Yes, you made the claim. So do the work and support your claim. Don't expect me to do your work for you.
Marvin
PS And you still insist on that strawman argument. I guess you don't mind be thought of as dishonest and deceptive.
Yes, you made the claim. So do the work and support your claim. Don't expect me to do your work for you.
Marvin
PS And you still insist on that strawman argument. I guess you don't mind be thought of as dishonest and deceptive.
What I said was true about the LDS type gospel. If you take issue with what I said then you need to tell me what you believe that I said was wrong. What differences are there between the LDS gospel and the gospel that you believe Abraham was under?
I was wondering--how does your claim here compare with Russianwolf's statement:
You made the claim--we are asking you to back your claim.Russianwolf---There is no LDS type of Gospel. There is only the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Where do you find that the LDS believe that the Gospel that Abraham was taught was the same as the "LDS type of gospel"? Where do you even find my LDS reference to that phrase, except it be of your own making?
Yes. It was the same gospel--the gospel of Jesus Christ. The question being--if it was not the gospel of Jesus Christ--was it the gospel at all?
There is only one gospel of Jesus Christ--and the scriptures state that it was the gospel of Jesus Christ that Abraham was taught--and that is what you are going to have to accept--if one desires the truths taught within the Biblical NT.
That does not define what all was contained within that gospel--as the Lord reveals His gospel a little at a time.
For instance--was the gospel after the first century--where it looked a lot different, in which taking the gospel to the Gentiles, and the doing away with circumcision, which was not part of the gospel practiced until later--was that still the gospel of Christ?
Yes, it was. A fuller form of the gospel--but still the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Was it the gospel of Jesus Christ before the resurrection and the Atonement--yes, still the gospel. Was it the gospel before the Holy Ghost--yes, still the gospel.
Adding components to the gospel, which has been done all along--does not disqualify it from being the gospel.
Trying to define every truth revealed does not effect it being the gospel. Trying to qualify the gospel preached to Abraham by comparing it to the gospel truths contained within the LDS church does not disqualify it from the gospel of Jesus Christ, anymore than comparing it to what truths had been revealed after the first century of the NT church.
They were completely different, in many respects. At the end of the first century AD--the gospel looked a lot different than at 33AD.
Abraham was taught the gospel, no matter how you wish to compare it to all the truths contained in the LDS church, or dig up and define every ordinance or commandment Abraham was given.
The Gospel is found in CorinthiansYes. It was the same gospel--the gospel of Jesus Christ. The question being--if it was not the gospel of Jesus Christ--was it the gospel at all?
There is only one gospel of Jesus Christ--and the scriptures state that it was the gospel of Jesus Christ that Abraham was taught--and that is what you are going to have to accept--if one desires the truths taught within the Biblical NT.
That does not define what all was contained within that gospel--as the Lord reveals His gospel a little at a time.
For instance--was the gospel after the first century--where it looked a lot different, in which taking the gospel to the Gentiles, and the doing away with circumcision, which was not part of the gospel practiced until later--was that still the gospel of Christ?
Yes, it was. A fuller form of the gospel--but still the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Was it the gospel of Jesus Christ before the resurrection and the Atonement--yes, still the gospel. Was it the gospel before the Holy Ghost--yes, still the gospel.
Adding components to the gospel, which has been done all along--does not disqualify it from being the gospel.
Trying to define every truth revealed does not effect it being the gospel. Trying to qualify the gospel preached to Abraham by comparing it to the gospel truths contained within the LDS church does not disqualify it from the gospel of Jesus Christ, anymore than comparing it to what truths had been revealed after the first century of the NT church.
They were completely different, in many respects. At the end of the first century AD--the gospel looked a lot different than at 33AD.
Abraham was taught the gospel, no matter how you wish to compare it to all the truths contained in the LDS church, or dig up and define every ordinance or commandment Abraham was given.
1 Cor 15:1-8
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
No Laws no ordinances only what about Jesus. His death, burial, and resurrection. As witnessed By the Apostles and 500 of those that believed in Him.. There is no way to include as part of the Gospel something that is not included within the Bible.. Unless you are teaching that the Bible is not the word of God.. IHS jim
[quote] dberrie---Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View PostOriginally Posted by Billyray View Post
Are you denying that LDS believe that the gospel that Abraham was under was a different gospel than you are under?
[B]Yes. It was the same gospel--the gospel of Jesus Christ.[B] The question being--if it was not the gospel of Jesus Christ--was it the gospel at all?
There is only one gospel of Jesus Christ--and the scriptures state that it was the gospel of Jesus Christ that Abraham was taught--and that is what you are going to have to accept--if one desires the truths taught within the Biblical NT.
That does not define what all was contained within that gospel--as the Lord reveals His gospel a little at a time.
