daniel's 70 weeks prophesy]]> http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100057-Once-more-Daniel-s-70-weeks-prophesy&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 18:04:47 GMT I intend this to be a review for clarity of Cynthia's thread on the 70 weeks (no gap, she claims). When I first addressed her thread, she came back saying that I had not read her OP post adequately, and had as a result put too much emphasis on the dates (point of departure for the 70th weeks), which surprised me because I had merely intereacted with her own introducing Cyrus's decree into the discussion, again not something I initiated but her.


Cynthia's explanation indicated that she felt that the various 70 Week timelines offered throughout history were all "goofed up" and she suggested instead that we begin with Christ's earthly ministry and count back, and apparently she thought such a count reached back to Cyrus' decree. My interaction pointed out that counting backwards 483 (69 or 69 1/2 weeks, as per her suggestion) from the Messiah's earthly ministry would only go back to a different and later decree from Cyrus', one about the mid 400s...during the time of the Persian Kings. And contrary to Cyrus' decree as the point of departure, I pointed out that Cyrus' decree does not match the prophecy in Dan. 9 anyway, according to which...the period was to run from the decree to rebuild the City (Jerusalem) unto Messiah the Prince (Christological interpretation = Jesus of Nazareth)., whereas Cyrus' decree only emphasized the temple (house for our God)....


So now with mutual agreement, we went into the actual wording of the prophesy itself as presented in Dan. 9:24-27. Within the prophecy 3 increments are presented totalling the 70 weeks of 2520 days (about 7 years) each, broken down as 7 weeks, 62 weeks, and one week (the last of the 70).


The prophecy's object is stated to be Daniel's people and his Holy City (Jerusalem). Gabriel is dispatched to give Daniel insight into this prophecy as it relates to his people and to his holy city. Thus the angel proceeds to rehearse each of the three increments....he puts the 7 + 62 together consecutively from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem....unto Messiah the Prince. Then he stops his rehearsal to insert the Messiah's cutting - off and the further distant destruction of the City and the Sanctuary (v. 26), then Gabriel resumes his rehearsal with the one remaining week to complete the 70 (see v. 27).


The words of Daniel 9:24-27 have been a problem besetting the christologocial "historical" view which dogmatically declares the uninterupted progression and fulfillment of all 70 weeks, the end of which Cynthia finds about 3 1/2 yrs after the Cross. What problem besets this attempted explanation? In order to comprehend we will need to highlight 3 or 4 passages of Scripture exhibiting a strain of identity as later referenced through Scripture (both OT and NT).


The first related passage appears in Jesus' "Olivet Discourse" (Matt. 24-25)....a comprehensive outline of future events uttered by Jesus just about 3 or 4 days before the Cross (see Matt. 26:2, "You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man is to be handed over for crucifixion." )). Contained within this futuristic outline (future from Jesus' speaking) is a major prophetic event which he holds forth as revelatory and easily recognizable upon occurrence....i.e. "when you see....then shall be". Jesus says when this is seen, those in Judea must flea to the mountains pronto...no time to take anything out of the house...boogity boogity :) Jesus continues by pointing out that this revelatory event (Daniel's AoD) is to introduce an unprecedented time of trouble, which he calls 'great tribulation' (like no other before or after). The time of trouble is so ferocious that without shortening for the elect's sake, no flesh would be saved. Here is an abbreviated outline in the order presented.


" Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), . . .then those in Judea must flea to the mountains. . .for then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will be (unprecedented). . . .But immediately after the tribulation of those days ...they will see the SON OF MAN coming on the clouds...with power and great glory." (Matt 24:15-21; 29-30).


Note especially Jesus' reference to "Daniel the prophet" when referring to "the abomination of desolation", notice also we cannot detect a slightest distinction being drawn by Jesus of two separated (by about 40 years or so) and distinct AoD's....no, he speaks just of "the abomination of desolation"....nothing more, nothing less.


