Mormon and Jehovah's witness

[JohnDeereFan]

mine was real

How do we know? Won't Mormons, JWs also say that their subjective experience is real? Won't people of no particular religious belief also say that they're had subjective experiences that they believe "changed their heart"?

neither would the Gospel without the Spirit. Im not saying a testimony of feelings but the Gospel in my testimony.

But giving your testimony is not the Gospel. Telling someone that you had an objective experience that "changed your heart" will not communicate the Gospel to them. That's why the Bible says "faith comes by hearing the word of God" and not "faith comes by hearing somebody's subjective experience".

Honestly, if somebody is an enemy of God and is in willful rebellion against Him, what makes you think they're going to want their heart changed?

I would disagree, indirect Gospel messages are still hearing the Gospel.

But we're not talking about the Gospel. We're talking about a subjective, esoteric experience.

Yes I agree all of that and I know you assumed Jesus into the picture, but I would also show how His work was so vital and how by that grace we are free.

Free from what?

 

[zrs6v4]

People are not saved through faith in a false god or Jesus, which is what the Mormons and JWs have.



But the Mormons are not giving the gospel. You do know that they teach Jesus saves us "after all we can do." Iow, works are part of salvation. They also have the wrong Jesus, who is a spirit child of God and his wife.

I agree totally and that their gospel isnt the same when you start defining things like grace, the person of God, and so forth.

My question was more concerning the 7 year old who hears the Gospel without defining all of the theology behind it-- Jesus Christ came to save sinners and if we trust and believe in Him we will be saved. At what point does what we say become to not enough, or at what point is it false? Im mainly speaking of essentials, but we can to the conclusion of the Spirit working through His Word to save people. I above offered the idea that God chooses to give grace through the gospel preached by those who have been born again. I dont want to go all the way through what has been stated again, but I do agree that they have the wrong God, but then we must say unless one has the right God then no one is truly saved.

 

[zrs6v4]

How do we know? Won't Mormons, JWs also say that their subjective experience is real? Won't people of no particular religious belief also say that they're had subjective experiences that they believe "changed their heart"?

your right you dont know. and yes everyone thinks they are saved.

But giving your testimony is not the Gospel. Telling someone that you had an objective experience that "changed your heart" will not communicate the Gospel to them. That's why the Bible says "faith comes by hearing the word of God" and not "faith comes by hearing somebody's subjective experience".

It is a way of giving the Gospel, but your right my testimony isn't the Gospel. I dont want you to misunderstand me here, A Testimony is a way of teaching the Gospel. I dont mean help the Spirit, but our role is teaching, but the Spirit teaches the heart for a definite result. I would think of my testimony as an analogy so to speak. I dont mean that going to someone and telling then that I asked Jesus into my heart when I was 6 months old and then I felt really funny for a minute .

Honestly, if somebody is an enemy of God and is in willful rebellion against Him, what makes you think they're going to want their heart changed?

only the work of the Spirit in them. I wouldn't rely on my testimony or my imperfect teaching abilities. That is an important key.

Free from what?

slavery to sin (the Law) and to serving Christ willingly under grace

 

[JohnDeereFan]

your right you dont know.

So then, why would you choose a subjective and esoteric experience that you admit is unknowable over the Gospel, which God, Himself, assures us is the power of God unto salvation?

and yes everyone thinks they are saved.

So how does sharing a subjective and esoteric experience with an unsaved person explain to them that they are not saved?

It is a way of giving the Gospel

No, it isn't. It's a way of sharing your subjective, esoteric experience with them.

I dont mean help the Spirit, but our role is teaching

No, our role is to proclaim. We teach them after they're saved.

slavery to sin

And if I'm an unsaved person, the first words out of my mouth are going to be "are you calling me a sinner"?

and to serving Christ willingly under grace

But you still haven't explained why serving Christ is going to be a selling point to somebody who is perfectly happy devoting his life to finding new ways to rebel against Christ, and whom the Bible says is an enemy of Christ.

Unsaved people don't want to serve Christ.

 

[Marcia]

I agree totally and that their gospel isnt the same when you start defining things like grace, the person of God, and so forth.

My question was more concerning the 7 year old who hears the Gospel without defining all of the theology behind it-- Jesus Christ came to save sinners and if we trust and believe in Him we will be saved. At what point does what we say become to not enough, or at what point is it false? Im mainly speaking of essentials, but we can to the conclusion of the Spirit working through His Word to save people.

I think the case of a child and an adult are not the same in the sense that an adult can comprehend more. God gives the understanding to a child, I believe, of what he or she needs to believe. If that child is believing in the true Jesus, even without much theological understanding, that is what saves him/her.

