Page 1 of 9 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 250

Thread: This Kind of Thinking is Scary.

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Sir
    Guest

    Default This Kind of Thinking is Scary.

    Because I don't want this thread to be removed on the basis of personal attacks I will refrain from citing the poster whose words these are. But this is the kind of thinking that makes LDS like me wonder why critics of the LDS think they have something better to offer the LDS:

    "You still refuse to believe! You hold a foolish idea that a ,man must sin to be a sinner.. That isn't what the Bible teaches.. It says ALL have sinned.. ALL [name removed] not just adults with mature minds but ALL means the infants, the mentally handicapped, ALL"
    1) Is it really foolish to think that one must actually do something in order to be called someone who does that thing? Can I call someone a rapist if he never committed rape? Can I call someone a thief if he has never stolen? etc.

    2) How can someone claim to have a better news, the good news, to offer LDS, when they believe that infants and mentally handicapped people are sinners? I agree with the BoM that states people who believe an infant, a baby that has no comprehension of reality, let alone the ability to make a rational choice to choose between good and evil and consciously choose one or the other, is in the gall of bitterness.

  2. #2
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir View Post
    1) Is it really foolish to think that one must actually do something in order to be called someone who does that thing? Can I call someone a rapist if he never committed rape? Can I call someone a thief if he has never stolen? etc.

    2) How can someone claim to have a better news, the good news, to offer LDS, when they believe that infants and mentally handicapped people are sinners? I agree with the BoM that states people who believe an infant, a baby that has no comprehension of reality, let alone the ability to make a rational choice to choose between good and evil and consciously choose one or the other, is in the gall of bitterness.
    Why do you think this kind of thinking is scary? We are all sinners by nature and we all sin because of our sin nature. I think that you will find that this concept is not unique to a single poster but rather a commonly held Christian belief. If this were not so then you would expect to see sinless people but you don't. Now what I think that you are confusing is sin and accountability. For example a 4 year old can go into a store and steal a piece of candy. This act is breaking the law, but because of his age he would not be held accountable for that crime, but it is still a crime.

  3. #3
    James Banta
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Why do you think this kind of thinking is scary? We are all sinners by nature and we all sin because of our sin nature. I think that you will find that this concept is not unique to a single poster but rather a commonly held Christian belief. If this were not so then you would expect to see sinless people but you don't. Now what I think that you are confusing is sin and accountability. For example a 4 year old can go into a store and steal a piece of candy. This act is breaking the law, but because of his age he would not be held accountable for that crime, but it is still a crime.
    This proves that an understanding of sin and it gravity is NOT taught in mormonism.. IHS jim

  4. #4
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Why do you think this kind of thinking is scary? We are all sinners by nature and we all sin because of our sin nature. I think that you will find that this concept is not unique to a single poster but rather a commonly held Christian belief. If this were not so then you would expect to see sinless people but you don't. Now what I think that you are confusing is sin and accountability. For example a 4 year old can go into a store and steal a piece of candy. This act is breaking the law, but because of his age he would not be held accountable for that crime, but it is still a crime.
    In Gods eyes it is not a sin, since the innocent cannot be held accountable.
    God will judge the infant as innocent of sin, since the sin can only be judged as sin if the person willingly disobeys and recognizes it's a sin.

  5. #5
    ErikErik
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    In Gods eyes it is not a sin, since the innocent cannot be held accountable.
    God will judge the infant as innocent of sin, since the sin can only be judged as sin if the person willingly disobeys and recognizes it's a sin.

    Oh but "innocent" Adam and Eve were indeed held accountable.

    And according to nrajeff, Adam and Eve were infants.

  6. #6
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikErik View Post
    Oh but "innocent" Adam and Eve were indeed held accountable.

    And according to nrajeff, Adam and Eve were infants.
    Innocent no, because they were told what they could and could not do.
    Accountable for being disobedient, do you not know the scriptures? dude.

  7. #7
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    since the sin can only be judged as sin if the person willingly disobeys and recognizes it's a sin.
    So a person can kill and commit adultery etc. and this is not sin as long as he does not recognize that he is breaking God's laws such as would be the case for an atheist?

  8. #8
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    So a person can kill and commit adultery etc. and this is not sin as long as he does not recognize that he is breaking God's laws such as would be the case for an atheist?
    Hmmm, thought we were discussing those not old enough to be accountable, when did you decide to deflect from this issue?

