What degree of obedience qualifies for salvation?

[Aaron32]

for some reason, it won't let me edit my response. Here's the part I missed:

If you are what you say you are, I believe you said you were a counselor in a Bishopric, then you know that our church is very legalistic and that no one can enter heaven except they are baptized by one having authority to do so.

First, let's get a clear understanding of what legalism is: https://www.ligonier.org/blog/3-types-legalism/
1) Isolating the law from God, 2) seperating the letter from the spirit, 3)Adding rules to God's law

D&C 88:
38 And unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions.
39 All beings who abide not in those conditions are not justified.

If becoming Christlike is the embodiment of the spirit and letter of the law - that's not legalism. That's glorifying God.

What is the essence of the law? To love God, and love your neighbor as yourself.
Where does baptism fit in there? It's evidence of our faith in Christ and following Him because we love Him.
Baptism itself is not the law - the commitment itself is the spirit of the law. Thus, King Benjamin's followers took upon themselves the name of Christ, the people of Ammon all past out and woke up. Baptism is simply an expression of that faith, it's also a gateway into the Church. In actuality it has to do more with sanctification than justification. It's moving from the "love of God" to the "love your neighbor as yourself":

Mosiah 8:
8 And it came to pass that he said unto them: Behold, here are the waters of Mormon (for thus were they called) and now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, and are willing to bear one another’s burdens, that they may be light;

9 Yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death, that ye may be redeemed of God, and be numbered with those of the first resurrection, that ye may have eternal life—

10 Now I say unto you, if this be the desire of your hearts, what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?

Salvation is individual - Exaltation is collective.
The church is for the perfection (not the salvation) of the Saints. (Eph 4:12) Baptism is how we join the church.

Trying to lay common ground by a peace offering in the form of admitting we were wrong is nothing more than saying we are just like them all... equally wrong.

I never said the Church was wrong.
Owning their accusation of us having a "works-based Salvation" is what's wrong.
Accepting faith, and how they understand faith is right.
But too often, Mormons can't seem to distinguish the relationship between works and faith. The grudgingly perform works, and get depressed because they feel they don't do enough, and they question if they have salvation. My view is "Stop being self centered. Accept you're fallen and imperfect, and our works are worth nothing. Accept you have salvation in Jesus Christ, and perform works to glorify God because you love Him."

There's nothing in our religion that contradicts my perspective. It's the fear that we're too much like protestants comes into play, and it some how challenges our weird subconscious belief that "Protestant Christianity must be wrong for Mormonism to be right". That's BS! We can take all they good they have and add to it.

 

[brotherofJared]

"Faith alone" is in the context of salvation.

There is no such thing as faith alone in any context.

What "good work" can you do that isn't first led by faith.

What faith is there if there isn't any good work being done?

anything that follows is encapsulated by faith - hence, "faith alone".

*boggle*. If anything is encapsulated by faith, it is not alone. Something must follow it or it is dead.

 

[Aaron32]

There is no such thing as faith alone in any context.

Good luck getting forgiven for any sin you can't make restitution for then.

What faith is there if there isn't any good work being done?

None. But there's a lot of works being done without any faith that are (in your words) "painful and expensive".

*boggle*. If anything is encapsulated by faith, it is not alone. Something must follow it or it is dead.

Again, this is your trying to paint "easy gracism" as an accepted belief by Christianity. I challenge you to call Matt Slick or any other Christian to see if this is something they believe.

 

[organgrinder]

Aaron wrote to BOJ:
Accepting faith, and how they understand faith is right.
But too often, Mormons can't seem to distinguish the relationship between works and faith. The grudgingly perform works, and get depressed because they feel they don't do enough, and they question if they have salvation. My view is "Stop being self centered. Accept you're fallen and imperfect, and our works are worth nothing. Accept you have salvation in Jesus Christ, and perform works to glorify God because you love Him."

That is a good statement, Aaron.

 

[brotherofJared]

Yes. I believe that's demonstrated throughout Church History.

And so we see that it is now your standard and not the church's standard to go by.

 

[brotherofJared]

But works is evidence of faith.

