Speaking of ‘Anti-Christic’ religions…

Posted on November 10, 2009 by theoldadam

_______________________________________________________________

Know any Mormons? 

Do you ever try and share the gospel with them?

How do you go about it?

 

 

Filed under: Mormonism

« »

43 Responses

  1. Alden, on November 10th, 2009 at 4:40 pm Said:

    Mormons are a tough crowd. For one thing, they are taught not to use common sense- their faith is based on an “inner witness,” not facts or logic. So, traditional logic-based apologetics doesn’t work, for the most part. I’ve found that sharing my own “inner witness” that Joseph Smith was not a prophet – and in fact was a liar – has the most impact.

    Reply
    • Erich Heim, on November 10th, 2009 at 4:57 pm Said:

      I agree with Alden. I usually tell Mormoms I have read and prayed about it as they suggest and that I hear back from my belly that it is a complete load of BS put conctocked by a two-bit charlatan of ill-repute, and that the only ‘burning in my bosom’ I sense after reading it is a bad case of hear burn and indigestion.

      Reply
  2. John D, on November 10th, 2009 at 10:59 pm Said:

    http://www.credenda.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=63:how-to-witness-to-mormons&catid=96:theology&Itemid=122

    I was just recommended this article, in which the author recommends there is a way to witness that will point Mormons to Saving Grace, and a way that will lead them to Atheism.

    Reply
  3. willohroots, on November 11th, 2009 at 3:39 am Said:

    I read the Mormon bible. It was dry as sawdust and had some stuff in it I could not swallow. I live on the Susquehanna, downstream from where Joe Smith baptized himself, not far from where he ‘found the stuff’. i could believe aliens, but not tens of thousands of warriors were ever here. I have found many arrowheads, no brass bucklers, lance points or chariot axles.

    Reply
  4. Raggedy Lamb, on November 11th, 2009 at 1:11 pm Said:

    In September, Walter Martin’s site focused on the Mormons and Jehovan’s Witnesses. This was the link, but every month the audios offered are different. http://www.waltermartin.com/realaudio.html

    I don’t really know any Mormons, but once a missionary youth came to my door. It was strange, because I’m American (in Japan). He was American and his teammate was Japanese. Perhaps the American was the more experienced of the two. He insisted on speaking to me in Japanese, even though we both were native English speakers. I could tell the Japanese guy was a bit amused. ;-)

    Reply
  5. Darius, on November 11th, 2009 at 7:35 pm Said:

    “For one thing, they are taught not to use common sense- their faith is based on an “inner witness,” not facts or logic.”

    Kinda like Lutherans? :) Seriously, every time I tried to point out the common sense reading of the Bible in one of these threads regarding the sacraments, someone would just say something like “you can’t think rationally about this to understand.” What a cop out.

    Reply
    • Bror Erickson, on November 14th, 2009 at 3:12 pm Said:

      Darius,
      taking the plain sense reading of the text while understanding that the man who said it is God himself for whom all things are possible, leads one to the Lutheran View on Sacraments. It is the common sense, rational position, unless you want to deny the divinity of Christ, or go Nestorian. I don’t know who you think says “you can’t think rationally on this to understand.” My view is if you think rationally about this you will be Lutheran in your understanding of it. But you have to start with who God is.

      Reply
  6. theoldadam, on November 11th, 2009 at 8:17 pm Said:

    Darius,

    Ah…NO. Not kinda like Lutherans.

    Lutherans trust what the Lord tells us to do in Holy Scripture.

    Joseph Smith wasn’t the one to command us to baptize. Brigham Young wasn’t the one to command us to eat his body and drink his blood.

    Jesus Christ commanded us to do those things.

    You might think it is not rational to trust that Christ is present where He told us to do things…but we Lutherans trust Him at His Word.

    Reply
    • Erich Heim, on November 12th, 2009 at 3:39 pm Said:

      Protestant enthusiasts, like Darius, and Mormons are taught to turn inward to seek a “burning in their belly” regarding their ’sure salvation.’ Probably an aspect of his new theology that Joe Smith carried with him out of his generic protestant roots.