  9. #9
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Hmmm, thought we were discussing those not old enough to be accountable, when did you decide to deflect from this issue?
    When you made the following statement
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    God will judge the infant as innocent of sin, since the sin can only be judged as sin if the person willingly disobeys and recognizes it's a sin.

  10. #10
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    When you made the following statement

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Richard
    God will judge the infant as innocent of sin, since the sin can only be judged as sin if the person willingly disobeys and recognizes it's a sin.


    Your quote:
    "So a person can kill and commit adultery etc. and this is not sin as long as he does not recognize that he is breaking God's laws such as would be the case for an atheist?"


    How can that relate to a infant? Youere way out in left field, good buddy.

  11. #11
    ErikErik
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    In Gods eyes it is not a sin, since the innocent cannot be held accountable.
    God will judge the infant as innocent of sin, since the sin can only be judged as sin if the person willingly disobeys and recognizes it's a sin.
    Did Eve recognize that she was disobeying God? Bible says she was deceived. Yet God meted out punishment.

  12. #12
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikErik View Post
    Did Eve recognize that she was disobeying God? Bible says she was deceived. Yet God meted out punishment.
    Did not God the Father tell her not to eat the Apple? did she not make a choice? did Satin force her to disobey? did she not know the consequences of her action? She understood obedience and disobedience. Yes or no, right or wrong.

    Mormons believe Adam's fall was part of the Lord's plan for His children.

  13. #13
    ErikErik
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Did not God the Father tell her not to eat the Apple? did she not make a choice? did Satin force her to disobey? did she not know the consequences of her action? She understood obedience and disobedience. Yes or no, right or wrong.

    Mormons believe Adam's fall was part of the Lord's plan for His children.
    According to your fellow mormon, nrajeff, Adam and Eve were babies and not capable of understanding right from wrong.

    According to the bible, nowhere does it say that God told Eve not to eat of the fruit. He commanded Adam not to. This is why Eve was deceived, but Adam deliberately disobeyed.

    Mormons believe that Adam and Eve's transgression against God was a blessing. That's satan's lie. What is the definition of transgression? Look it up in a bible dictionary.
    Last edited by ErikErik; 11-03-2010 at 11:23 AM.

  14. #14
    Jean Chauvin
    Guest

    Default um?

    You lost me with the word "because."

    Respectfully,

    Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

  15. #15
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikErik View Post
    According to your fellow mormon, nrajeff, Adam and Eve were babies and not capable of understanding right from wrong.

    According to the bible, nowhere does it say that God told Eve not to eat of the fruit. He commanded Adam not to. This is why Eve was deceived, but Adam deliberately disobeyed.

    Mormons believe that Adam and Eve's transgression against God was a blessing. That's satan's lie. What is the definition of transgression? Look it up in a bible dictionary.
    Adam and Eve did not comprehend just yet what the consequences were by being disobedient. They understood that they could make a choice, just like any infant eventually learns. The result of using our agency is the consequences of our choices; good choices produce good consequences, bad consequences produce wrong choices. Adam and Eve understood they faced two conflicting set of instructions-to avoid the fruit of the tree and to go forth and multiply.


    Lehi, the first prophet of the Book of Mormon, explained it this way:

    If Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.

    And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

    But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.

    Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.

    And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall.” (2 Nephi 2:22-26)
    The act that produced the Fall was not a sin-inherently wrong-but a transgression-wrong because it was formally prohibited. These words are not always used to denote something different, but this distinction seems meaningful in the circumstances of the Fall.” (Dallin H. Oaks, “‘The Great Plan of Happiness‘,” Ensign, Nov 1993, 72)

  16. #16
    TheSword99
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Adam and Eve did not comprehend just yet what the consequences were by being disobedient. They understood that they could make a choice, just like any infant eventually learns. The result of using our agency is the consequences of our choices; good choices produce good consequences, bad consequences produce wrong choices. Adam and Eve understood they faced two conflicting set of instructions-to avoid the fruit of the tree and to go forth and multiply.



    Richard, God gave Adam the command to be fruitful and multiply before he and Eve partook of the fruit. Transgressions against God is always wrong. . Both transgressions and sins are violations against God's law. What the lds have done is redefine transgression and say it isn't a sin even if its committed against God. . You can transgress against me and its not a sin against God. But if you transgress against a command of God it is sin and has consequences and God punished Adam and Eve by throwing them out of Eden where they began to die that very day, with sickness, age and death. To rebel against God is sin.