I understand that. And without the evidence of works, there is not faith. It's pretty simple.

It's not "I believe AND I did 'x'." It's "I did 'x' BECAUSE I believe."

belief is not faith. Hope in what we believe is faith. Faith is a principle of action. Again, if you are drowning and you believe if someone will throw you a life ring, you might have a chance to be saved. So someone throws you the life ring. If you don't do anything about it, then you're going to drown. If you don't act on your hope, then there might as well not have been a life ring thrown to you at all.

It does not matter what reason you think a person is doing something. Again, your statement above makes those who don't know about Christ or know and don't believe, but do the same works as those who actually do know and believe are far better off than the believer. But you guys condemn that person to hell only because he didn't believe. That's why the baby scenario is so important. They never knew and so never had faith and so, by your logic, they are damned to hell. Horrible theology.

The fact remains, no matter which end the action is on, the work is still being done and if the latter statement is true, then if you aren't doing the work, then that must mean you don't believe, and so, are damned to hell because you didn't believe and we're back to a works-based salvation. It's pretty simple.

Thus, though I strive but fail against a sin of omission, I can still have hope, and try again.

It doesn't matter what the sin is, you can still have hope and try again. I don't see how that relates to you above example.

Not, "I didn't make all my ministering visits so I'm going to hell."

Who believes that? It's certainly not taught by the church. None of the leaders in the church has ever taught that if you don't do this and such, you're going to hell.

God looks on the heart, and it's nuanced

Does that mean graded on a curve?

there's no universal line to cross

Oh. I believe there is. In fact, the Bible says there is and for crossing that line, you can't get forgiveness ever.

except believing in Jesus Christ.

And that damns 80% of the population of this planet over history.

You're trying to hold me to defining a standard that can't be defined, and if I can't then somehow I'm wrong.

Ummm. No. You're defining a standard and making false claims that the false standard is what Mormons really believe. As far as defining what a person who is saved must do that is difference from a person who isn't saved. If you can't do that, then it's only because you don't want to or because you can't. It's not that "it can't be defined". I've defined it. The Bible has defined it. It seems that the only people who can't define it is the people who think they don't have to do any good works and they'll be saved. It's no wonder our prisons are so crowded with born-again Christians.

 

[brotherofJared]

Think about the term "works-based" salvation.

Wny don't you think about it?

The basis of salvation = works.

The basis of faith = works and the basis of salvation is faith. See how that works?

Works a+b+c = salvation
If a or b or c is missing then "no salvation".

Yep. that's why salvation is expensive. No lazy people allowed. Do you want me to get a scripture to support that one?

By common sense, "works based" salvation requires perfection.

That is not common sense. That is the lazy man's excuse not to work.

What matters in OUR discussion is what YOU believe and what I believe.

You apparently, missed the point. You aren't listening to what I believe, you are telling me what I believe.

I'm trying to nail down exactly what you believe

Hmm... you don't have to define what you believe, but you feel you can nail down what I believe. Got it.

I've told you what I believe. I was explicit about what the difference is between the unsaved and the saved and the scriptures are too. You seem to want to ignore them while at the same time, you offer then and then say, that's not really what it means. I believe you actually have to do the works God taught us to do. I don't care what you believe about them, do the works and you'll be fine.

It's not easy if you're relying on your own strength

It's not easy if you're relying on someone else's strength either. The fact remains, if you aren't doing the works, you don't have faith. Seems pretty simple.

that's why many Christians take no credit in their own righteousness.

Most of them don't have any righteousness. They are just like the Pharisees. They claim they are teachers of God's word, but they don't teach it, instead, they teach their own ideas which seem to shift with the wind, I mean social pressure.

 

[brotherofJared]

Projection.

So, do they have to give up sin to be saved or not?

 

[brotherofJared]

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I said a few posts back.

Then what is the issue?

I'm saying the requirement is a condition of the heart.

And I'm not disputing that. That's not the only "requirement". Of course, it a condition of the heart, but how does one know that their heart is conditioned correctly?

Legalism is checking off the list of requirements and saying you're entitled to whatever rewards are attached for doing so.