      Reply
  7. Darius, on November 12th, 2009 at 4:24 pm Said:

    Except, Steve, that you choose to take Jesus literally in some spots and metaphorically in others with no rational explanation why except “the Spirit tells us Lutherans and you lowly Protestants wouldn’t understand.” Jesus clearly was speaking symbolically when he said “this is my body” since he himself ate of it and the fact that he used symbolic language in MOST of his teaching. It’s bread! Nothing else. Just plain ol’ bread and wine.

    Reply
  8. Darius, on November 12th, 2009 at 4:25 pm Said:

    Jesus also commanded us to cut out our eyes if they cause us to sin. It’s very convenient that you choose to view that as symbolic language, isn’t it?

    Reply
  9. Brigitte, on November 12th, 2009 at 5:28 pm Said:

    Darius: teaching about the sacraments is entirely different from having an “inner witness.” The sacraments as objective truth from outside of yourself, is the exact opposite of the “inner witness”. God’s word is sure, my heart is a mess.

    Reply
  10. Darius, on November 12th, 2009 at 5:42 pm Said:

    No disagreement with you there, Brigitte. But if we honestly look at the Scriptures, it’s pretty hard to say that Jesus was CLEARLY speaking literally in the one time at the Last Supper when He did anything but speak literally most of His life. At least, it is impossible to honestly say that to the point of being able to claim that those who believe otherwise are heretics. Going to that length is sinful in that it spreads disunity where something is unclear and secondary.

    Jesus said at the Last Supper that the cup was His blood and we were to drink of it…. elsewhere He said that people had to drink of “living water.” Which is it, wine or water? Or, if we take our heads out of the sand for a second, MAYBE, just maybe, Jesus was speaking metaphorically of something the Spirit does inside us and not about us literally drinking a particular liquid.

    Reply
    • Erich Heim, on November 12th, 2009 at 6:06 pm Said:

      It’s the living waters of baptism.

      You have your inner feelings of assurance; we rely on the promise of sins forgiven delivered to us in the sacraments as the means of grace–it’s all good.

      Reply
    • Bror Erickson, on November 14th, 2009 at 3:15 pm Said:

      Really Darius?
      You can’t tell the difference just from the context? I remember this argument now. We had it. Sorry dude, that you can’t read.

      Reply
  11. Brigitte, on November 12th, 2009 at 5:46 pm Said:

    I’ve spent much time with a neighboring Mormon family. We had very warm friendships and still do after they moved away.

    I’ve had many walks and talks with the mother. We’ve argued scripture. I’ve read “No man knows my history” (recommend that one highly.) She has a very strong piety. It taught me, that my piety is nothing. She can have such a false belief and still be high on it. It means nothing. Only what God really said and did matters. The devil himself can feel pious.

    How does one talk to them? I’ve told her many things, but made not dent, seemingly. Only when you come to Joseph Smith’s character will they really flip out. Of course, he is a scoundrel of the highest sort. Then there is the burning of the printing press to suppress the truth… and so on. Telling her this made me suddenly, somehow, a “Bible-thumper”. She had no answer other than calling me a name.

    Which does not make any sense. Perhaps when we try to show them things from scripture we are “Bible-thumpers”. So, we’re written off right of the bat.

    They study and study but don’t know the Bible. Of first order they need to learn the authority of the scriptures and to actually read them. Maybe then we can talk about something. Joseph Smith is a liar. Peter and Paul and Matthew and Moses and David and Isaiah, etc. are not. Just read them and about them.

    Reply
  12. Darius, on November 12th, 2009 at 7:34 pm Said:

    “You have your inner feelings of assurance; we rely on the promise of sins forgiven delivered to us in the sacraments as the means of grace–it’s all good.”

    What are these “inner feelings” you keep talking about? We are assured of salvation because Christ died for us, nothing else. Typical of a Lutheran to fight a straw man. Meanwhile, you rely for assurance on something sinful man does.

    Reply
  13. Brigitte, on November 12th, 2009 at 8:55 pm Said:

    There are plenty of people who look for feelings, rely on feelings, despair of their feelings. Perhaps, not you. I am glad for that.

    We do not rely on what sinful man does. We trust the word and promise attached. The action brings this word home. It seems to me people have explained this type of thing around here, before.

    Reply
  14. Darius, on November 12th, 2009 at 9:30 pm Said:

    “The action brings this word home.”

