If I found out that Socrates had not lived faithfully to his own teaching, would it have an affect on how I viewed his teaching? I don’t think so. True teaching is true teaching and false teaching is false teaching no matter who the teacher is.

Moses was a murderer, yet God used him to deliver the Law to Israel: “Do not commit murder.”

Paul, as a servant of Christ, had a temper, he was outspoken (today we would say too much so), he wrote in frustration that he wished that the teachers of the Law would castrate themselves and he saw conflict as a normal part of life. Yet much of our Christian doctrine is based on Paul’s writing.

David was an adulterer, a murderer and disobeyed the Lord on a number of recorded occasions. Yet, he was a “man after God’s own heart” – for all of his faults, David yearned to follow God.

The beauty is in the message, not in the messenger.

May my cry come before you, O LORD;
give me understanding according to your word.

May my supplication come before you;
deliver me according to your promise.

May my lips overflow with praise,
for you teach me your decrees.

May my tongue sing of your word,
for all your commands are righteous.

May your hand be ready to help me,
for I have chosen your precepts.

I long for your salvation,
O LORD, and your law is my delight.

Let me live that I may praise you,
and may your laws sustain me.

I have strayed like a lost sheep.
Seek your servant,
for I have not forgotten your commands.

Psalms 119

(note, this is also getting turned in as a “reflection question” for my philosophy class tonight)

I’m going to try to tie my last three posts together in an attempt to show you all where I am right now. (In this post, they’re not in the order I posted them, the school paper makes it out of order)

“Bad Doctrine Has Consequences” – a recurring theme around our home. Last night my daughter and I talked (like we always do) on our way home from church after her small group met. This didn’t happen in the small group, but with a group of members of the small group and other at a restaurant. She was not breaking confidentiality by talking about it. She said, “I think I might have to look for a different small group.” She has a very small group – just Manda and one other young woman. Manda told me that this other girl has “lots of opinions that she will never think are wrong, but are very loose” and that this other girl won’t listen to anybody else. Manda has been talking about the whole “Firehouse Family Ministries” thing (I’m a proud mom) and this other girl won’t even talk about it.

“I’m just really looking forward to worshiping with another demonination!” (Manda pointed out that anti-Trinitarians go beyond “denomination” into a whole different religion – that point got lost in the emptiness)

“But denominations are just wrong” (Manda pointed out that we have denominations for a reason – and some are right and some are not.)

“Manda, you just have to learn how to worship with other denominations!” (Manda pointed out that she is Reformed, her grandparents go to a non-denom in FL, a United Missionary Church in MI, her aunt is Baptist, her uncle is a Free Methodist minister and everybody else goes to the Missionary church. We have the “other denomination” thing down.)

“Well, I just thought those people were neat!” (Manda used my phrase – “bad doctrine has consequences”)

“Manda, you just have to lighten up!”
(note, these are not the exact words, but pretty close to the conversation)

“Rome/Arminius/Reformers – ‘The TULIP’” was a good and necessary reminder of where we come from and why we are in a CRC. As I look for a different church, one of the possibilities is a non-denom. It is very large, and may have Reformed underpinnings, but would underpinnings be enough?

Part of the problem at Sunshine is that the farther they get from Reformers, the more doctrinal problems I see. (Not just TULIP oriented, but the increasing emphasis on gifts, the growing role of the pastor that appears more “charismatic”, the role of Neil Anderson’s “Freedom” – when I went in a couple of years ago to advocate for a single ministry, a couple of women’s leaders pushed me to go through Anderson’s series “to see where this is coming from”. Excuse me: being single does not mean “in bondage”)

This 3-way study of TULIP helped solidify in my mind why the Reformation was needed and why I need to be in a “Reformed” church. Solidly Reformed – not Arminian.

Finally, “Plato’s Allegory of the Cave” (which is actually an assignment for my philosophy class) reminded me that four years ago I would have laughed at the idea of me looking for a solidly Reformed church.

After a lifetime of living in an Arminian family, the break to Reformation Christianity was like being unchained and seeing the flame.

The realization of how much this effects my decision-making is like stepping into the sunlight.

Wrapping it up: I’m not ready to claim “cessationism” (as full-bore TR’s define it), but I am ready to take a really good look at it and I’m ready to let that issue play a part in my decision making process.