There are requirements. What makes you think that accomplishing any of the requirements entitles someone to anything? It's a requirement to have a license to drive, but that doesn't mean I'm entitled to drive. I still have to meet other conditions to be able to drive and they are usually based on my behavior, what I do. Like if I drink, I can still drive, but I'm not "entitled" to drive. If I get caught, all kinds of bad things will happen.

Because the requirement according to the law of the gospel is having "a mighty change of heart"

Ha. First there a problem with having a requirement, and then you give me a requirement. And how does one know they've had a mighty change of heart? Isn't it by what they do?

"We are saved" in the present state, in Alma's words "we can sing the song of redeeming love". We don't have to question if we have salvation. It's done, and we have no room to boast of ourselves, because we know we didn't do it by ourselves.

Interesting mix. Sounds like Iron mixed with miry clay. You're not going to win converts by lying to them about what we believe. Eventually, they will know what you said isn't true. In our church, no one gets into heaven except they have been baptized. That's a requirement but it doesn't entitle them to be saved.

The list you are complaining about is what people do who are changed and if they don't do those things, then they don't have that mighty change of heart.

@Markk has listed 5 things that are absolute requirements. You have to do them or you can't be exalted. But at the same time, doing any or all of them doesn't mean you're exalted. No entitlement. Then he listed like 10 or 11 other things that one of our leaders said we need to do to obtain salvation. It's not a checklist. There isn't a certain level of accomplishment that is required. One of them is prayer. This is just something that people do when they believe. If you're not doing it then you don't believe. I really don't understand why it's an issue that prayer would be among the things that believers do.

So, we have a person who got baptized and confirmed and he starts to attend church, but during the sports season, he doesn't really attend church, he doesn't pray, he doesn't read the scriptures and of course, he doesn't attend any of his meetings. What does this individual believe in? Sports right? Does he have a mighty change of heart? Well, not during sports season. Is it really too hard to talk to the person who saved to into the kingdom of God? Apparently, it is. So, is this person a saved person? We don't really know, you know, cause God knows our hearts (really, everyone else knows too cause the guy isn't really paying attention to what he claims he believes). Has he done anything really bad? No, not yet, but can you honestly say the person had a mighty change of heart?

Eventually, that person realizes that his life is no different now than it was before he got baptized and he just stops attending church altogether, or praying or reading the scriptures until one day, he's in a heap of trouble. Then he remembers his God and he starts to cry out of desperation, God, help me. And God does, the guy gets out of trouble and then goes right back to watching his sports and he ends up just like the atheist. Not much of a mighty change of heart after all

What it comes down to is you get to say when the heart has been changed which appears to be based solely on desire. Oh. I'd like to pray every day, but I have other less important things to do. I'd like to attend church, but golf is so much more important. God would keep me from my friends. Who knows, I might even have a chance to teach them about what the gospel has done for me.

And you know what? I think that's great. If that's what you think will obtain heaven, then go play golf. Stop praying until your desperate. Don't do anything different in your life and if that works for you, then it'll work for me. If you don't go to church on Sunday and you get into heaven, then why should my going to church on Sunday prevent me from getting into heaven?

The logic you all use to justify faith alone is baffling to me. All that matters is where your heart is and if it's in the right place, then you don't have to do anything and if you do, then your heart isn't in the right place. You never want to accept that I might be doing these things because my heart is in the right place. I don't believe they will necessarily save me, but it's the place I want to be because I don't want to drift in the world. I don't want the world to encroach upon my sense of peace. I want to keep doing all those 11 or so things because I want to find out what the Lord has for me in this life. I might do things that you think aren't necessary but I feel that they are. They are for me but may not be for you. Will those "extra" things save me? I don't think so, I believe I'm saved because I'm on the covenant path. But I want something more than just being saved. Like, I want knowledge. So I ask God how to get it. He tells me how and I believe if I do that, I'll get it. I might ask, how can I find someone who is prepared to learn and accept the gospel. He might tell me how to do it. I believe that if I do that, I will find someone. I'm not doing them to be saved. I'm doing them because I had a mighty change of heart. My whole being is changed.

