Picture Proof:Satanic pentagrams on German church

[Father_JD]

Cmon jeff. I believe you well know how youve perverted BIBLICAL TRUTH and brought it down to the level of occultic Mormonism.

Christianity is indeed a religion of the supernatural...NOT the occult as Mormonism clearly is:

Had any dead grandmas show up at night to testify to the supposed truth of Mormonism lately?

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Besides that it did not occur to you that the particular Temple ordinances in question have nothing to do with the Masonic rites huh?

Clearly you must be clueless as to just how close the secret temple rites are to Masonic ones, M.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

It comes from the Greek verb logizomai and is translated as,"reckoned,credited',accepted,counted,considered . The lexical definition carries several meanings as well:reckon,calculate,take into account,put on someone's account,estimate,evaluate,look upon as,consider,think,dwell on,believe,be of the opinion of."

Excellent! Then WHY dont you believe him? WHY dont you believe that Abrahams faith/belief was CREDITED to him as righteousness?

[Mesenja]

God recognized and viewed Abraham's faith as righteousness and had not "credited" Abraham the alien righteousness of Christ

The Greek verb logizomai does not most often refer to what a person is not,or does not have,but is merely considered to be yet is not so in reality. Most often it is a mental representation of the reality of what is recognized or understood in what they are witnessing.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

God recognized and viewed Abraham's faith as righteousness not "credited" Abraham the alien righteousness of Christ

The Greek verb logizomai does not most often refer to what a person is not,or does not have,but is merely considered to be yet is not so in reality. Most often it is a mental representation of the reality of what is recognized or understood in what they are witnessing.

Clearly you dont know your Bible, M. I challenge you to look for those Bible verses in which the English word IMPUTED is used.

Voila...here they are

Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which [he had yet] being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Rom 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
Rom 4:23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
Rom 4:24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Jam 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.


And besides this, Isaiah has answered you: OUR righteousness is as FILTHY RAGS. Think on that.

[nrajeff]

[QUOTE=Father_JD;64905]
....Rom 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
Rom 4:23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
Rom 4:24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
QUOTE]

------Uh-oh--the Bible refutes Calvinism twice in one verse! And you are the one who brought it to our attention!

1. The "SHALL BE imputed" part means that for "us" Christians, that imputation is a future thing. But doesn't Calvinism teach that the imputation should have ALREADY occurred, BEFORE the person became a Christian? (In this case, Paul was writing to the saints in Rome, right?)

Doesn't the Calvnist order of events go something like this:

God regenerates person, causing person to be born again

God saves person via unmerited, unconditionally given grace

God causes person to receive unmerited, unconditionally given gift of faith, which causes God's righteousness to be imputed to person

Person becomes a Christian and starts obeying God's will--something the person was totally unable to do before being regenerated, given salvation, grace and faith.

2. The verse says that righteousness will be imputed to the saints in Rome IF those saints believe on the Father of Jesus. If they were already saints, shouldn't the imputation have already occurred?

Oops.

[Father_JD]

BZZZZZ! Wrong, jeff.

So-called Calvinism does NOT teach that. Wanna try again?

[nrajeff]

OK, let's suppose that Calvinism doesn't teach it but YOU DO. Is that better?

Just point out the errors in logic or fact in my post.

1. The "SHALL BE imputed" part means that for "us" Christians, that imputation is a future thing. But doesn't FJDism teach that the imputation should have ALREADY occurred, BEFORE the person became a Christian? (In this case, Paul was writing to the saints in Rome, right?)

Doesn't the FJDist order of events go something like this:

God regenerates person, causing person to be born again

God saves person via unmerited, unconditionally given grace

God causes person to receive unmerited, unconditionally given gift of faith, which causes God's righteousness to be imputed to person

Person becomes a Christian and starts obeying God's will--something the person was totally unable to do before being regenerated, given salvation, grace and faith.

2. The verse says that righteousness will be imputed to the saints in Rome IF those saints believe on the Father of Jesus. If they were already saints, shouldn't the imputation have already occurred?

[Father_JD]

Nope. Imputation of the alien righteousness of Christ is imputed AFTERWARDS even though it is God who enables the person to HAVE faith.

Salvation is MONERGISTIC and NOT synergistic...

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Nope. Imputation of the alien righteousness of Christ is imputed AFTERWARDS even though it is God who enables the person to HAVE faith.

Salvation is MONERGISTIC and NOT synergistic.

Salvation is not guaranteed if Paul warns the saints at Corinth that it is possible to receive the grace of God in vain. However it would be guaranteed if according to Reformed doctrine they first received an imputed,alien righteousness of Christ. It would also make faith unnecessary since at this point in time they were/are already saved.

Paul would also be making no sense in warning them to "receive not the grace of God in vain" and be guilty of teaching false doctrine by saying that they are "workers together with him."

2 Corinthians 6:1-2
1 We then,as workers together with him,beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.
2 (For he saith,I have heard thee in a time accepted,and in the day of salvation have I sucoured thee:behold,now is the accepted time;behold,now is the day of salvation.)

Also Father JD provide for us one example of any judgment scene where those going to heaven and those going to hell is based on their having faith alone and being given the imputed righteousness of Christ? In every single judgment scene in the New Testament the exact opposite is true in that our eternal judgment is based on works and obedience to God's commandments.

Revelation 22:11-14
11He that is unjust,let him be unjust still:and he which is filthy,let him be filthy still:and he that is righteous,let him be righteous still:and he that is holy,let him be holy still.
12 And,behold,I come quickly;and my reward is with me,to give every man according as his work shall be.
13 I am Alpha and Omega,the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
14 Blessed are they that do his commandments,that they may have right to the tree of life,and may enter in through the gates into the city.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Salvation is not guaranteed if Paul warns the saints at Corinth that it is possible to receive the grace of God in vain. However it would be guaranteed if according to Reformed doctrine they first received an imputed,alien righteousness of Christ. It would also would make faith unnecessary since at this point in time they were are already saved.