    Adam and Eve did not receive 2 sets of conflicting instructions. God never contradicts Himself, nor does he tempt anyone. Adam received the command to be fruitful and multiply and also to not partake of that particular tree. One did not have anything to do with the other.

    You have it backwards when you say disobeying God was a good thing; a blessing. That is satan's lie. Adam and Eve listened to that lie and they paid the ultimate price, banishment from paradise and from immortality to mortality.

    You also have a warped view of God if you believe He deliberately created a beautiful world and put two perfect people on it, for the sole purpose of wanting man to transgress against Him. For sin to taint the world and for God to have to come in the flesh and suffer a horrible and brutal degradation of Crucifixion. You do not understand the Holy One True God that Christianity has believed in for over 2,000 years and the God of the Jews. Your god was a man like you so you view him as no different than you except he's exalted. The problem is you have all these doctrines of men that you need to support, so you read the Bible and import your beliefs into the p***ages rather than letting God speak for himself. You need the Fall to be a good thing in order to support some of your unscriptual beliefs.

  17. #17
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSword99 View Post
    Richard, God gave Adam the command to be fruitful and multiply before he and Eve partook of the fruit. Transgressions against God is always wrong. . Both transgressions and sins are violations against God's law. What the lds have done is redefine transgression and say it isn't a sin even if its committed against God. . You can transgress against me and its not a sin against God. But if you transgress against a command of God it is sin and has consequences and God punished Adam and Eve by throwing them out of Eden where they began to die that very day, with sickness, age and death. To rebel against God is sin.

    Adam and Eve did not receive 2 sets of conflicting instructions. God never contradicts Himself, nor does he tempt anyone. Adam received the command to be fruitful and multiply and also to not partake of that particular tree. One did not have anything to do with the other.

    You have it backwards when you say disobeying God was a good thing; a blessing. That is satan's lie. Adam and Eve listened to that lie and they paid the ultimate price, banishment from paradise and from immortality to mortality.

    You also have a warped view of God if you believe He deliberately created a beautiful world and put two perfect people on it, for the sole purpose of wanting man to transgress against Him. For sin to taint the world and for God to have to come in the flesh and suffer a horrible and brutal degradation of Crucifixion. You do not understand the Holy One True God that Christianity has believed in for over 2,000 years and the God of the Jews. Your god was a man like you so you view him as no different than you except he's exalted. The problem is you have all these doctrines of men that you need to support, so you read the Bible and import your beliefs into the p***ages rather than letting God speak for himself. You need the Fall to be a good thing in order to support some of your unscriptual beliefs.
    He did not create a world of paradise, he created a GARDEN wherein he placed ADAM and EVE. The Scriptures are silent on the what, how and why of ADAM and EVE if they had remained there. WE know that they would have stayed innocent, not knowing good and evil.

    "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

    So, tell me, what do the Scriptures tell us, would Adam and Eve remain in the GARDEN forever, would they be innocent forever, would then never have known evil or good? Tell me what you know??? Please.

  18. #18
    TheSword99
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    He did not create a world of paradise, he created a GARDEN wherein he placed ADAM and EVE. The Scriptures are silent on the what, how and why of ADAM and EVE if they had remained there. WE know that they would have stayed innocent, not knowing good and evil.

    "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

    So, tell me, what do the Scriptures tell us, would Adam and Eve remain in the GARDEN forever, would they be innocent forever, would then never have known evil or good? Tell me what you know??? Please.
    "Paradise" (Hebrew פרדס PaRDeS) used as a synonym for the Garden of Eden.

    If the Scriptures are silent about something, than so too should we be and not try and make a doctrine based on presuppositions and speculations.

  19. #19
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSword99 View Post
    "Paradise" (Hebrew פרדס PaRDeS) used as a synonym for the Garden of Eden.

    If the Scriptures are silent about something, than so too should we be and not try and make a doctrine based on presuppositions and speculations.
    I can buy that, so quit speculating. WE have additional scripture, our light and knowledge is continuing to reveal all of Gods Plan of Salvation.

  20. #20
    B2M5L2
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I can buy that, so quit speculating. WE have additional scripture, our light and knowledge is continuing to reveal all of Gods Plan of Salvation.
    What exactly are you alluding to when you say, "additional scripture"? And why should anyone who knows anything about the canonization process of Scripture ***ume that anything beyond what is found within the 66 books of the Bible is Scripture?