Now some people might think that is going too far. Life would be so boring if all I ever did was seek knowledge or find people who I can teach the gospel but who said that's all I'll ver do? Can't I watch sports and still attend church? Can't I find someone to teach the gospel, while I'm playing golf? It might be annoying to some people that the gospel comes up in almost every conversation, almost every, but still, I can't stop because that's where my heart lies.

So, I don't see where the work I do would prevent me from being saved. So what if you don't have to do all those things. It doesn't really matter does it? It's not going to make me unsaved. But I can tell you what will make you unsaved. Killing someone, stealing or taking advantage of another, despitefully using, bearing false witness and not being true and faithful to your wife and kids. Those things will drag a person down to hell for sure.

 

[Aaron32]

And so we see that it is now your standard and not the church's standard to go by.

How many notable men of Church History spoke the truth regarding polygamy, etc. but were made out to be apostates? They weren't wrong.
Oliver Cowdery is a hero in my book. I think the Church would be better with honesty than silent compliance.
If people, particular in the Quorum of the Twelve, were more vocal and honest in their testimonies, at times such as BY discoursing the Adam God Theory, we wouldn't be dealing with it as much today.
So, standing in truth is very much a standard to go by. Chaos can also come by men in high places rejecting truth, not just the rebellious membership. The chaos comes from people unwilling to listen to each other, and define everything to death unwilling to be charitable and consider different viewpoints.
I demonstrated to you, that ultimately we believe the same thing on a logical basis, but your pride simply can't accept it.

 

[brotherofJared]

If "They are not salvific in and of themselves" - what makes the salvific? FAITH!

Uh. Yea. and how do we know that faith exists? Works. If you don't get baptized, it doesn't matter how much faith you have, you're not getting into the kingdom of God. That baptism is the life ring and if you don't grab it, you're going to drown. PERIOD. Faith does absolutely nothing for you if you don't act on it. That's why faith and works are two sides of the same coin. Screaming about it isn't going to change it.

Faith precedes any works.

But works still has to be there. If they aren't there is no faith.

That is why salvation is faith-based, not works-based.

That is why salvation is works-based, not faith-based without works. You are trying to separate them, but the fact is, as soon as there is works, there is also faith. Even if I believed that the works actually saved me, that's still faith. I might be wrong, but it's still faith. Look. If someone told me that praying to Allah 5 times a day on a carpet, facing Meca would save me, that act, that I perform faithfully, every day no matter where I am, is a demonstration of my faith. Where you guys get the asinine idea that doing works to be saved is not a sign of faith is beyond me. They may be useless and frivolous works, but regardless, those works are a demonstration of my faith. The problem isn't faith because obviously faith is there or I wouldn't be doing it. But is that work alone going to save me? No. I can't pray 5 times a day and then fly a plane to a building killing thousands of people and expect that God will save me. There's a conflict there. God said, thou shalt not kill. Praying all day every day isn't going to overcome the fact that I didn't do what God asked me to do, to value life, even above my own, if necessary. I know I shouldn't have to explain this, but I will. The underlying principle of thou shalt not kill is love one another. Just not killing someone is the letter of the law. The spirit of the law is the sanctity of life, It is that every person is precious. Jesus escalated that law to include anger. Again, the underlying spirit of that law is love.

So, it doesn't really matter how much faith one has in what one does. Doing A does to cancel out B if A is prayer and B is killing people. We don't pray to be saved. We pray because we want to know what God has to tell us or because we need help or because we are just thankful and we want God to know it. I suppose it would be a great sign of faith, if a person, every Sunday, watched his sports and thank God every day before he turned on that TV for the wonderful events he was about to watch. What a great thing sports is, thank you God for football. Just think, if it wasn't for football, I'd have to sit in church, but now I get to stay home and watch this great blessing that you have provided for me like manna from heaven. Thank you, Jesus!

There is no such thing as faith-alone. In order for faith to be effective, it must always be accompanied by works. Works is the activating principle here. Again, no matter what work you do, it is always motivated by faith unless you know that work will accomplish what you want. Then it's no longer faith, it is knowledge.

The bolded is exactly what I'm saying!

If that is true, then salvation is works-based.

 

[brotherofJared]

And what I'm saying is the damning theology you're describing is a mischaracterization of what Christians believe.

It may be a mischaracterization of what you believe Christians believe, but you don't get to choose what a Christian is nor what they believe. You can twist this 10 ways from Sunday, it's not going to change the fact that works must always be present for faith to be active.

They do not believe in easy grace - they recognize that as a fallacy.

This is a very conflicted statement. Are you saying that they recognize that easy grace is a fallacy? If that is true, then why do you keep preaching it is what we believe? or are you telling everyone that they are wrong? And if they are, then why are you claiming that you are a Mormon?

 

[brotherofJared]

Yes. Baptism is

That's a very confusing statement. Is that wrong, that baptism is a requirement?

True faith results in works. It's faith in action. Faith without action is dead faith - it's lip service.

Uh, yep. That's what makes it a works-based theology.

If you never grab hold of it, you never had it in the first place.

That's the point.

Rather than using faith as the life preserver, maybe it should be "the word of God", as faith is a result of hearing, and not just hearing but doing.

Again, that's the point.

It's a gift from God we cannot obtain it by ourselves

Of course, you can obtain it yourself. It's out there, freely available for the asking.

it Pre-requisited by humility

which is obtaining it ourselves.

 

[brotherofJared]

How many notable men of Church History spoke the truth regarding polygamy,

Well, a lot of course, There's Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. They were notable. They spoke the truth about polygamy.

but were made out to be apostates?

You mean like you? LOL. Again, your standard, not the church's.

They weren't wrong.

Says you. I don't think you're seeing the picture here. Just because you believe Joseph Smith was wrong doesn't make you the new standard by which Mormons live. You don't have to practice polygamy if you don't want to. You don't even have to be married if you don't want to. What you do with your life is entirely up to you. But that doesn't make it right. It's just right for you.

Oliver Cowdery is a hero in my book.

Oliver didn't think so.

I think the Church would be better with honesty than silent compliance.

Of course, you would, but until it does, you're just working your way out of the church.

If people, particular in the Quorum of the Twelve, were more vocal and honest in their testimonies, at times such as BY discoursing the Adam God Theory, we wouldn't be dealing with it as much today.

There is nothing wrong with the Adam God theory if understood in the proper context. But make up your mind, are you a Mormon or not?

So, standing in truth is very much a standard to go by.

That's great. The problem is, your truth is not the church's truth.

Chaos can also come by men in high places rejecting truth, not just the rebellious membership.

And it can also come from rebellious membership and that's where you are right now. Correct me if I'm wrong. But it seems that you come into a Mormonism forum and tell all the critics that the church is wrong while claiming that you are a Mormon, that's chaos, isn't it?

The chaos comes from people unwilling to listen to each other

LOL. We don't need your input as a Mormon. We already get that from our critics. You've started burning the candle from the other end. But, at least we understand which side of the aisle you're on now. You'll probably keep claiming that the church is true, but everyone here, I'm sure, knows that you don't really believe that.

I demonstrated to you, that ultimately we believe the same thing on a logical basis, but your pride simply can't accept it.

What you have demonstrated to me is that ultimately, you believe very little of the same things I believe. Your pride simply can't accept that.

 

[brotherofJared]

I never said the Church was wrong.

oh. i disagree. That's exactly what you said.

 

[Aaron32]

I understand that. And without the evidence of works, there is not faith. It's pretty simple.

It seems like two different points are being debated simultaneously.
1. You believe I'm saying "no works are required for salvation." I'm not saying that. That's your strawman characterization of my argument.

I'm saying people can believe their works will earn them salvation, and if they fail to do works, despite their efforts, they will lose salvation. I would define that as "That's works without faith."

2. The definitions of works-based and faith-based salvation.
I'm saying, If works are evidence of our faith, then we believe ina faith based salvation, since faith is the "basis" of our works.

belief is not faith. Hope in what we believe is faith. Faith is a principle of action. Again, if you are drowning and you believe if someone will throw you a life ring, you might have a chance to be saved. So someone throws you the life ring. If you don't do anything about it, then you're going to drown. If you don't act on your hope, then there might as well not have been a life ring thrown to you at all.