Ok, two more passages need to be compared to the above to complete the strain of identity mentioned earlier. One is in Daniel 12:1 which once again hi-lights an unprecedented time of trouble which culminates in the eschatalogical resurrection. Thus, "Now at that time. . .there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people (Daniel's people). . . will be rescued" (Dan. 12:1). So back further to Jeremiah 30:7, "Alas! for that day is great, There is none like it; And it is the time of Jacob's distress, But he will be saved from it.


See the unprecedented strain of identity that works its way from OT prophetic utterance...to Jesus' reiterization and projection future from his Olivet Discourse. This is something Jesus holds forth as revelatory (when you see), and you might compare it with Paul's man of sin being revealed sitting in the temple, claiming deity and demanding worship in the final years leading up to the Lord's 2nd Advent (2 Thess 2)...when Daniel's people (Jacob) will be rescued out of this terrible time of trouble. John refers to it with his "beast" who's power he says is "42 months"....one half of a 7 year period (coincidence?)...which he also has culminating in the Lord's Parousia (2nd Advent..Rev. 19). So all of this strain of identity is consistently represented as reaching to the 2nd Advent....with the latter half of a seven year period of unprecedented trouble.


Well now that we see the strain of identity that wanes its way through Scripture, we can now in my next post see how it relates to Daniel's 70 week prophecy. Much will naturally revolve around the "midst of the week"....i.e. the one remaining week of the 70 that Gabriel resumes with in Dan. 9:27. Remember that Jesus uttered his, "when you therefore shall see the AoD"......only 3 or 4 days prior to the Cross if one thinks that is the middle of the last week, Jesus would then be pointing to the AoD only 3 or 4 days hence.

I'll take a short break, in case there may be some some questions or points someone wants to clarify.

Take care, folks:

Ray ]]> Eschatology Ray Goldsmith http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100057-Once-more-Daniel-s-70-weeks-prophesy No proof for Melchizedek Priesthood for Joseph Smith Jr http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100051-No-proof-for-Melchizedek-Priesthood-for-Joseph-Smith-Jr&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 17:18:56 GMT It is claimed by the Mormon leaders that before the church was organized Peter, James, and John restored the Melchizedek Priesthood. Apostle LeGrand... It is claimed by the Mormon leaders that before the church was organized Peter, James, and John restored the Melchizedek Priesthood. Apostle LeGrand Richards admits that the exact date of this ordination is not known: "While we are a record-keeping people, as the Lord commanded, nevertheless our records are not complete.... we do not have the date that Peter, James and John conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood upon them" (Letter from LeGrand Richards, dated September 26, 1960).

"In the History of the Church, no account is given of the date when the Melchizedek Priesthood was restored." Doctrines of Salvation Vol. 3 page 95 Joseph Fielding Smith

The Doctrine and Covenants 27:12
is cited as proof that the Melchizedek Priesthood was conferred at a very early date: "And also with Peter, and James, and John, whom I have sent unto you, by whom I have ordained you and confirmed you to be apostles .... "

This verse, however, did not appear in the revelation when it was published in the Book of Commandments in 1833. It was added into the Doctrine and Covenants, and therefore cannot be cited as proof that the Melchizedek Priesthood was in the church at the time the revelation was given

Hyperlink is the Original section of 27 before 12 verses were added.

This hyperlink shows the two side by side

http://www.utlm.org/images/changingt...tions_p157.gif

Visitations of John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John conferring the priesthood apparently were not known in the church until sometime after 1834. If restoration of priesthood was such a significant event, wouldn’t Joseph have mentioned it earlier? “I never heard that an Angel had ordained Joseph and Oliver to the Aaronic Priesthood until the year 1834, 5, or 6—in Ohio… I do not believe that John the Baptist ever ordained Joseph and Oliver…” – David Whitmer (Early Mormon Documents, 5:137). “I joined the church in 1831. For years I never heard of John the Baptist ordaining Joseph and Oliver. I heard not of James, Peter, and John doing so… I never heard of it in the church for years…” – William McLellin (An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins, pp.224-25). The revelation referring to the Aaronic restoration is missing from the Book of Commandments, as well as from the original church history as published in The Evening and Morning Star (edition dated March 1833, p.6). The only known manuscript copy of the revelation makes no reference to the LDS priesthoods either (Origins of Power, p.16).

The account of the Melchizedek restoration is entirely missing. B.H. Roberts writes that “there is no definite account of the event in the history of the Prophet Joseph, or, for matter of that, in any of our annals…” (History of the Church, 1:40fn).

The information that is available about the Melchizedek restoration creates a problem. Many LDS scholars who have studied the event place the ordination within a few weeks of the Aaronic priesthood ordination date, which was in May 1829 (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 2:885-86). There is a brief mention of the event in Oliver B. Huntington’s journal, which places the Melchizedek ordination on a night after Joseph and Oliver had been on trial in Colesville, New York (Journal of Oliver B. Huntington, 13 January 1881). Joseph Smith dated this incarceration in mid-to-late June of 1830 (History of the Church 1:84-85, 92-94). Wesley Walters located the court bill for this trial, which was dated “July 1st 1830” (Joseph Smith’s Bainbridge, N.Y., Court Trials, p.125). That date is several weeks after the Church was organized. But LDS sources are emphatic that Smith could not have legally organized the Church unless he had received the Melchizedek priesthood first. At the time of church organization, Joseph Smith gave himself the title of FIRST ELDER of the church. That creates an irreconcilable problem for the LDS claim of authority.

The first mention of Melchizedek Priesthood in the scriptures of the church is Doctrine and Covenants 68, which was recorded in November 1831. Verse 15 says, “Wherefore they shall be high priests who are worthy, and they shall be appointed by the First Presidency of the Melchizedek Priesthood, except they be literal descendants of Aaron.” Nowhere before 1831 is there any such notion of a Priesthood of Melchizedek on the records of the church. ]]> Mormonism (LDS) Ivanhoe http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100051-No-proof-for-Melchizedek-Priesthood-for-Joseph-Smith-Jr Why are there four gospels? http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100049-Why-are-there-four-gospels&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 16:16:19 GMT The Bible contains four accounts of the life of Jesus which are very different from each other and each one contains some information that isn’t in... The Bible contains four accounts of the life of Jesus which are very different from each other and each one contains some information that isn’t in the others. Some of the differences are so great that the gospels almost seem to contradict each other. Why would God inspire men to write four different accounts rather than just one?

One thing to keep in mind when comparing the gospels is that they are called gospels, not biographies.None of them is intended to give a complete account of Jesus’ life as a modern biography does. The gospel is that Jesus died for our sins and rose again from the dead. All of the gospels give more detail about these events and the circumstances immediately leading up to them than they do to any other part of Jesus’ life. Each author has selected from the previous life of Jesus only those events which he considered necessary to provide the necessary background for the actual gospel. Each of the writers apparently had a specific audience in mind when he wrote his gospel and this influenced his choice of what to include.

Matthew’s gospel was written for a Jewish audience and often quoted from the Old Testament to show that Jesus fulfilled its prophecies. Luke was written in Rome to a believer named Theophilus who was probably a gentile. Both told of the birth of Jesus but they emphasized different aspects of it.

Matthew began by showing that Joseph was a descendant of Abraham and David. He wasn’t the biological father of Jesus but his marriage to Mary made him the legal father so his genealogy became that of Jesus. As a descendant of Abraham Jesus was the recipient of the many promises God had made to him. He was also in the line of the kings who succeeded David. Apparently Joseph would have been king if the monarchy had continued and so he passed on the Jesus the right to the throne of Israel.

Because of his emphasis on the kingship of Jesus Matthew is the only one who records the visit of the Wise Men who were looking for the king of the Jews. (They are often depicted visiting Jesus while he lay in the manger after his birth but this isn’t Biblically accurate. Matthew 2:16 shows that two years had elapsed between the time they saw the star and their arrival in Bethlehem.)