Paul would also be making no sense in warning them to "receive not the grace of God in vain" and be guilty of teaching false doctrine by saying that they are "workers together with him."

Also Father JD provide for us one example of any judgment scene where those going to heaven and those going to hell is based on their having faith alone and being given the imputed righteousness of Christ? In every single judgment scene in the New Testament the exact opposite is true in that our eternal judgment is based on works and obedience to God's commandments.

---Great points, Mesenja. Calvinism might "seem" to be supported by the Bible....until a person looks into it. Then it's shown to have less Biblical support than LDSism has.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Great points, Mesenja. Calvinism might "seem" to be supported by the Bible....until a person looks into it. Then it's shown to have less Biblical support than LDSism has.

Okay, okay, now lets see, yep the Bible supports humans becoming gods of their own planets with many wives to put out them spirit babies, and them temple mason cer0monies, and prophets who can make a prophecy and young boys called elders, and, and and something about Calvinism is less or more less then LDSims?

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Great points,Mesenja. Calvinism might "seem" to be supported by the Bible....until a person looks into it. Then it's shown to have less Biblical support than LDSism has.

[nrajeff]

Don't worry. I have no intention of giving a troll any nourishment.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Clearly you must be clueless as to just how close the secret temple rites are to Masonic ones,Mesenja.

I asked you the question when,where and how. When and where did Joseph Smith take the particular Temple ordinances of baptisms for the dead and anointings and washings from Masonry? The fundamental question remains as to how he could have done this as this is not part of Masonry.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

I asked you the question when,where and how. When and where did Joseph Smith take the particular Temple ordinances of baptisms for the dead and anointings and washings from Masonry? The fundamental question remains as to how he could have done this as this is not part of Masonry.

I don't know exactly "when, where, and how", but the EVIDENCE REMAINS: The almost point by point similarities between the Masonic Rites and the Mormon temple rite.

You think JS came up with his little fig-leaf apron idea all on his own? Or the blood oaths if one revealed the rite to the outside world?

[alanmolstad]

The use of Satan's symbols on Mormon buildings should give a Mormon pause....but it doesn't...they laugh it off.

But one day the smile will be wiped off their faces..

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

The use of Satan's symbols on Mormon buildings should give a Mormon pause....but it doesn't...they laugh it off.

But one day the smile will be wiped off their faces..

I wonder if there are any mormon symbols on the Moon? That reminds me of the other day when I was taking to a lady who had thoughts of joining the LDS inc. While mentioning a few strange teachings and practices of the LDS inc. I throw in the Brigham Young, quote about Quaker like people living on the Moon, and her response was, " I believe there are people living on the Moon too."
Well, that ended our conversation.lol

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by RealFakeHair

I wonder if there are any mormon symbols on the Moon? That reminds me of the other day when I was taking to a lady who had thoughts of joining the LDS inc. While mentioning a few strange teachings and practices of the LDS inc. I throw in the Brigham Young, quote about Quaker like people living on the Moon, and her response was, " I believe there are people living on the Moon too."
Well, that ended our conversation.lol

Hey the ole boy even said there were people loving on the sun (J. of D., Vol. 13, p. 271).. What was the limit of his false teachings.. By this it would seem to be unlimited.. IHS jim

[Pa Pa]

Originally Posted by Russ

Like so many of your posts and so many of other Mormons on this board, I'll just comment upon something unrelated.

Your tagline: "Abba Xanthus said, "A dog is better than I am, For he has love and does not judge."

Think about that in relation to the unworthy father of the groom who is not allowed to attend the wedding.

Cryptic...still har***ing Mormons on their way to worship. I cannot count the threads about such symbols on the Salt Lake Temple. The Rome Temple has crosses on the door...ever exposed that, or does it not fit you worldview. Not to mention the many visitors centers with pictures of Christ dying for our sins...wait that would just be Calvinist; correct?

[Pa Pa]

Originally Posted by James Banta

Hey the ole boy even said there were people loving on the sun (J. of D., Vol. 13, p. 271).. What was the limit of his false teachings.. By this it would seem to be unlimited.. IHS jim

Hiding behind your disgust for polygamy while doing the same.

[Pa Pa]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

The use of Satan's symbols on Mormon buildings should give a Mormon pause....but it doesn't...they laugh it off.

But one day the smile will be wiped off their faces..

Why are they not Satanic in Luther's Church...the father of the Protestant movement, and the wooden rotting shied you hid behind?

[Pa Pa]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

Don't worry. I have no intention of giving a troll any nourishment.

Have not seen you in a while

[Apologette]

Originally Posted by Pa Pa

Why are they not Satanic in Luther's Church...the father of the Protestant movement, and the wooden rotting shied you hid behind?

Papa? Have you been to Nauvoo? Those pentagrams are quite prominent, as are Masonic symbols, on the temple. I've been in many Christian churches, cathedrals, etc., and I've never seen a pentagram in any of them - it's a well known occult symbol. That's not to say that there aren't any with pentagrams, but certainly not as prominently displayed as in Nauvoo. Luther was not a prophet, nor did he pretend to be one. He stood against some very obvious distortions of the Gospel in the Roman faith, and was a very valiant man. He had beliefs about the Jewish people which we don't share today (just as Brigham Young and Joseph Smith had beliefs about blacks that we don't have today). Yet, Luther was a moral man, and certainly not Satanic. Have you ever read his catechism?

[Apologette]

Originally Posted by Pa Pa

Have not seen you in a while

He wrote that back in August - Jeff's not here.