I get that. But you can't ignore that Faith is also a principle of power - such as receiving answers to our prayers. Recognizing that having a life ring thrown at you as a result of your asking for it is also the substance of that hope.
The works-based vs faith-based debate is essentially answering the question - who takes the credit for our salvation? The Christians whom we debate credit the guy throwing us the life ring, knowing our works wouldn't be possible without him acting first - answering our prayer.
The "irresistible grace" means no rational man recognizing his situation is going to reject the life ring. Thus, one could say God giving us the awareness is also God's grace - in other words in the words of Lehi help us "awake and rise up". Being "pricked in our hearts" is also a necessary step in our obtaining salvation, which IMO is almost as rare to acquire as receiving "the mighty change of heart". It's a spiritual gift.

It does not matter what reason you think a person is doing something.

Hmmm...
First, you don't think there's significance in the BoM's words about "acting in no hypocrisy and without guile" or praying in "sincerity of heart" or "with real intent"? That's all motive, my friend. How do you reconcile that with your statement above?

Againin, your statement above makes those who don't know about Christ or know and don't believe, but do the same works as those who actually do know and believe are far better off than the believer.

How? I'm confused at this statement.

Butut you guys condemn that person to hell only because he didn't believe. That's why the baby scenario is so important. They never knew and so never had faith and so, by your logic, they are damned to hell. Horrible theology.

Unless we recognize that the baby was geographically in hell to begin with. If we're born into telestial glory, and ignorant of any other higher glory, as they say "ignorance is bliss". We also know "man can be saved in ignorance".

"Hell" is the condition of being tormented. Knowing we can be in a better place, but being divided in rationalizing the cost/benefits. Hence, why would those who have spiritual knowledge held to a higher standard?

The fact remains, no matter which end the action is on, the work is still being done and if the latter statement is true, then if you aren't doing the work, then that must mean you don't believe, and so, are damned to hell because you didn't believe and we're back to a works-based salvation. It's pretty simple.

Or maybe you've tried to do the work, (keep a commandment) but you've failed over and over, so you give up trying and simply ask God to provide the way, and your heart gets changed to no longer desire to sin.

It doesn't matter what the sin is, you can still have hope and try again. I don't see how that relates to you above example.

Then pay attention closely - if our salvation is WORKS-based, and Im guilty of a sin of omission (a sin that would have been prevented if I had "done the work") - then I have no rational way of having hope. Works-based salvation has no room for grace.

Who believes that? It's certainly not taught by the church. None of the leaders in the church has ever taught that if you don't do this and such, you're going to hell.

You do by saying we believe in a "works based" salvation. And I agree, it's certainly not taught in our church. Yet, people tend to get confused at statements such as "He that is slothful shall not be counted worthy" (D&C 107:100)
It's the confusion between justification and sanctification that people get their lines crossed, thus leading them to depression.

Does that mean graded on a curve?

Nope.

Oh. I believe there is. In fact, the Bible says there is and for crossing that line, you can't get forgiveness ever.

That would first require receiving the Holy Ghost and acknowledging it as such.

And that damns 80% of the population of this planet over history.

Yep. Hence we do temple work.

Ummm. No. You're defining a standard and making false claims that the false standard is what Mormons really believe.

I'm defining real faith, and saying our salvation is faith-based.
Your insistant on saying our salvation is works based. We do not believe that.

AsAs far as defining what a person who is saved must do that is difference from a person who isn't saved. If you can't do that, then it's only because you don't want to or because you can't. It's not that "it can't be defined". I've defined it. The Bible has defined it. It seems that the only people who can't define it is the people who think they don't have to do any good works and they'll be saved.

Where did you define it?
I've state multiple times. A person who is saved has real faith in Jesus Christ, and unsaved person does not. Apparently, that's not good enough for you.

It's no wonder our prisons are so crowded with born-again Christians.

And that Utah is one of the largest consumers of porn and anti-depressants.

 

[Aaron32]

oh. i disagree. That's exactly what you said.

Find the quote

 

[Theo1689]

belief is not faith.

<Chuckle>

Let's translate that claim into Greek, the language the NT was written in:

"belief ... is .. not faith."
"πιστις έστιν ου πιστιν."

So BoJ's statement is like saying:

"love is not love", or
"a tree is not a tree".

And that damns 80% of the population of this planet over history.

Um, okay ..... ?
So what exactly is your point?

Are you claiming that God is slave to some outside "force" that requires or OBLIGATES Him to save more than "20% of the population"?

What exactly, according to you, a fallible human sinner's opinion, is the minimum "required" percentages that God (according to you) is "obligated" to save?

 

[Theo1689]

So, do they have to give up sin to be saved or not?

Here is the problem with your impossible standard...

The BIBLE teaches that no one will be saved by obeying the law (ie. "giving up all sin", Rom. 3:19-20).

But then you interpret that as meaning, "people can just keep sinning as much as they ever did", which is what NOBODY teaches.

You think that if people continue to sin, that must mean they did don't "give up sin".
So for Christians, you require SINLESSNESS.
But for Mormons, you don't require sinlessness.


The problem is that you INSIST on trying to "evaluation" someone salvation based on the criteria of "committing sin". But that is NOT the criterion of salvation.

The criterion of salvation is God's GRACE, which is demonstrated by mans' FAITH.

 

[Aaron32]

Well, a lot of course, There's Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. They were notable. They spoke the truth about polygamy.

Can you provide some Joseph Smith quotes on polygamy please?

You mean like you? LOL. Again, your standard, not the church's.

Huh? Am I an apostate now because I believe salvation is by faith? What standard are you talking about?

Says you. I don't think you're seeing the picture here. Just because you believe Joseph Smith was wrong doesn't make you the new standard by which Mormons live.

Correct. Wilford Woodruff did that.

You don't have to practice polygamy if you don't want to. You don't even have to be married if you don't want to. What you do with your life is entirely up to you. But that doesn't make it right. It's just right for you.

When did "my life" become the subject?

Oliver didn't think so.

On what basis do you make this claim?

Of course, you would, but until it does, you're just working your way out of the church.

So, to be a good faithful member I should accept dishonesty and silent compliance? Are you serious?
Nah, I'd rather get the posers like you kicked out for misrepresenting us.

There is nothing wrong with the Adam God theory if understood in the proper context.

That's weird because I remember one time you being upset with me because I validated Adam God.
Why am I not surprise. Disagreeble people are gonna disagree.

But make up your mind, are you a Mormon or not?

I guess that depends how you define "Mormon".
Clearly we disagree on what they believe.

That's great. The problem is, your truth is not the church's truth.

So your a relativist? "My truth" is my opinion. "Your truth" is your opinion.
Truth is truth, independent of our opinions. I stand in truth.

And it can also come from rebellious membership and that's where you are right now.

I'm rebellious because I disagree with you? That's pretty audacious of you, don't you think?

Correct me if I'm wrong. But it seems that you come into a Mormonism forum and tell all the critics that the church is wrong while claiming that you are a Mormon, that's chaos, isn't it?

I'm sure to you it is. If people were simply humble and listened to each other, the chaos would end. I point the contradictions in their own reasoning, and it drives them mad.
You've basically explained my position for me with statements such as "works are not salvific in and of themselves", but then die on the principle that we have a "works-based" salvation. <- Now that's chaos.

Conceptually, we're in already agreement. I'm just trying to help you realize that. what we're arguing about at the point is terminology, and the strawman arguments you think I'm making, but you're really just inventing on your own.

LOL. We don't need your input as a Mormon. We already get that from our critics. You've started burning the candle from the other end. But, at least we understand which side of the aisle you're on now. You'll probably keep claiming that the church is true, but everyone here, I'm sure, knows that you don't really believe that.

On the contrary, I've refuted their definition as a cult of people trying to earn salvation, and you've underscored it. Good job. *Slow clap*

What you have demonstrated to me is that ultimately, you believe very little of the same things I believe. Your pride simply can't accept that.

This is your unsubstantiated opinion. You believe what I believe, you just prefer to argue than to listen.