Since Luke was writing for a gentile audience his readers probably wouldn’t have been interested in Jesus’ kingship over Israel. His emphasis is more on the humanity of Jesus. He tells the story of the birth from Mary’s point of view and the genealogy he includes is hers. When it says that Joseph was the son of Heli it obviously means that he was considered a son because he was married to Heli’s daughter because according to Matthew his father’s name was Jacob. This genealogy shows that Mary was a descendant of David through Nathan rather that Solomon. It also traces his ancestry all the way back to Adam.

Luke doesn’t record the visit of the Wise Men because his intended audience wasn’t Jewish and therefore wouldn’t be interested in whether Jesus was king of Israel. He does record some information not found in the other gospels, such as the visit to the temple when Jesus was forty days old and the fact that John the Baptist was a relative of Jesus.

Mark’s gospel doesn’t say anything about the birth or backgroud of Jesus but begins with his baptism by John. This gospel emphasizes what Jesus did more that what he said. It records more miracles in proportion to its length than any other gospel and has less of his teaching that the others. The fact that he explains the meaning of Jewish customs shows that he was writing for gentiles who were unfamiliar with them.

John’s gospel is different from the other three. There are some events and a great deal of teaching that are found only here and he leaves out much that the other gospels include. There are three reasons for these differences.

1. John’s gospel was the last one to be written. By the time John wrote it the other gospels were in wide circulation and most Christians were familiar with them. He probably didn’t think there was any need to repeat what was already widely known so he selected events and teaching that the other writers had omitted.

2. Jesus had both a human and a divine nature. The first three gospels focussed mainly on his human nature although they also mentioned his deity. John’s emphasis was on the fact that Jesus was God, although he also wrote abouth his humanity.

3. John stated the purpose of his book in John 20:31, “These are written so that you may beleive that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” His purpose was evangelistic, to bring others to faith in Christ. Luke’s purpose for writing given in Luke 1:4, “That you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.” He was writing to instruct someone who was already a believer.

God sent Jesus to die for the whole world and he wants everyone to hear and believe the gospel. Because people are different there is no single way to present the gospel which will be effective for all of them. Paul said,

Quote:
To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.
(1 Corinthians 9:20-22 ESV)
When he said this he was reflecting the same attitude that God showed when he gave us four gospels so that each of us can find in them what he needs to bring him closer to God. ]]> General Christian Theology theophilus http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100049-Why-are-there-four-gospels Mormons get salvation the old fashioned way. They eeaarrnn it. http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100043-Mormons-get-salvation-the-old-fashioned-way-They-eeaarrnn-it&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 15:20:28 GMT With apologies to the old Merrill Lynch TV commercial.


I've met some Mormons who object to the assertion that Mormonism is a works-based system. They sometimes object to the word "earn."



Richard G. Scott - October 2006 General Conference, “The demands of justice for broken law can be satisfied through mercy, earned by your continual repentance and obedience to the laws of God. Such repentance and obedience are absolutely essential for the Atonement to work its complete miracle in your life. The Redeemer can settle your individual account with justice and grant forgiveness through the merciful path of your repentance. Through the Atonement you can live in a world where justice assures that you will retain what you earn by obedience. Through His mercy you can resolve the consequences of broken laws.”
http://www.lds.org/general-conferenc...iness?lang=eng

On pages 211-212 of his book The Miracle of Forgiveness, President Spencer Kimball, "...are doing nothing seriously wrong except in their failures to do the right things to earn their salvation."

John A. Widtsoe, "Every person will inherit a glory of salvation, which will be the one that he has earned." (Joseph Smith--Seeker after Truth, Prophet of God, p.170,).

Apostle Bruce McConkie said: "’Salvation is free,' but it must also be purchased; and the price is obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel." (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3:462)




So here's my question. How's that working out for you?

Are you good enough? Yet?




]]> Mormonism (LDS) russ http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100043-Mormons-get-salvation-the-old-fashioned-way-They-eeaarrnn-it Watching TV One Night http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100032-Watching-TV-One-Night&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 14:23:19 GMT I came home from work one night and caught part of a Ravi Zacharias sermon on TV. One thing he said stood out to me where he said as best as I can... I came home from work one night and caught part of a Ravi Zacharias sermon on TV. One thing he said stood out to me where he said as best as I can remember (I repeated it several times on my DVR) that "God's revelation is based in history, in His Word and confirmed to us by personal experience." He didn't expand on that but what I believe he's saying is that since the Bible is supported by actual historical events for which there is abundant historical, manuscript and archaeological evidence, it gives the personal experience a solid basis in reality. IOW God left lots of support for the Bible, but what really makes divine truth come alive, what lights the fire in a soul, is that personal experience given by the Holy Spirit.

In contrast, I notice that Latter Day Saints put too much emphasis on the experience and not near enough on the evidence. ]]> Mormonism (LDS) Brown Cat http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100032-Watching-TV-One-Night To Believe or Not to Believe; Is it A Choice? At What Point is our Will Free? http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100027-To-Believe-or-Not-to-Believe-Is-it-A-Choice-At-What-Point-is-our-Will-Free&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 13:58:36 GMT Ever since I have become Lutheran the one thing I cannot get straight is at what point our will is free too choose between: good-evil,... Ever since I have become Lutheran the one thing I cannot get straight is at what point our will is free too choose between: good-evil, faith-unbelief, right-wrong, etc. I do totally understand that I can not do anything for my salvation because Christ paid the price on the cross.

To believe in Christ or not to believe, is that a free-will choice?

To sin or not to sin? I am here on CARM; I could be on XXX.com is that a free will choice?

Lets start with Adam and Eve. Did they not have a choice to make? They could of followed God's instructions but it seems they chose to follow temptation. Since they had not ate from the Tree of Knowledge, did they even realize what they were doing and how could God hold them accountable? This might be a case where ignorance of the law might be an excuse.

I also do understand that that our will is bound by original sin and it is that nature which makes us at odds with God. I also understand that it is by the Holy Spirit that we are brought to God. What I don't get is the thing that occurs within a person that causes the acceptance or rejection of God's grace.

I got three weeks before classes start again, so I have plenty of time to hammer this out. BJ & Elder start your pounding.:) ]]> Lutheran bigbear72 http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100027-To-Believe-or-Not-to-Believe-Is-it-A-Choice-At-What-Point-is-our-Will-Free Where are my subscribed forums http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100022-Where-are-my-subscribed-forums&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 13:22:22 GMT Hi,

I've subcribed to a forum, but I don't see it anywhere on my main screen. I see nothing that says, "Subscribed Forums." I have to go to the main forums page everytime I come to carm. Help!!!!

Katie ]]> How do I .... ? katiemygirl http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100022-Where-are-my-subscribed-forums Evangelicals ‘sinned against Mormonism’? http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100015-Evangelicals-‘sinned-against-Mormonism’&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 11:20:06 GMT Got to love this… ... Got to love this…

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...MPU_story.html

Romney at Liberty University. ]]> Mormonism (LDS) Papa http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100015-Evangelicals-‘sinned-against-Mormonism’ Personal sin? http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100014-Personal-sin&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 11:11:04 GMT I'd just like to discuss an idea being thrown around at the moment which is that we can have personal sin but not sin before God. The bible is very clear on this that we are only sinners before God.

Psm 51:3-4 For I acknowledge my transgressions, And my sin is always before me. 4 Against You, You only, have I sinned,And done this evil in Your sight—That You may be found just when You speak, And blameless when You judge.

Does the bible tell us that we can have personal sin but not sin before God? What say ye. ]]> Seventh Day Adventism kja http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100014-Personal-sin Crucified Life http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100013-Crucified-Life&goto=newpost Wed, 16 May 2012 10:34:40 GMT Hi, looking for christians that really understand what the crucified life is all about. Hi, looking for christians that really understand what the crucified life is all about. ]]> Introduce Yourself/Testimonies abundant life http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?100013-Crucified-Life