I think to a certain extent that might be true of an adult at the point of belief, but in a short time, that person accepts the Trinity, for example. If they reject it or argue against it, I would have to wonder if they were saved (though they might argue against other things that would not mean they were not saved imo).

How much a person has to know or understand about God or Jesus to be saved is an issue of much unresolved discussion and debate amongst theologians.

I think we've had a thread on that here and there was disagreement all around.

I above offered the idea that God chooses to give grace through the gospel preached by those who have been born again. I dont want to go all the way through what has been stated again, but I do agree that they have the wrong God, but then we must say unless one has the right God then no one is truly saved

I'm not sure what you are saying here. I thought before you were saying or implying that someone could get saved at a Mormon conference. I don't think so because no one there would be preaching the true gospel or the true Jesus.

 

[Marcia]

But giving your testimony is not the Gospel.

JDF, what about someone giving the gospel as part of their testimony? I know a few people saved hearing the testimony of others when it includes the gospel. Someone was saved once reading my online testimony (and I know a few other cases of this type of event). But the gospel is incorporated in the testimony.

Testimonies can be powerful and used by God. I agree it needs to be more than a subjective account. So if the objective truth of the gospel is included, I think the Lord uses that to save sometimes.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

JDF, what about someone giving the gospel as part of their testimony?

It's not giving the testimony I have a problem with. It's the idea that we evanglize by trying to convince someone they should become a Christian.

 

[zrs6v4]

So then, why would you choose a subjective and esoteric experience that you admit is unknowable over the Gospel, which God, Himself, assures us is the power of God unto salvation?

Im not sure, what is the point in telling the person my name or asking how they are doing. intellectually it isnt necessary and the Gospel is enough.

So how does sharing a subjective and esoteric experience with an unsaved person explain to them that they are not saved?

Im not sure

No, our role is to proclaim. We teach them after they're saved.

I would probably disagree, unless you can explain how we dont teach them? I do understand that we proclaim, but we also teach. There will be questions and so forth and I want to be clear in my presentation although my reliance is totally on God's Spirit and work of Grace behind all of my work.

And if I'm an unsaved person, the first words out of my mouth are going to be "are you calling me a sinner"?

If you are an unsaved person rejecting the Gospel then it in itself will be foolish as well. I do understand what your saying, but if God is working in someone then they will respond in a different way. I think of the Ethiopian eunich wanting to know about Isaiah 53.

But you still haven't explained why serving Christ is going to be a selling point to somebody who is perfectly happy devoting his life to finding new ways to rebel against Christ, and whom the Bible says is an enemy of Christ.

Unsaved people don't want to serve Christ.

Im not sure how we ended up here and I feel like we are just on some random path that is making weird turns. When presenting Christ, we are pretty much giving a message that is detestable and as you said will be rejected every time. There is no way to sell someone or convince them apart from God's work, but I will do all I can to show them their idolatry that roots in their heart of sin. What is faith and repentance but repenting from everything and turning to Christ in faith? That is the only proper response to the Gospel, and is not for me to change ones heart or raise them from the dead.

 

[dcorbett]

Since I was married to a mormon (yes, when I was living out of God's will) , I will interject what I do know about their beliefs.

Most of the mormons I know and have known do not know what their church actually believes! The message has been glossed over to be more palatable, and Jesus as Savior is presented, but when you dig down and
find the "Jesus was brother to Satan and Satan fell from grace", you finally hit the nail on the head - NOONE who believes this can be saved because it denies the diety of Christ! My son married and converted a mormon girl to Christianity! He kept reading scripture to her every night, and when they are with her family, he opens his prayers with "Lord God, creator of everything, 3 in 1, blessed be the Trinity" instead of "Heavenly Father" because mormons think that there is a heavenly father and a heavenly mother in each of the kingdoms.

Hell is real, and if you show the mormons what the Bible says about hell, they cannot dispute it.

 

[zrs6v4]

I know JW's dont believe in hell, but are you saying Mormons dont either? I thought they did.

 

[dcorbett]

I know JW's dont believe in hell, but are you saying Mormons dont either? I thought they did.

Not a hell like we know exists....

The mormon belief was presented to me thusly: terrestrial is where we are now, celestial kingdom is earned and is ultimate. But the telestial...that is explained here: (quoting mormonwiki.org)

In Mormonism the glory of the Telestial Kingdom is compared to that of the stars. People who are sent to the Telestial Kingdom will be the last to be resurrected and cannot dwell where God and Christ live. This final resurrection will take place after the Millennium.
According to the Doctrine and Covenants those who will inherit this kingdom are those who:

• Rejected the gospel, the testimony of Jesus, the prophets, and the everlasting covenant.
• Were liars, adulterers, murderers, thieves, and all others who flouted God's commandments.

