----------
---- Original message --------------
From: "Charles Perry Locke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Again, Blaine, I point out that the cross is not seen or used as a symbol
> for jesus. Do you understand that?
>
>
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Reply-To: [email protected]
> >To: [email protected]
> >Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Cross
> >Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 18:22:51 EST
> >
> >In a message dated 12/13/2005 9:03:40 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> >Then why put them on the "House of the lord"?
> >
> >Blainerb: Hmm, well it goes like this, Kevin: One of the names of Jesus
> >Christ is "The Bright and Morning Star."' He has also been called
> >Wonderful,
> >Counselor, the King of Heaven, the Creator, the Prince of Peace, the Lamb
> >of God, etc. Have you ever heard or read about him bein g called "the
> >cross?"
> > or, "The old Rugged Cross?"
> > Stars are higher than crosses. Stars are more beautiful than crosses.
> >Stars represent where we want to be after we leave this Vail of Tears.
> >Most
> >Christians would like it better if we put crosses on our temples. But we
> >don't
> >because, we are trying to be more like Jesus, and he was perhaps the most
> >independently minded person to walk the earth. We are not trying to be
> >like
> >everyone else, we are simply doing what we think most appropriate,
> >considering
> >we idolize and worship Jesus Christ. We like stars better than
> >crosses--why
> >is that an arrow in your side? Why does that offend you?
> >
> >
>
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how
> you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend
> who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> he will be subscribed.
And stars have absolutely nothing to do with the Christian faith -- biblically speaking, of course. It is Mormon doctrine that the First Church was correct in its dealings (a wonderfully legalistic conclusion, by the way, but one which we will not argue at this time). In "Luke" and "Acts" we have the gospel and history of the First Church -- the one that you folks think was the Right Church. All of the remaining New Textament scriptures with the possible exception of the writings of the Apostle John are or were written during this Age of the Perfect First Church.
So , what do we have? We have a Mormon population that believes the Frist Church was The Right Church; we have a full record of the Gospel of that First Church, a 37 (plus or minus) year historical record of that First Chruch INCLUDED IN WHAT WE ALL CONSIDER TO BE "SCRIPTURE," and , as an added bonus, we have the instructional materials used to both sturcture this First Church and give it its basic teachings................................ all this before the church went apostate !!!
That being true .. we should expect to find the Mormon church identical to that of the First Church as recorded in biblical scripture.............. but this is clearly not the case.
Trading the cross for a star as we attempt to convey what was most important
to the First Church and its concept of the incarnate and ascended Christ of God is the extension of nothing biblical and represents a clear departure from the teachings of the First [and Perfect -- according to your doctrine] Church.
When you argue that the Mormon Church is the re-establishment of the first and pre-apostate church , you are necessarily making the argument that the Mormon Church is the re-established church of biblical scripture ---------- which it clearly is not. Trading the cross for a star is representative of this failed thinking, IMO.
jd