    And yet, there it is. Action. Your work or deed. Something you do to be saved. It is bizarre that no one seems to be aware of the works-based righteousness involved here.

    Reply
  15. Darius, on November 12th, 2009 at 9:31 pm Said:

    Oops, that paragraph should NOT be italicized.

    Reply
  16. Brigitte, on November 12th, 2009 at 9:51 pm Said:

    Darius: no, it is a gift to you. A gift to make you surer, to make you glad, to sustain that faith that lives in you, a nourishment. Gifts and nourishment are not to be refused.

    Have you ever looked at Luther’s catechism with Bible explanations? See what you think of it. http://http//www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/LCMS/explanation.pdf

    Reply
  17. Darius, on November 12th, 2009 at 9:57 pm Said:

    The link doesn’t work.

    “A gift to make you surer, to make you glad, to sustain that faith that lives in you, a nourishment. “

    Okay, so you admit that a sacrament doesn’t itself give faith or save, it’s just a symbol of the faith given by the Spirit to encourage us. Now we’re in agreement.

    Reply
  18. Brigitte, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:58 am Said:

    What the… Sometimes this link works and sometimes not. I thought it was my computer or my server. Don’t want to figure it out anymore right now or argue right now. Maybe tomorrow.

    Just if the sacrament were not to give anything then it would not be a gift.

    Reply
  19. theoldadam, on November 13th, 2009 at 4:17 am Said:

    What part about Jesus ordering us to do something and then Him actually being present in that ’something’ is offensive to you, Darius?

    You believe that He is actually present in your heart…don’t you?

    So then why is it such a stretch to believe that He could actually be present in a piece of bread and a sip of wine accompanied by His Word of promise?

    For the life of me I can’t figure out why that turns people off.

    I think it is the greatest thing in the world!

    Reply
  20. Brett, on November 13th, 2009 at 2:32 pm Said:

    Darius, we would agree that the preaching of the Word can convert a person, right? Well is human action not involved in the preaching of the Word through which the Spirit moves to convert someone!? So does that make preaching a work by which someone is saved? Now I take it you would disagree that the preaching of the Gospel is not a human work of salvation though human action and actors are involved, so why is baptism any different?

    Reply
  21. Darius, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:04 pm Said:

    Brett, the PREACHING doesn’t save anyone, it’s the WORD that converts people. God and only God can save, we humans can do nothing. We can’t save someone by sprinkling water on them. God saves by sprinkling His Spirit on His elect.

    Reply
  22. theoldadam, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:07 pm Said:

    Brett,

    Nice try.

    I think the clay is baked.

    Reply
  23. Brett, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:15 pm Said:

    Well, to clarify, I said it wasn’t the preaching that saved, but the spoken Word through which the Spirit moves to convert someone’s heart.

    It’s the same as we Lutherans believe, teach, and confess about baptism, it is no mere water, but water and the Word, the Word which makes it efficacious.

    I try.

    Reply
  24. Darius, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:18 pm Said:

    Brigitte, I read that link about baptism. It has some really bad exegesis in it to support it’s case.

    A couple examples: Babies are to be baptized because
    A. they are included in the words “all nations”;

    Wow… Jesus was talking about spreading the gospel to every tribe and tongue, not about baptizing every person.

    D. babies also are able to have faith.

    They then use Matt. 18:6 as support for this. In that passage, as is the case in pretty much all of Matthew, “little ones” refers to young Christians, not literal children. Pretty pathetic if they have to twist Scripture to support their position (Lutherans aren’t the only ones guilty of this). I hate to see the Scriptures molded to fit anyone’s theological views, even if I agree with them.

    Reply
    • Darius, on November 16th, 2009 at 3:05 pm Said:

      Darius,
      Really, So you think what Jesus meant to say was go and baptize all nations excluding their infants and babies and children under twelve since they are not yet citizens of those nations?
      Second. In Matthew 18, before Jesus gets into this discourse he calls a child to him as somewhat of an object lesson, which means that Jesus meant exactly what he says there little ones refers to children, infants, toddlers. And you assume that young children can’t also be young Christians?