On the cessation thing. I’m not going to be looking for any burning bushes. But for forty-some years God has been able to figure out ways to communicate what He wants me to know. I don’t imagine that’s going to change.

God hasn’t changed. My understanding of the way that He may (or may not) communicate with us has changed.

But God hasn’t changed. And as long as God doesn’t change, I’ll be ok.

Interesting.

A friend and I have discussed a few times about some of the heresies that we see today – most of them are coming out of Arminian churches. Mormons (Elena made the point that Joseph Smith began life as a Methodist) and “Oneness Pentecostals are the two I have been studying most recently.

It would appear evident that when the Reformers moved away from Rome, there were those who tried to return (in doctrines, if not in name).

I’ve looked at “TULIP” from the Roman standpoint, as well as Reformed and Arminian. In all but the “T”, Arminius made moves back toward Rome.

Today, every step away from the Reformers is a step toward Rome. And as Arminians churches get further away from the Reformers (and closer to Rome) the more heresy we see.

See the complete post here.

(In order to discuss this intelligently, I’m going to ask that all who comment here have a working knowledge of the differences in doctrine between Arminianism and Calvinism – thank you!)

In the “Allegory of the Cave”, we see an example of people seeing “through the glass dimly.” Plato describes a group of people in a cave since their childhood, chained so that they cannot move their heads. I could not picture this until I saw the illustration, but imagine a fire behind the people, casting shadows on the wall in front of them. There is also a walkway and animals, people and things are carried along between the fire and the wall in front of the prisoners.

All these people know of the world are the shadows on the wall in front of them. In fact, they may not even know that there is a world outside of those shadows. All they can see – all they can know – are the flickering shadows on the wall in front of them.

Imagine that one of these prisoners is set free. He stands up and turns around, seeing the fire for the first time. This is the first time he sees the direct flame and he is blinded. At first, before his eyes grow accustomed to the light, the objects that cast the shadows seem unreal – less real than the shadows. He rebels – this is not what he is used to!

(continue reading)

Very few people care about defending the doctrine of God against those who teach heresy. Adn those that point out the heresy are not welcome.

I’ve never believed that a person can lose his or her salvation – there are too many passages that indicate that Christ cannot lose one of His own. So the last straw in leaving my Arminian church was when my kids and I were talking about their childhood and I asked if they remembered the moment that they “got saved”. My son could tell me where he was, what he had been doing, who was there.

My daughter said, “What do you mean? Do you mean the first time, or all the other times?” The surety of her salvation (to her mind) depended on how many times she had “gone to the alter” – this was the consequence of this bad doctrine.

What are the consequence of having “relationships” with those who deny the Trinity?

James White says (In “The Forgotten Trinity):

True worship must worship God as he exists, not as we wish Him to be. The essence of idoloatry is the making of images of God. An image is a shadow, a false representation. We may not bow beforea statue or figure, but if we make an image of God in our mind that is not in accord with God’s revelation of Himself, then we are not worshiping in truth. Since sin and rebellion are always pushing us toward false gods and away from the true God, we must seek every day to conform our thinking and our worship to God’s straight-edge standard of truth, revealed so wonderfully in Scripture.

(page 195) Look at the “gospel” message of every single group that denies the doctrine of the Trinity. You will find error and perversion in every group. Why? Because the true Gospel must be based upon the work of the one true and triune God. Without that basis, the Gospel cannot stand. Look at Mormonism, which denies the pillar of monotheism: the Gospel becomes the means of becoming a god. Look at the Witnesses: the Gospel is a mere appendage, a message of how we can live forever in a paradise earth. Such is what happens when the Redeemer becomes Michael the Archangel, and the Spirit becomes an impersonal active force. And in the Oneness groups the Gospel becomes legalism, replete with “necessary” things one must “experience” to be truly saved.

Bad doctrine has consequences – twisting the Gospel to fit our own desire about how it should look – has consequences.

I had thought (my bad) that Elena had a passing knowledge of the religion of the adherants that she was defending.

Elena said (in her post on Discernment), “…a Christian is faced with lots of opinions and situations that may seem like they are “good” on the surface, but the truth is they are really not “Christian” values. One has to be able to discern what is true and what is not.

This evening, Elena spent some time here on this blog

I offered the “Friendship with the World” award (after Elena offered me “Mountain out of a Molehill” She agreed that the award …”would be fine Ellen.”

Among her comments:

I know how to discern between what is true and what is false. (8:47)

After a week of vigorously defending the ability and willingness of all women in the blogospere to discern and recognize false teaching, Elena said:

The amount of what I could tell you about what mormons believe wouldn’t even take half a minute! I honestly don’t know much about them at all.

and

I simply don’t care. I also don’t care what it means to be “Reformed” vs. “truly Reformed.” Just not interested.

and

I don’t have to know Mormon doctrine to know Christian doctrine. One only needs to know the truth to be able to discern a lie.

Prior to this exchange, just after Elena graciously accepted my “Friend of the World” award, I followed up with this:

James 4:4
You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.

Here is my point: If you don’t know the Bible well enough to know that “Friend of the World” is not a good thing – how are you going to know it well enough to see when false doctrine from other religions is slipped in?

Or, if you don’t know (or care) what other religions teach, are you going to know (or care) when you are exposed to their teaching?

Do you know (or care) that when you stand shoulder to shoulder (or keyboard to keyboard) with a Mormon and praise Jesus…Do you know (or care) that one of you is praising the spirit-brother of Lucifer?

When you stand in prayer together with a Mormon, do you know (or care) that one of you is praying to a being that once was as human as you are today?

With that, I’m done. I will answer comments to this blog, but only if the commenter demonstrates an interest in knowing the doctrine of the adherants that are being defended.

If you don’t know what Mormons believe, don’t come here asking me to give them a pass.

“Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; so hear the word I speak and give them warning from me. When I say to the wicked, ‘O wicked man, you will surely die,’ and you do not speak out to dissuade him from his ways, that wicked man will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. But if you do warn the wicked man to turn from his ways and he does not do so, he will die for his sin, but you will have saved yourself.” Ez 33:7-9

…We cannot blink at the fact that gentle Jesus meek and mild was so stiff in his opinions and so inflammatory in his language that he was thrown out of church, stoned, hunted from place to place, and finally gibbeted as a firebrand and a public danger. Whatever his peace was, it was not the peace of an amiable indifference.”

This t-shirt is part of their message:

“ARE YOU BRIGHT ENOUGH TO BE A TARGET?”

How bright does your light shine? Are you the “City on a Hill? (read these lyrics, they say something important – given the last week, this is a new song, not yet recorded).

I went to a concert with my kids (and a spare) last night.

The first band was really bad. The second wasn’t good. The third band was “interesting”. They list their style as “tribal” and they sound sort of like “middle eastern- punk” with an accordian.

The fourth band is the band we went to see.

This band is brothers, their dad is manager (but the blonde is not related, he just plays bagpipes and mandolin).

They have a message. Their “Amazing Grace” is quite something. It was also something to hear a room full of teenagers singing. I could tell those who sang the meaning. Half the kids rolled their eyes and moved to the back of the room. The other half got up on the stage with the band and stood shoulder to shoulder, arm in arm.

Before their last number, the leade singer (all 6 feet, 9 inches of him) talked for a few minutes about Jesus and following Him. Those who know Him: walk it. Those who don’t: accept Him.

But here is what he ended with: Do the right thing. Don’t back down.

Here are some of their lyrics:

My favorite (been there, done that have the t-shirt):

An eye for an eye, and everything in between,
an eye for an eye, and we’ll pay the price.
An eye for an eye, you defied your maker,
an eye for an eye and we’ll all be blind.

And I like this one, too:

We’re the scallywags of Archer Street, we don’t know when to quit
We go to shows, we sing out loud, we scuttle every pit.
But when it comes to praisingGod we always bow our knees,
We go to Him, we sing out loud, it’s him that made us free.

From the depths of Sheol to the heart of shalom,
we will stand strong together, we will never be alone.
Fill our cups full of courage, may our face hit the floor,
when we are at our lowest point, we stand at heaven’s door.

They are pro-life

FIGHT TO LIVE

It’s not a kid, it’s just a thing, selfishness is the song you sing
It’s your body, it’s your choice but the life inside you have a voice
The news has pulled your pride wall down
Now you’re not the stud in town
You gave him life don’t kill the child
just because your pride’s defiled
Fight to live fight to save a life
The life you gave this child within her
He’s a gift not a curse

So be a man don’t be a quitter
Protecting life is so much better
be a man don’t be a quitter,
fight, be a man don’t be a quitter
just because this child’s within her
be a man don’t be a quitter

There are a lot of parallels…

These people came to my church.

The latest flap around the “girl blogs” erupted.

1 John 4:1
Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

——-

I named names – along with the problems with doctrine.

So did a Godly woman on line.

2 Timothy 2:15-18 Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth…”

——-

I went public

She went public

Acts 20:31 So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears.

——-

I said, “We should not be having a “relationship” with these people. They are false teachers and we shouldn’t be having them in our pulpit.”

She said, “We should have discernment and wisdom when visiting their blogs”

Matthew 7:15
“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.

——-

I was told “We just don’t see what the big deal is.”

She was told “We just don’t see what the big deal is.”

2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,

——

Accusations were thrown around. There is a lot of heat.

My daughter is standing up (I’m a proud mom) for right doctrine. And we take a lot of heat for that.

Some of the heat is on line.

My daughter and I are taking heat in real life. A couple of women have lectured me about being “Spirit-filled.”

Manda is having fingers pointed at her: “they’re the ones that are trying to ruin the spring break trip.”

For us, standing for truth and discernment has been very real-life and has cost us.

We’ve got a whole lot of Christians…

standing shoulder to shoulder with the “ones who call themselves Christian but who believe in another Jesus” accusing their spiritual siblings of “legalism”.

We have Christians attempting to silence those to call them to discernment

There are three characteristics here (I’m speaking only on this issue, we all know that we have different characteristics at different times)

1) Stand up for truth – even if it’s hard. Name names, just like Paul did.
2) Tell those that stand up to shut up.
3) Be silent, say nothing, be safe.

2 Timothy 4:1-2: “In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction.”

Here is the problem: Mormons are attempting to pass themselves off as Christian.

Here is the BIGGER problem: Christian women are helping them. (Where is the Godly leadership of husbands?)

Matthew 12:30 “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.“

Gordon. B. Hinckley, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said: “We are Christians in a very real sense and that is coming to be more and more widely recognized. Once upon a time people everywhere said we are not Christians. They have come to recognize that we are, and that we have a very vital and dynamic religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ.“

Marla said: And if we are so concerned with love, let us love by being truthful rather than muddling the distinctions between blogs of Christians and those of sects that have broken away from Christianity, so that seekers and newer Christians aren’t taken captive into deceptive philosophies (sound familiar?).

And her readers said:

I think your discernment award is pathetic and you can delete this if you want.

You give Christians a bad name.

you are the most UN-Christian person I have ever met.

the words you post on your blog reflect negativity and a bitterness of soul that I do not care to read

I (Ellen) say that persecution strengthens a person. It’s just really sad when it comes from other Christians.

Elena’s readers said:

Elena asks: 3. Who died and left Marla Swoffer the queen of the blogosphere?

I (Ellen) say that those who are “prepared in season and out of season to
correct, rebuke and encourage” do not consider themselves “queens” — they consider themselves faithful to God.

I commented on a blog today and received a reply about missionaries.

The lesson that the following family learned before going to the “mission field” was (my words) “share the love, but not the Gospel”.

What a difference from Jesus’ disciples!
Luke 9:2 and he sent them out to preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick.

And the early Christians!
Acts 8:4 Those who had been scattered preached the word wherever they went.

I would submit that a Christian is to serve God, serve the body of Christ, but preach the Gospel to the lost to the lost.

In short, This family was put into the mission field. The father’s job is flying planes, delivering medical supplies to a closed country. The family received training in what is and is not appropriate about their “mission”. The children that their mission is to interact with other children in a way that reflects the heart of Christ for a people who do not know Him… They weren’t called into the mission field to preach but to serve.

Romans 1:9
God, whom I serve with my whole heart in preaching the gospel of his Son…

Galatians 5:13
You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature ; rather, serve one another in love.

Romans 12:7
If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; (note: this does not tell us to go and serve, but not share the Gospel)

Ephesians 6:7
Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, (note: this is instruction to slaves serving their master’s)

Philippians 2:22
But you know that Timothy has proved himself, because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel.

Preaching, on the other hand…
Jonah 1:2
“Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me.”

Matthew 4:17
From that time on Jesus began to preach, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.”

Matthew 24:14
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

Mark 6:12
They went out and preached that people should repent.

There are many more, I’d suggest that you visit Biblegateway.com

This is in the context of blogs belonging to Mormons. There are some that say that we are only “stopping to visit”, or sharing, or any number of things – but not preaching the Gospel.

I cannot find anywhere that the Bible tells us to “visit”, but not preach the Gospel.

But, that’s just me looking in the Bible…

Can we really just visit a blog and share only part of our lives? Especially the part that is supposed to permeate every fiber of our beings?

“Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers…

For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness?

Or what fellowship has light with darkness?

What accord has Christ with Belial?

Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?

What agreement has the temple of God with idols?

For we are the temple of the living God;

as God said,

“I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them,
and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.

Therefore go out from their midst,
and be separate from them, says the Lord,

and touch no unclean thing;
then I will welcome you,

and I will be a father to you,
and you shall be sons and daughters to me,
says the Lord Almighty.”

2 Corinthians 6:14-18

My daughter and I went to “youth night” at church and we worshipped together in “her” setting.

The speaker was a little nutty, but good. At one point he broke people into four basic groups (we all fit into all four groups once in a while)

1) VIP’s (very impactful people)
2) VTP’s (very teachable people)
3) VNP’s (very nice people)
4) VDP’s (very draining people)

The two that struck me over so many “controversies” are #1 and #3.

There are a few folks out there who are VIP’s who are ready to take on hell with a squirtgun.

Then there are the VNP’s who say, “I’ll bring the cookies.”

The ones who are exhort others to at least acknowledge the battle, “Come’on! Hell’s creeping in on us. Go get your sqirtgun!” And the ones who exhort, “please-can’t-we-all-just-get-along!”

Which would you rather be?
(VNP can also be “Very Non-Productive)

This is response to a question on another blog about how to decide who is Christian and who is not:

Once upon a time there was a man that lived on a planet called “Kolob”, not so very far away. It came to pass that this man lived a good life and became a god; he came to another little planet called “earth” with his wife that he had married on his home planet.. In their exalted states, this god and his wife gave birth to “spirit children”; the first-born was Jesus – later would come Lucifer, along with many other “spirit children”.

The “father-god” was concerned about the future salvation of humans on this new planet and he had a planned. One of his sons (Jesus) agreed with the plan. The other son (Lucifer) did not agree and rebelled, convincing a large number of (pre-human) spirit-children in heaven to side with him. As punishment, the father-god cast Lucifer out of heaven and made Lucifer’s followers into demons, who could never, ever be born as humans(1). Another large number (although not the remaining) of spirit-children sided with Jesus and would be blest to be born as Caucasians. The remaining spirit-children (who had not taken sides) would be born in the line of Cain, as non-Caucasians (black people).

These spirit children remained in heaven, to be born as humans – their race and location depend on the choices that they made in heaven in this great spiritual battle.

Some of these people moved to a place far across the ocean. A group of people from a place called Babel settled in what we now know as Central America(2). Another group, called “Jews” also came to this new place(3). A man named Nephi led these Jews. They divided into two groups, the Nephites and the Lamanites who fought each other. The Nephites were defeated in 428 A.D. The Lamanites continued and are now known as the American Indians.

The father-god’s plan of salvation included the spirit-child, Jesus. In order for the father-god’s plan to work, Jesus needed a body. So the father-god used a girl named Mary, in a process that is as natural as our own birth(4), to give birth to Jesus.

Jesus was born, got married (to three women: Mary, Martha and Mary Magdelene) and had children. At the end of his life, Jesus began to atone for the sin of man (but not personal sins) in a garden(5). After he began the work in the garden, he finished his work on a cross. After Jesus died on the cross, he arose from the dead after three days. During the time between his death and resurrection, Jesus’ spirit was in the spirit world, where the souls of the dead wait for their own resurrection, to be reunited with their bodies. There, he ministered to the “righteous spirits, training them to teach other (sinful or ignorant) spirits – extending his ministry on earth into the spirit world.

After Jesus was resurrected, he went to minister to the Nephites in America. He appeared before a congregation in their temple, and allowed them to feel the wounds in his hands and feet, staying with them for several days, teaching and healing.

For 1800 years, this father-god was quiet. Then(6) the father-god(7) appeared to a boy(8) and revealed to him that religion, as he knew it, was wrong – all of it. Teachers, churches, creeds and beliefs were all abominations. The angel told the boy that he had been chosen to translate a very special book that was written on tablets of gold. Four years9 later an angel(10) appeared and told the boy to begin the work of translation. As the boy translated, a prophet(11) appeared to him and ordained him to restore the “true church”

The story on these tablets was amazing. The story (as related by this boy) was the account of ancient people who came to the Americas, people from Babel and Jews who were fleeing persecution in Jerusalem. According to the boy (now a man), his translation of this book is more doctrinally correct than the Bible(12). He even boasted that he did more than Jesus to keep his church together(13)!

The boy (now a man) published this book(14) and started the one “true” religion – a religion that was so outside of orthodox Christianity that the church was driven from town to town. As the religion grew, so did its doctrine.

Just like the “father-god”, all humans have the potential for becoming god, with their own planets (like earth). One of the father-god’s prophets(15) said, “As god once was, man is. As God is, man may become.” When this prophet said, “man…”, he meant exactly that. Women cannot be saved unless they are married to a “priest(16)” in this new religion.

Another teaching of this new religion was that the spirit-children in heaven could only be exalted (with the possibility of becoming a god themselves) if they were born into human bodies and that a man’s glory in heaven depended on the number of babies he had fathered. This meant that adherents of this religion must have as many babies as possible. In order to do this, polygamy was essential. This effectively reduced women to mere commodities. One follower of this religion said, “I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying a cow(17).”

Folks, this is Mormonism. Either Mormons believe their prophets and doctrine (and all of this story), or they believe that their prophets and presidents were wrong.

Full references and bullet points

This is in response to a commenter on Elena’s blog that my list of bullet points was incorrect and that I had been “misled”

Here are the points and my sources:

• Mormon doctrine denies the eternal nature of God (the father-god was a created man who became a god)

As god once was, man is. As God is, man may become.” (See The Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, comp. Clyde J. Williams, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1984, p. 1)

• Mormon doctrine denies the Trinity )”That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man.” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35.)

Source: Joseph Smith: “Lectures on Faith.”, approved for inclusion in the Doctrine and Covenants by a Conference vote of the LDS Church on August 17, 1835. They appeared in all English editions of the D&C until their unexplained removal in 1921 without a General Conference vote. Lecture Five explicitly teaches that there are two persons in the Godhead:

Q. How many personages are there in the Godhead?
A. Two: the Father and the Son.

• Mormon doctrine denies the virgin birth (the father-god had sex with Mary to conceive Jesus)

Brigham Young, second prophet and president of the LDS church said,

“The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood—was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers.” (Journal of Discourses, v. 8, p. 115).

• Mormon doctrine teaches that Christ was in a plural marriage

Jedediah M. Grant, Second Counselor to Brigham Young the Second Prophet of the LDS Church:

“Celsus was a heathen philosopher; and what does he say upon the subject of Christ and his Apostles, and their belief? He says, the ‘grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was because He had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed Him.’ After Jesus went from the stage of action, the Apostles followed the example of their master. . . The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, casing his crucifixion, was evidently based on polygamy,. . .a belief in the doctrine of plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus, and his followers. We might almost think they were ‘Mormons’ ” (Journal of Discourses, Vol 1. ppl 345-346)

• Mormon doctrine teaches that Mormonism is the only true way to heaven
• Mormon doctrine states that there is no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, p. 188.)

If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation. There is no salvation [the context is the full gospel including exaltation to Godhood] outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 670.)

• Mormon doctrine teaches that all men have the potential to become gods

As god once was, man is. As God is, man may become.” (See The Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, comp. Clyde J. Williams, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1984, p. 1)

• And it follows that Mormon doctrine denies monotheism (as there are as many gods as there are men who have become gods)

We were begotten by our Father in Heaven; the person of our Father in Heaven was begotten on a previous heavenly world by His Father; and again, He was begotten by a still more ancient Father, and so on from generation to generation, from one heavenly world to another still more ancient…
LDS Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, 1853, page 132

I was going to stay quiet but I just couldn’t resist.

Marla Swoffer posted on being discerning about those who choose to call themselves Christians (namely Mormons).

A commenter on Marla blog commented: “I really cannot believe someone who would call themselves a Christian is so religious-racist, to coin a new phrase…”

Equating Godly discernment with racism may be…well, I’m not sure I have words…but let’s have a look at some real religious-racism, Mormon style.

“Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be and the Lord put a mark on him, which is the flat nose and black skin” Brigham Young (second prophet and President of the Mormon Church)

“Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Volume 10, page 110.

“Had I anything to do with the negro , I would confine them by strict law to their own species and put them on a national equalization.” Joseph Smith (founder, first prophet and president of the Mormon Church), History of the Church, Volume 5, pages 218 – 219.

“Racial degeneration, resulting In differences In appearance and spiritual aptitude, has arisen since the fall. We know the circumstances under which the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham) were cursed with what we call negroid racial characteristics.” Mormon Doctrine, page 616.

.As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed with a dark skin; he became the father of the negroes, and those spirits who are not worthy to receive the priesthood are born through his lineage.” Mormon Doctrine, page 109.

To illustrate: Cain Ham, and the whole negro race have _ cursed with a black skin, the mark of Cain, so they can be identified as a caste apart, a people with whom the other descendants of Adam should not intermarry.” Mormon Doctrine, page 114.

“Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. A curse placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a black skin and have been denied the privilege of Priesthood and the fullness of the blessings of the Gospel. These are the descendants of Cain. Moreover, they have been made to feel their inferiority and have been separated from the rest of mankind from the beginning…. we will also hope that blessings may eventually be given to our negro brethren, for they are our brethren—children of God—not withstanding their black covering emblematical of eternal darkness. ” The Way to Perfection, pages 101-102.

2/15/2006
I’ve been struggling/wrestling with this issue, give the stuff at my church plus a few of the blogs I read on a regular basis. It’s going to take me a while to get through this. I welcome input and I think I’m going to keep everything in this one post, so that it’s in one place. That means I’ll have to try to update the date

I’ve got
- “To be Continued?” by Samuel Waldron
- “Keep in Step With the Spirit” by J.I.Packer
- “Wind & Fire” (Ten sermons by C.H.Spurgeon)
- and articles found here.

I guess the short story is that I’ve experienced what some would call “prophetic words”; others would call them coincidence. I grew up with one of my mom’s favorite hymn being “In the Garden”…you know…”and He walks with me and He talks with me…”.

Does He? I know He walks with me…but does He talk with me?

Cessationists say, “NO!” Prayer is one-way communication.

Continued later…

I took these last night, just to see what my new digital camera could do at sunset.

I’ve done some pretty extensive studies on divorce and remarriage – at my age, there are not that many widowed guys and most (MOST) of the never married men are never married for a reason. Knowing where I stand on this issue was very important for me to figure out.

This particular post was prompted by a commenter on Challies who said, “The Levitical priests were not to marry a divorced woman because of defilement. Is that defilement not tied to sin?”

The actual quote from Leviticus 21 is:-15 ” ‘The woman he marries must be a virgin. He must not marry a widow, a divorced woman, or a woman defiled by prostitution, but only a virgin from his own people, so he will not defile his offspring among his people. I am the LORD, who makes him holy. ‘ ”

Read this again. A priest had special prohibitions on who he could marry. Not only could he not marry a divorced woman, he could not marry a widow or a prostitute.

He had to marry a virgin. Period. It didn’t matter what the reason for the woman’s “non-virginity”, a priest had to marry a virgin.

Next: the woman described as “defiled” was defiled by prostitution, not divorce. So, if a person wishes to import the “defilement” to divorced women as well, that person needs to import the “defilement” to widows as well.

So, I would ask, what sin in tied to being a widow, other than the sin of being married to a man who gets cancer and dies?

Another point is the status of divorced women.

Lev. 22: 12-13 If a priest’s daughter marries anyone other than a priest, she may not eat any of the sacred contributions. But if a priest’s daughter becomes a widow or is divorced, yet has no children, and she returns to live in her father’s house as in her youth, she may eat of her father’s food.

This is important to the “defiled by divorce” – in this passage, there is no difference in the “holiness” of a priests daughter, divorced or widowed, as it pertains to living in the priest’s home or eating the sacred contributions.

There is no difference in status between a divorced woman or a widow.

Well…I do like writing…but at the rate I’m moving I’d get a PhD about the time I die.

You Should Get a PhD in Liberal Arts (like political science, literature, or philosophy)

You’re a great thinker and a true philosopher. You’d make a talented professor or writer.