For instance--was the gospel after the first century--where it looked a lot different, in which taking the gospel to the Gentiles, and the doing away with circumcision, which was not part of the gospel practiced until later--was that still the gospel of Christ?
Yes, it was. A fuller form of the gospel--but still the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Was it the gospel of Jesus Christ before the resurrection and the Atonement--yes, still the gospel. Was it the gospel before the Holy Ghost--yes, still the gospel.
Adding components to the gospel, which has been done all along--does not disqualify it from being the gospel.
Trying to define every truth revealed does not effect it being the gospel. Trying to qualify the gospel preached to Abraham by comparing it to the gospel truths contained within the LDS church does not disqualify it from the gospel of Jesus Christ, anymore than comparing it to what truths had been revealed after the first century of the NT church.
They were completely different, in many respects. At the end of the first century AD--the gospel looked a lot different than at 33AD.
Abraham was taught the gospel, no matter how you wish to compare it to all the truths contained in the LDS church, or dig up and define every ordinance or commandment Abraham was given.
Because there is no "LDS type gospel". There is only the gospel of Jesus Christ--or it isn't the gospel at all.
Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
Yes. It was the same gospel--the gospel of Jesus Christ. The question being--if it was not the gospel of Jesus Christ--was it the gospel at all?
There is only one gospel of Jesus Christ--and the scriptures state that it was the gospel of Jesus Christ that Abraham was taught--and that is what you are going to have to accept--if one desires the truths taught within the Biblical NT.
That does not define what all was contained within that gospel--as the Lord reveals His gospel a little at a time.
For instance--was the gospel after the first century--where it looked a lot different, in which taking the gospel to the Gentiles, and the doing away with circumcision, which was not part of the gospel practiced until later--was that still the gospel of Christ?
Yes, it was. A fuller form of the gospel--but still the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Was it the gospel of Jesus Christ before the resurrection and the Atonement--yes, still the gospel. Was it the gospel before the Holy Ghost--yes, still the gospel.
Adding components to the gospel, which has been done all along--does not disqualify it from being the gospel.
Trying to define every truth revealed does not effect it being the gospel. Trying to qualify the gospel preached to Abraham by comparing it to the gospel truths contained within the LDS church does not disqualify it from the gospel of Jesus Christ, anymore than comparing it to what truths had been revealed after the first century of the NT church.
They were completely different, in many respects. At the end of the first century AD--the gospel looked a lot different than at 33AD.
Abraham was taught the gospel, no matter how you wish to compare it to all the truths contained in the LDS church, or dig up and define every ordinance or commandment Abraham was given.
The gospel is found throughout the Biblical NT--it is not confined to any one book or scripture.The Gospel is found in Corinthians
1 Cor 15:1-8
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
No Laws no ordinances only what about Jesus.
The gospel of Jesus Christ was a Law itself:
Galatians6:2--"Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ."
Seems like a confirmation to me.. "I declare unto you the gospel".. What more do you need?[dberrie2000;109401]The gospel is found throughout the Biblical NT--it is not confined to any one book or scripture.
athe law of Jesus is NOT the Gospel.. The Gospel is the good news that Jesus was killed lay in the earth for 3 days and was resurrected.. That is GOOD NEW.. Law is a whole different animal... IHS jimThe gospel of Jesus Christ was a Law itself:
Galatians6:2--"Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ."
I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)--Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
Originally Posted by James Banta View Post
athe law of Jesus is NOT the Gospel..
As long as you don't bring up his previous posts:
James Banta--Only the Mosaic Law has nothing to do with salvation.. You lack of Biblical knowledge is astounding.. Paul tell us that by the Law is the Knowledge of Sin (Romans 3:20). That the Law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Jesus (Gal 3:24).. The LAW of God is more than that He gave to Moses. Yes that is a huge part of the Law. But the LAW is every command given by God.
What part of the Gospel as defined by Paul is the commandment to be perfect as the Father in heaven is perfect? I don't see it there.. The good news is Jesus dies for our sin, and was raised the third day for our justification.. That is the Good News, the Gospel! Law is NOT GOOD NEWS, law is the knowledge of sin. Just what did you ever say you believed? It sure wasn't the Bible.. IHS jim
And all I have said is 100% consistent with what I say here.. There is NO LAW OT or NT in the Gospel.. I don't understand you reading into my words as you would want them to appear rather than what I actually say.. That is just what you do to the scriptures! You did this to NE then she simply said the one commandment that came to her mind was the Golden rule. She never said it was the first commandment of God as you made it out to be. You just can't understand even simple statements when you feel that you are in the right. All reason goes out the door. That to your shame..IHS jim
Last edited by James Banta; 01-02-2012 at 11:27 AM.
And where is the Law of Jesus part of the Gospel. Where are they even used in the same context?
