Re: [TruthTalk] Re:Dialogue with Mormons

[Dave]

Charles Perry Locke wrote: DaveH, See my comments below. DAVEH:  Most everybody (nonM)I've chatted with on TT has felt the need to save me from Mormonism.  I have repeatedly said that I did not come to TT to change, and many seem to have disbelieved my intentions and apparently take offense that I am so stubbornly unwilling to change the way I perceive and understand the Bible.  Yet I, looking from the other side of the fence, see those same TTers being equally stubborn in their inherited Bible beliefs. There are some deeply rooted Protestant ideas that simply cannot be compromised for some reason, which I find curious.  (Again.....that is why I tend to categorize most TTers as being Protestants despite some protesting of such.)   After being in TT for well over 4 years now, I have seen enough petty squabbles amongst TTers who go to great lengths to explain their understanding of things found in the Bible, yet I think few change their views.  So, why be hypocritical about it.....why not just say I'm not here to change and then enjoy TT for what it is.  Yet it seems I am one of the few who thinks this way.  Everybody else apparently supposes they are going to be able to persuade the others to think like them.......and, when it doesn't happen that way.....everybody gets their noses bent out of shape. DavidH,   Pardon me for interjecting into your conversation with Lance, but you must consider that to the average TT'r  you are on the other side of the FAR fence. Almost ALL on TT consider you well outside of orthodoxy, and many probably believe you are in a cult. DAVEH:  Sure.....I well understand that.  I suspect Jesus found himself in a similar position in his day.  Being outside the norm is not necessarily bad, IMO.  Though it certainly carries a burden of sorts.  However, on the other hand it gives a fresher/different perspective that may not be fully appreciated by those imbued with orthodoxy. So, while we Christians might disagree among the TT family about doctrinal differences, I believe we all respect one another as brothers in Christ. Hank Hanegraaf calls these differences "in-house debates"; i.e., debates that are interesting from a theological standpoint, but are not outside of "the pale of orthodoxy". It is natural for Christians to want to convert non-christians... DAVEH:  I understand that.  However, as I understand it, the primary purpose of TT is not to make that a requirement.   In the past, some have murmured that those who don't conform to Christian orthodox thought should be excluded from TT.  When I have stated that I am not in TT seeking to change to an orthodox perspective, some folks seem to take offense and get a bit riled up.  I'm not sure why that happens, but do find it a curiosity.  From my LDS perspective, I don't ever recall seeing that in Mormonism.  So.....even though we actively pursue converts as well, our attitudes are vastly different in how we accept failure in our goals.  Hmmm......I'm not sure I phrased that correctly Perry, but I think you understand what I'm saying. I think even you will agree with that, having been a missionary yourself at one time (I am assuming this is true...let me know if I have assumed in error.) DAVEH:  That is correct.   You use the term "protestant" to refer to anyone that is a Christian, but not Roman Catholic. DAVEH:  Not exactly.  There is a third category (Restoration) which I feel is an important factor.  And.....I suppose there may be a 4th category of extreme fringe elements, but I haven't thought much about them at this point.  But I think you are basically correct in assessing my understanding of how most TTers relate to Protestantism. I guess that is like using the word "Kleenex" to refer to tissues, or "Coke" to refer to cola soft drinks. However, in many cases it is inaccurate. DAVEH:  Perhaps, but we use such terms (scotch tape is another) all the time because it pragmatically works, even though legally it may be incorrect or misleading.   While there are some groups that still refer to themselves as "Protestant", i.e., they trace the lineage of the denomination to which they "belong" back to the reformation, many today do not. The Baptists, for example, claim to have descended from the Ana-baptists, who never where a part of the RCC, so never needed to protest it or "come out of it".   I sometimes use the word "protestant" to refer to myself when indicating that I am non-RCC, but in general I do not view myself as a "protestant", per se. DAVEH:  That is why I think most TTers are Protestants, even though they deny protesting anything.  As I see it, the RCC folks claim a priesthood authority based on Peter being the rock upon which all else (RCC) is built.  Without that God given authority, any other religious paradigm is toast (from the RCC perspective).  What most TTers are protesting (from my perspective) is that priesthood authority which the RCC say needs to be handed down through under the auspices of the RCC Priesthood.  Instead, it seems most TTers believe they can have the authority to act in behalf of God simply by reading Scripture and believing in Jesus.   Instead of simply rejecting the claimed authority (and hence becoming Rejectionists, I suppose!) of the RCC, they seem instead to protest their claimed authority, while accepting many of their doctrines. I do not belong to any tradition or "denomination" that claims to trace itself to the reformation. DAVEH:  Yet you accept the T-Doctrine, which to me seems to have been handed down to and through the RCC folks to the Reformers.....which indicates your beliefs are rooted Protestantism. (Not that I think that is a necessarily bad thing, by the way). DAVEH:  Don't get me wrong, Perry......I really don't know you very well so I don't want you to think I'm being critical of your personal life----But, I think many independent thinkers who don't want to ally with a denomination use that excuse to avoid Christian responsibility.  It is easier for many professed Christians to say they can be closer to God by fishing on Sunday rather than attending a church service.  So....they consider themselves independent thinkers/believers who give lip service to Jesus instead of bearing the burden of church responsibility.    But I consider true believers to be "members of the body of Christ", that is, those who follow Christ REGARDLESS of the tradition from which they come, be it "protestant", or whatever. That they may fellowship with a group that has a particular name or tradition does not change that thaey are a member of the body of Christ. The key is that the individual is a believer in Christ, DAVEH:  By definition, that defines any Christian. and that the Bible is their source of authority. DAVEH:  As I said before......THAT (authority from the Bible) is their protest of the RCC apostallic authority.  Hence, IMO those who believe such are Protestants.   If you would like to use a more accurate term for those you call "Protestants", you could use the term "believer" DAVEH:  I'm a believer......but not a Protestant. , or just "Christian", DAVEH:  I'm a Christian......but not a Protestant. or even "followers of the way" (not "The Way Internatioanal") . But, to use the term "protestant" lumps everyone that is non-RCC into the same classification, which, in many cases on TT, is not accurate. DAVEH:  As I see/understand it, those who protest the RCC apostallic authority and claim the same by reading the Bible fit the description of a Protestant......because, that is essentially what the Reformers did in order to justify their split from Catholicism.   A question to TT'rs (who bothered to read this far) ... what term or name do you use to refer to yourself, or the group to which you consider yourself a member, relative to your beliefs, be it organized or not? For myself, I am a "member of the body of Christ".  My doctrine may not not perfect, my theology may be flawed, and my walk may be imperfect, but it is in Him, and none other, that I place my faith for my salvation, the Holy Spirit for my guidance, and God, as revealed through His word, as my source of authority. DAVEH:  Which in my mind qualifies you as a Protestant.   Have you ever wondered if I consider Mormons to be members of the body of Christ? DAVEH:  I do not recall ever hearing another non-LDS TTer suggesting Mormons are of the body of Christ.  Quite the opposite.  Despite what you might think, that is OK with me.  I'm not worried about not being a part of your club, Perry.  I much prefer being a part of Jesus' club instead.  However I do enjoy fellowshipping with you folks despite your sometimes expressed anger and consternation at not being able to persuade me to join your club. If they reject the teachings of the LDS church about the false Mormon god and jesus, and embrace the God and Jesus of the Bible, then I believe they are. But, as long as they continue to place their faith in the wrong god and wrong jesus, they are not. DAVEH:   Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwn. Perry -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.