 

[dcorbett]

interesting, this is the very first time I have found anything about a mormon hell....but I had to dig, it is only referenced in the very last sentence. What a lot of mumbo-jumbo!

Outer Darkness is the permanent location of Satan and his followers and the Sons of Perdition, who are not redeemed by the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Satan and his followers are beings of spirit who were denied bodies and cast out of heaven during pre-mortal existence. After the millennium, after the last great battle between the forces of God and the forces of Satan, Satan and his followers will be cast into Outer Darkness.
The Sons of Perdition are those who have lived as mortal men and women on the earth, have had the heavens opened to them and received a certain knowledge that Jesus is the Christ, and then have rejected the Savior, "having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame" (Doctrine and Covenants 76:34-35; see also Doctrine and Covenants 76:31–33, 36–37). These men and women cannot be redeemed, and will be the only ones who will suffer the second death. The first death is physical death, and everyone but the devil and his angels will overcome physical death through Resurrection. The second death is spiritual and is separation from God. Everyone but the Sons of Perdition and the devil and his devils, will overcome spiritual death through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. However, sons of perdition cannot achieve forgiveness and will be completely cast outside of the light of God. Hence, the term outer darkness. They will not have access to the Holy Ghost or Heavenly Father or Jesus. In short, Outer Darkness is eternal torture. Another name for Outer Darkness is hell.

Retrieved from "http://www.mormonwiki.com/Outer_Darkness"

 

[dcorbett]

There are probably few of us who haven’t been visited at least once by Mormon missionaries...... When asked why if LDS is a restoration of the true Church these doctrines are not found in any of the writings of the ECF's there are just blank stares.

My son Mike asked me to post this in here as I explained the discussion to him:

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" says the Prophet Jeremiah, by the Holy Spirit of God, in the seventeenth chapter and ninth verse of his first book in the Old Testament (read in King James English). Feelings can be a good guide, sometimes, but you cannot rely completely on them. Yes, the mormon terminology used for what is being discussed here is referred to by joseph smith as "a burning in the bosom." If you are a truly saved, born-again believer, yes, you will feel promptings from the Holy Ghost... You will also feel the antagonistic pull of your own flesh, and it's carnal desires! And not to mention the fact that you may be depressed, euphoric, dealing with your monthly cycle, or any number of other things that have nothing to do with the Holy Ghost. Likewise, a non-believer's "burning in the bosom" could be the result of this morning's coffee! As for the "fullness of the everlasting gospel",

Mormon gospel? well... I think maybe, as with other things, we are dealing with two different definitions of the word Gospel. Just as the word 'holocaust' makes most people think of the extermination of approximately 6 million Jews... It actually just means a mass destruction. The proper and biblical definition is 'good news'. And what is the news? Well, the Holy Bible is the story of the creation of Man, the fall of man into sin, and God's redemptive plan to save Man... The good news is Jesus Christ, and Him crucified and resurrected by the Living God on the third day. Now that is from the Holy Bible. Just as there is only one name given under Heaven by which we must be saved. So there is only one book that gives the true fullness of the Gospel. Often times, mormons like to say that the joseph smith additives complete the Bible, or some things were lost or not included in the Bible. Well they are correct in one way of looking at it. In the first book called Genesis, for example, we are given the simplified accounts of a very complicated creation. In the beginning, we are told, God created the Heavens and the Earth. However, the Holy Ghost obviously did not tell Moses to write down how God created Hydrogen molecules, or the exact weight or volume of the Earth and exactly how much gravity potential it has. I suppose I could ramble on and on, but, let's talk about what's important! God loves mormons! So must we! God loves homosexuals, murderers, prostitutes, muslims, satanists. And so must we! Do your very best to be equipped to reason with sinners of all walks, especially the ones who number greatly in the sphere of influence that Almighty God above has put you in, this is good and pleasing in His sight! But I will assure you one thing... You will never be studied up enough. So the very wisest thing you can do is to rely on the power of God and His Holy Spirit. Rely only on that old, old Gospel and you can't go wrong! "For the Gospel", and not you, "is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth!" (Romans 1:16) And remember that the word of God does not return to Him void, but will accomplish that which He pleases! (Isaiah 55:11) Amen!

by Michael Vrtatko, direct descendant of Andrew Gordon Kimball and Heber C. Kimball.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

If you are an unsaved person rejecting the Gospel then it in itself will be foolish as well. I do understand what your saying, but if God is working in someone then they will respond in a different way. I think of the Ethiopian eunich wanting to know about Isaiah 53.