      Reply
    • Bror Erickson, on November 16th, 2009 at 3:07 pm Said:

      Darius,
      Really, So you think what Jesus meant to say was go and baptize all nations excluding their infants and babies and children under twelve since they are not yet citizens of those nations?
      Second. In Matthew 18:2, before Jesus gets into this discourse he calls a child to him as somewhat of an object lesson, which means that Jesus meant exactly what he says there little ones refers to children, infants, toddlers. And you assume that young children can’t also be young Christians?

      Reply
  25. Darius, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:21 pm Said:

    Brett,

    Water doesn’t save a single person. God’s Spirit, a spiritual baptism, saves people. Physical water saved Noah physically, which pointed forward to Christ’s spiritual water saving people spiritually.

    It honestly amazes me that people can see what they want to see in Scripture when it is so clearly not the case. Do exegesis right, or don’t do it at all!

    Reply
  26. theoldadam, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:25 pm Said:

    It amazes me that so many people refuse to believe that when God tells us to do something, that He is active in the doing of what He told us to do.

    Reply
  27. theoldadam, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:29 pm Said:

    Darius,

    “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them.”

    Can you prove that babies are incapable of trust?

    That is what faith is…trust.

    I don’t think you are putting much trust in the Living God to say that He couldn’t give babies faith, if He so desired.

    Reply
  28. Darius, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:35 pm Said:

    “Can you prove that babies are incapable of trust?
    …
    I don’t think you are putting much trust in the Living God to say that He couldn’t give babies faith, if He so desired.”

    Again, Steve, I’ve said this before but let me repeat, I have never said that God can’t give babies faith. I’m just saying, and no one has been able to prove otherwise, that we cannot and should not hold God hostage to whom He should save. If He chooses not to save someone, it won’t matter how much you preach to him, dunk him in water, and stuff bread and wine down his throat.

    Furthermore, I still have yet to hear a good answer to why so many baptized babies turn away from God and their “faith.”

    Reply
  29. theoldadam, on November 13th, 2009 at 3:53 pm Said:

    People of all stripes turn away from God…including people who “made their decisions for God”.

    Staying in faith is a battle. Many reject God’s promises, but that does not mean that those promises are still not good and valid.

    If we (Lutherans) are to err…we want to err on the side of God’s grace…and not our doing, or deciding, or our faith.

    Grace before faith. That’s the Lutheran understanding. And it is straight out of the Bible.

    Reply
  30. Darius, on November 13th, 2009 at 4:00 pm Said:

    “Staying in faith” is a battle, but it’s not of our own doing. Once God saves, He doesn’t change His mind. No one can take us out of Jesus’ hand… that’s straight out of the Bible as well. :)

    God doesn’t write our names with pencil into the Lamb’s Book of Life… they’re put there with permanent ink. Once He puts a new heart in us, that heart doesn’t “go bad” or revert to the old heart. The old has passed away and died. What is dead cannot come back to life.

    Reply
  31. theoldadam, on November 13th, 2009 at 4:17 pm Said:

    Then what’s the battle all about?

    That’s my last comment for awhile. I’ve got to go out for the day.

    You have the last word (with me, anyway)

    Reply
  32. Darius, on November 13th, 2009 at 4:36 pm Said:

    The battle is to mortify sin in our lives… through the power of the Holy Spirit.

    Reply
  33. Brigitte, on November 13th, 2009 at 6:45 pm Said:

    Darius: same battle, same enemies.

    For me the trust of infants (and fetuses) is clinched by Psalm 22:

    “Yet thou art he who took me from the womb; though didst keep me safe upon my mother’s breasts. Upon thee was I cast from my birth, and since my mother bore me thou hast been my God.”

    Reply
  34. theoldadam, on November 14th, 2009 at 5:36 am Said:

    “The battle is to mortify sin in our lives… through the power of the Holy Spirit.”

    God does that in our baptism (Romans 6).

    I think the battle is to keep us in faith, as the world, the flesh and the devil do their best to rip it away from us.

    Reply
  35. Brigitte, on November 14th, 2009 at 6:04 pm Said:

    And lead us not into temptation.
    What does this mean?
    God tempts no one. We pray in this petition that God would guard and keep us so that the devil, the world, and our sinful nature may not deceive us or mislead us into false belief, despair, and other great shame and vice. Although we are attacked by these things, we pray that we may finally overcome them and win the victory.
    (Small Catechism, of course.)

    Note that false belief and despair are also great shame and vice.

    Reply

Leave a Reply