Do you ALWAYS bear your fellows burdens? ALWAYS? Do you ALWAYS love your fellow LDS all of them ALWAYS? I say No you don't always bear the burdens of one another, so by the authority of James 2:10 I say that you are guilty of NOT bearing the burdens of anyone.. You can't escape this by pointing a finger at me.. You are also making an unrighteous judgment is telling me that I am somehow worst than you in that commandment. I do admit that I am guilty of breaking the WHOLE of God's law in breaking this and many other commandments. I claim no righteousness of my own.. In myself there is nothing good save it be of God. You on the other hand are busy building the filthy rags of your own self righteousness.. IHS jim
Can't show that can you.. I didn't think you could.. So:And where is the Law of Jesus part of the Gospel. Where are they even used in the same context?
Do you ALWAYS bear your fellows burdens? ALWAYS? Do you ALWAYS love your fellow LDS all of them ALWAYS? I say No you don't always bear the burdens of one another, so by the authority of James 2:10 I say that you are guilty of NOT bearing the burdens of anyone.. You can't escape this by pointing a finger at me.. You are also making an unrighteous judgment is telling me that I am somehow worst than you in that commandment. I do admit that I am guilty of breaking the WHOLE of God's law in breaking this and many other commandments. I claim no righteousness of my own.. In myself there is nothing good save it be of God. You on the other hand are busy building the filthy rags of your own self righteousness.. IHS jim
It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
Abraham Lincoln
Originally Posted by James Banta View Post
And all I have said is 100% consistent with what I say here.. There is NO LAW OT or NT in the Gospel..Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
I know, James. You are 100% wrong.
Galatians5:2--"Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ."
Are you attempting to show that bearing one another's burdens is not part of the gospel of Jesus Christ?
James--using my personal position as a litmus test to determine if the scriptures are true or not in not my idea of good exegesis.Do you ALWAYS bear your fellows burdens? ALWAYS? Do you ALWAYS love your fellow LDS all of them ALWAYS? I say No you don't always bear the burdens of one another,
The scriptures state that bearing the burdens of others is the fulfillment of the law of Christ, period. Again--are you stating that that has nothing to do with the gospel of Jesus Christ?
And just where do you find that obeying Christ is related to "filthy rags"?so by the authority of James 2:10 I say that you are guilty of NOT bearing the burdens of anyone.. You can't escape this by pointing a finger at me.. You are also making an unrighteous judgment is telling me that I am somehow worst than you in that commandment. I do admit that I am guilty of breaking the WHOLE of God's law in breaking this and many other commandments. I claim no righteousness of my own.. In myself there is nothing good save it be of God. You on the other hand are busy building the filthy rags of your own self righteousness.. IHS jim
Are you saying that those of the scriptures had a right to the tree of life due to filthy rags:
Revelation22:14--"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."
The faith alone do no more than make a mockery of the Biblical text by their approach of stating there are no acts of obedience to Jesus Christ necessary for His grace unto life. It is in direct contradiction to the scriptures. One is either going to have to have a way of collating the scriptures one to another--or ***ume the Bible is a very unreliable source of truth. Pitting the scriptures against one another, and playing the cat in the litter box, does nothing to establish your theology, and much toward proving the Bible unworthy of belief.
The Bible teaches that we are saved when we place our faith in Christ and that our works do not contribute for salvation. It is a mockery for you to teach that your works help save you, and that complete obedience to the commandments is what is required when you fail by your own standards.
Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
The faith alone do no more than make a mockery of the Biblical text by their approach of stating there are no acts of obedience to Jesus Christ necessary for His grace unto life.Sure it does:
Philippians2:12--"Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling."
But of course--the only way to honor God is to teach there are no acts of obedience to Him necessary fro His grace unto life--right?It is a mockery for you to teach that your works help save you,
1 John2:3-4--"And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."
The only way to fail is to lose the faith and throw away the truth. The LDS believe that the way to succeed is to rise one more time than we fall.and that complete obedience to the commandments is what is required when you fail by your own standards.
Is the standard for exaltation complete obedience to the commandments? If so why will you be exalted since you admit that you don't keep the commandments.
Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
The only way to fail is to lose the faith and throw away the truth. The LDS believe that the way to succeed is to rise one more time than we fall.
Yes. We have been through this before.
I suppose I am of the same thinking that Paul was--I press toward the mark of the high calling of God.If so why will you be exalted since you admit that you don't keep the commandments.
That High calling, for me-- is eternal life--the mark is perfection.
Billyray--I don't give up my religion because someone is trying to tell me I can't do it. I have faith in Christ--that somehow He will help me in the eternities to become perfected in Him. I know I can do it. I know it is possible, with God.
Throwing away the truth for some prompting satan whispers in my ear is not my idea of faith in Christ.