And that's a perfect example. Did Philip say "You should be a Christian because God changed my heart" or "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life". He opened up the scriptures and shared the Gospel with the eunuch.

When presenting Christ, we are pretty much giving a message that is detestable and as you said will be rejected every time.

Not what I said.

There is no way to sell someone or convince them apart from God's work

But God works when we proclaim the Gospel to them. It's the law that brings about conviction of sin, not your story about how God changed your heart.

but I will do all I can to show them their idolatry that roots in their heart of sin.

But how are you going to do that without the law?

What is faith and repentance but repenting from everything and turning to Christ in faith?

And if I'm an unsaved person, the first words out of my mouth are going to be "repent from what? I'm a good person. I give money to charity. I even go to church at Christmas and on Easter."

"God changed my heart" is not a good response to that.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Since I was married to a mormon (yes, when I was living out of God's will) , I will interject what I do know about their beliefs.

Most of the mormons I know and have known do not know what their church actually believes!...

Hell is real, and if you show the mormons what the Bible says about hell, they cannot dispute it.

I find this is the case a lot of times. I talk to Mormon missionaries a lot and one of the first things you learn about evangelizing Mormons is that the missionaries read from a script. They already have a dialogue in their head about how they want their encounter with you to be. Once you get them off that script, the whole Mormon defense falls apart and it's very easy to share the Gospel with them.

 

[zrs6v4]

#1 But how are you going to do that without the law?


#2 "God changed my heart" is not a good response to that.

I have absolutely no idea what you have in mind at this point, but it seems you are misunderstanding me in some way (Im speaking peacefully here). No offense but most of the stuff you said I have clarified beforehand in your disagreements and it seems like you are trying to pick my words apart . Anyway these are 2 examples of why I have no idea what your trying to get at. I agree that the Law is a necesity and that Idolatry is a core root of sin in mans heart that is the key issue from the Law. The second one must be an assumption on your end of what I am thinking because I would not disagree that a personal experience is not "THE" Gospel. Im guessing that we have two completely different things in mind when we say, "testimony." There's a modern day traditional say a prayer, feel good, and remember that moment approach, while I personally believe I can relate each aspect of my testimony to the work of the Gospel itself and its implications. Now as I have said at least 5 times, this is not the only a way of preaching the Gospel. And by "Way" I mean the testimony can be a means by which one shares the Gospel. I dont mean, "Do you see what God did for me, do you want Him to do it for you so you?"

 

[billwald]

>And if I'm an unsaved person, the first words out of my mouth are going to be "repent from what?

Not according to Romans Chap 1.

>But God works when we proclaim the Gospel to them.

But it must be explained in a way that it can be understood at that time for them to be held accountable. I took a class in calculus. Far as I know, the text was inerrant and the instructing was accurate. I flunked the course. If God, as some say, is a geometer, will I go to Hell for only understanding algebra but not understanding calc?

Is this not a parallel to someone who trusts God but does not understand the dogma of the Trinity?

Another thread is titled, "Do Baptists believe the Trinity?" Is Baptist believing the Trinity different than Catholic believing the Trinity? If Catholic believing is not acceptable to God then is there any difference between a Catholic believing and a Mormon not believing?

 

[JohnDeereFan]

>But God works when we proclaim the Gospel to them.

But it must be explained in a way that it can be understood at that time for them to be held accountable. I took a class in calculus. Far as I know, the text was inerrant and the instructing was accurate. I flunked the course. If God, as some say, is a geometer, will I go to Hell for only understanding algebra but not understanding calc?

Is this not a parallel to someone who trusts God but does not understand the dogma of the Trinity?

Again, we're not talking about someone who doesn't understand the Trinity, but someone who understands it and rejects it.

 

[fbcodr]

These two are not other Christian denominations!!! There are false religious cults. Until those trapped in them understand that, they are in big trouble.:thumbsup::jesus:

 

[billwald]

>Again, we're not talking about someone who doesn't understand the Trinity, but someone who understands it and rejects it.

I have a problem with that line of thinking. Let me try a more obvious example. This thread, as I recall, noted that the JWs don't "believe in" Hell and this contributes to their condemnation by God.

If a sane person understood the reality of Hell would he consciously choose to go to Hell? Could a sane person decide that Hell was preferable and more advantageous to him than going to Heaven? On what rational basis would a sane person choose Hell over Heaven?