  21. #21
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B2M5L2 View Post
    What exactly are you alluding to when you say, "additional scripture"? And why should anyone who knows anything about the canonization process of Scripture ***ume that anything beyond what is found within the 66 books of the Bible is Scripture?
    There you go, man not allowing God to continue to reveal Himself, we have a bible, a bible and need no more.

    II Nephi 29:6 states “Thou fool, that shall say a Bible, we have got a Bible and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews?” Can you note the FOOLS are the only ones who trust in the Bible? Read verse 10. Here, the Book of Mormon declares the need for more revelation and makes way for its own existence!

    A point of interest - turn to I Nephi 13:26: “a great and abominable church - has taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.”

  22. #22
    B2M5L2
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    There you go, man not allowing God to continue to reveal Himself, we have a bible, a bible and need no more.
    You didn't answer the questions. Why? Too difficult? If not, here they are again.

    What exactly are you alluding to when you say, "additional scripture"? And why should anyone who knows anything about the canonization process of Scripture ***ume that anything beyond what is found within the 66 books of the Bible is Scripture?

  23. #23
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B2M5L2 View Post
    You didn't answer the questions. Why? Too difficult? If not, here they are again.

    What exactly are you alluding to when you say, "additional scripture"? And why should anyone who knows anything about the canonization process of Scripture ***ume that anything beyond what is found within the 66 books of the Bible is Scripture?
    Thanks for the opportunity to share with our friends and visitors.

    Isaiah 29:4
    And thou shalt be brought down, [and] shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.

    Perceiving how this would take place, Nephi1, the first writer in the Book of Mormon, wrote about 570 B.C. to unborn generations: "My beloved brethren, all those who are of the house of Israel, and all ye ends of the earth, I speak unto you as the voice of one crying from the dust" (2 Ne. 33:13). Similarly, the last writer in the Book of Mormon, Moroni2, wrote about A.D. 400: "I speak unto you as though I spake from the dead; for I know that ye shall have my words" (Morm. 9:30; cf. Moro. 10:27). As he was about to bury the records, he wrote: "No one need say [the records] shall not come, for they surely shall, for the Lord hath spoken it; for out of the earth shall they come, by the hand of the Lord, and none can stay it" (Morm. 8:26; cf. TPJS, p. 98).


    TWO RECORDS. Ezekiel also prophesied concerning the two records—that of Joseph or Ephraim (i.e., the Book of Mormon) and that of Judah (i.e., the Bible)—that would be joined in the last days as an instrument provided by the Lord to gather his people back to himself (Ezek. 37:15-22; cf. 2 Ne. 3:11-12; see Ezekiel, Prophecies of; Israel: Gathering of Israel).


    Again, thanks for the great opportunity to teach the truth.

  24. #24
    B2M5L2
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Thanks for the opportunity to share with our friends and visitors.
    You still haven't answered the questions. So, why not share an answer with "our friends and visitors" as to What exactly are you alluding to when you say, "additional scripture"? And why should anyone who knows anything about the canonization process of Scripture ***ume that anything beyond what is found within the 66 books of the Bible is Scripture?

    Because the longer you keep delaying or obfuscating the questions, the more you look to "our friends and visitors" like someone who doesn't want to be friendly and honest.

    Btw, just to let you know, spam is poor subs***ute for providing a well thought-out response. And worse yet, when you claim credit for it, it really makes you look deceitful, especially when you arrogantly think you're teaching it as well.

  25. #25
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    [QUOTE=B2M5L2;72578]You still haven't answered the questions. So, why not share an answer with "our friends and visitors" as to What exactly are you alluding to when you say, "additional scripture"? And why should anyone who knows anything about the canonization process of Scripture ***ume that anything beyond what is found within the 66 books of the Bible is Scripture?

    Because the longer you keep delaying or obfuscating the questions, the more you look to "our friends and visitors" like someone who doesn't want to be friendly and honest.

    Isaiah 29:4
    And thou shalt be brought down, [and] shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.





    Btw, just to let you know, spam is poor subs***ute for providing a well thought-out response. And worse yet, when you claim credit for it, it really makes you look deceitful, especially when you arrogantly think you're teaching it as well.

    I'm not teaching at all, just sharing as I stated, and then followed up with having taught truth by providing information one can research for themselves.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •