Topic: need explanation on a few things (Read 1515 times)

Tomtheironmongoose · « **on:** August 06, 2007, 08:31:11 PM »

I am curious on a few issues.
Since the LDS Church claims to be the true and restored church of Jesus Christ, there should be no fundamental difference between the church today and the church in first century eastern mediterranian? That is my assumption anyway.
To get to the point of this, a number verses in the Book of Mormon (I dont have a D & C, or Pearl of Great Price, so I havent been able to check them yet) that contradict orthodox Christian teaching. Verses off the top of my head are

- 2 Nephi 25:23
For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.

- 2 Nephi 2:25
Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.

these ones I have found at scriptures.lds.org

Can anyone clarify?

valerie · « **Reply #1 on:** August 15, 2007, 10:25:14 AM »

Hello Tomtheironmongoose...

"Since the LDS Church claims to be the true and restored church of Jesus Christ, there should be no fundamental difference between the church today and the church in first century eastern mediterranian?"

Not that I agree with your statement but perhaps you could point out what the fundamental differences are?

I am not sure I see your point in the scriptures you quoted either. I would be happy if you were to explain your position more. However, assuming you have similar questions to most individuals, I would assert that there is no difference in the underlying principles of the scriptures you quoted and similar ones from the Bible. Although, there are differences in how other churches view the fall and grace from the LDS church.

Another scripture to ponder...if you choose...Moroni 10:32-33

Quote

32 Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, ye can in nowise deny the power of God.
33 And again, if ye by the grace of God are perfect in Christ, and deny not his power, then are ye sanctified in Christ by the grace of God, through the shedding of the blood of Christ, which is in the covenant of the Father unto the remission of your sins, that ye become holy, without spot

.

Tomtheironmongoose · « **Reply #2 on:** August 17, 2007, 10:26:33 PM »

Thank you for that verse, I have not actually heard that one before, so it nice to see it.
The reason I chose those verses in particular is that they are indicative of a couple early Christian heresies.
The first one is gnosticism. Gnostics in the early church taught that the fall was good and necessary and the 2 Nephi 2 comes across as supporting that.
The second is pelagianism. Pelagius lived during the 300's AD and rejected Original Sin and taught that mankind could achieve salvation on their own without grace. Grace was not necessary, but was in effect caused, has some later holders of this articulated. 2 Nephi 25:23 appears to be defending this position.

I hold that men disobeying God is legitamately wrong. And that Grace is the necessary prerequisite before anything we do can be counted as pleasing in God's sight.

valerie · « **Reply #3 on:** August 20, 2007, 11:24:37 AM »

I am certainly not an expert in Christian heresies but I can submit that what is heresy to one is doctrine to another. Nevertheless, touching upon the fall, this is certainly some complex doctrine and perhaps not necessary for mankind to understand completely.

Let me elaborate a bit and preface that this is pretty much my opinion with a smattering of Mormon doctrine. Mankind has a habit of placing man like attributes and perceptions on to God. What we feel to be just and right, for all we know, is not God's view of just and right. Thus, I have found in my studies of the fall that our (mankind's) perceptions are simply inadequate to fully explain the circumstances surrounding the fall. Simply put, it is more important to understand how we (mankind) are saved from the fall rather than the specific circumstances of the fall. However, I will submit to you that it IS Mormon doctrine that the fall was necessary. The following quote from a talk (1993) given by Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles states:

Quote

When Adam and Eve received the first commandment, they were in a transitional state, no longer in the spirit world but with physical bodies not yet subject to death and not yet capable of procreation. They could not fulfill the Father

Tomtheironmongoose · « **Reply #4 on:** August 26, 2007, 03:06:41 PM »

I do think one has to be careful in saying that one's heresy is another's doctrine.

In historic Christianity, the praise seen for the fall is intimately tied to the redemptive work of Christ. 2 Nephi places praise on the fall making us better humans than we were when in an innocent state.

I will clarify on pelagianism then. When Martin Luther was debating with monks, one group called Nominalists defended the position defined in 2 Nephi 25:23. Luther called Pelagianism. Under examination, the accusation makes sense. What is described in 2 Nephi 25:23, appears to be men meriting God's favor, something which grace is not supposed to be.

valerie · « **Reply #5 on:** August 27, 2007, 03:52:47 PM »

Quote

I do think one has to be careful in saying that one's heresy is another's doctrine.

Careful of what? Getting burned at the stake or just burning in He**?

Quote

In historic Christianity, the praise seen for the fall is intimately tied to the redemptive work of Christ. 2 Nephi places praise on the fall making us better humans than we were when in an innocent state.

I am not sure I understand you here...nevertheless...in an effort to try and understand. How is it even possible to conclude on what state of "betterness" humans were in at that point? Is it not true that the atonement would not have been necessary if the fall had not occurred? If Adam had not fallen then would we be here today and in a position to take hold upon the redemtive work of Christ? Praise for the fall...it allowed for the great redemptive work of Christ!

Quote

I will clarify on pelagianism then. When Martin Luther was debating with monks, one group called Nominalists defended the position defined in 2 Nephi 25:23. Luther called Pelagianism. Under examination, the accusation makes sense. What is described in 2 Nephi 25:23, appears to be men meriting God's favor, something which grace is not supposed to be.

You assume too much based upon one scripture but that isn't really anything new. Who says grace isn't supposed to be that way? A very mankind approach to restrict God's definition of grace to mankind as basically dead weight that Christ has to drag up to heaven, never mind whether or not you actually wanted to go there. You are all going to go to heaven and you are going to like it! Reminds me of road trips with my Dad.

Tomtheironmongoose · « **Reply #6 on:** August 27, 2007, 10:20:47 PM »

Please forgive. My effort at trying to be succint as made me vague. I am sorry.

The point, "One's heresy is another's doctrine" rings the bell of "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." It sounds like trying to please the other point of view while reinforcing your own. Doesnt really get to the point of anything except maybe stalling. (Sorry, philosophy is one of my minors. That is why I saw your quote that way.)

Concluding the betterness of humans in that state rest, perhaps over-relied maybe, on that when God created everything, including Adam and Eve, God said it was good.

Gen. 1:31
And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very agood. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. KJV (scriptures.lds.org)
Gen. 1:33
And I, God, saw everything that I had made, and behold, all things which I had made were very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. IV(JST) (http://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/default.htm)

And you are correct, if Adam and Eve had not fallen, there would be no need for the atonement.
I am not sure I understand that last question in the paragraph. Sorry.
The Book of Mormon casts the fall in slightly different terms than you just did. In verse 25, it says

Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy. 2 Nephi 2:25

Am I assuming too much on a Book of Mormon scripture or a Bible scripture? I will try to avoid making such assumptions then.
I think we misunderstand each other on the dead weight issue. By Christ's atonement, mankind is redeemed and is in right standing with God. Or as Athansius would put it, "God became man, so that man could become god."

I hope that clarifies what I have thus said.

Author Topic: need explanation on a few things (Read 1515 times)

Tomtheironmongoose

need explanation on a few things

valerie

Re: need explanation on a few things

Tomtheironmongoose

Re: need explanation on a few things

valerie

Re: need explanation on a few things

Tomtheironmongoose

Re: need explanation on a few things

valerie

Re: need explanation on a few things

Tomtheironmongoose

Re: need explanation on a few things