phi39

Members
  • Posts

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

phi39's Achievements

  1. I have never understood why someone would protest a religion. In any case, even if Billy Graham said something to them I'm sure they would demand to check him for signs of horn removal. I've heard about the really offensive things they'll do; for what it's worth I apologize since they won't. Part of why I am so glad that Mohler spoke there is because I hope he will set an example for our side to follow. If we actually don't think we are going to heaven together and truly do want to win you to Christ, then dialogue like that is the better way. At least you get to see that we aren't all crazies!
  2. Interesting! And yes, I think a lot of us may live to see a day when we end up in jail or persecuted in various ways along with others we don't expect.
  3. I am curious to hear what reactions might be to the content of his speech from those who were there or read the transcript. I was actually excited that he was there at all. Do Evangelical, let alone Baptist speakers often come to BYU? I don't know what the context of the speech was, whether a chapel service or some special event. What can I say? It jumped out at me. P.S. I actually had an issue with horn removal a while back. The doctor said the operation would be impossible and unnecessary due to the growth locations. So now I just wear I giant chicken suit.
  4. I am a student at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY. Dr. Mohler is our president and they always post his articles on a bulletin board in the hallway. I did a double-take and spun around to read this when I saw where he delivered this speech: BYU! Just curious what you guys think. Here is the website, article/transcript is frontpage: AlbertMohler.com
  5. Question: When Jesus rose from the dead and the disciples felt his wounds, was that his spiritual body or actual physical body that was beaten and killed a few days before?
  6. I read a while back that for LDS, spirit is a higher form of matter. For them there actually is no such thing as the immaterial unless you count concepts. I don't think they would even consider intelligences to be immaterial, at least not in the sense that we would. Intelligences, spirit and physical matter are all eternal things in and of themselves, independent from God. God forms them to create, and he himself is even "made-of" the same stuff. God exists within the universe (or multi-verse?) along with us. Their view I think is surprisingly materialistic, sharing a lot in common with ancient paganism and modern science. Of course, we classicals are the weird ones, worshiping a God who transcends creation, calls it into being and holds it together by his power, because of his grace and for his glory.
  7. I think I know what you mean by infinite atonement, that it applies to all people (except Satan and his best friends). What do you mean by continuous atonement?
  8. Question to ask: "What did Jesus actually accomplish on the Cross?"
  9. I think that a major theme of the story in John 11 is that Jesus really was heartbroken over Lazarus' death. Yes, he is "deeply moved in his spirit and greatly troubled" by the tears of Mary and Martha, but he was able to hold it together and comfort them, as painful as it was to see their pain. He doesn't actually burst into tears until he sees the tomb. That's when the onlookers say, "See how he loved him!" I bring up this example of Jesus to show that while I agree that we do not need to fear death, it is still a horror, a tragedy in and of itself, no matter how temporary. I've been to an open casket funeral for a young girl once, and I've had to deal with my grandparents being cremated before I could fly home and see them and "say goodbye." There is hope, and even joy to answer the pain, but there is a definite "not-right-ness" to death. Yes, and in my theology, such a thing will never happen again. I find this to be simply a better story as silly as that sounds, and I hope you will consider it. The ending is final and complete, a true "happily ever after" in the greatest possible sense you could ever imagine. Thank you my friend! I am relieved to hear that.
  10. Just_A_Guy;700115] This is just our different views of the universe and is a whole different subject I think. You believe that there are other new heaven/earths out there in the (multi?)universe because you believe in the other LDS scriptures, and of course I do not. I think that's where that conversation would stop. We just don't have common ground there. Clarification: I'd say we actually agree here! But I think the passage is talking about something else. It lists death, mourning, etc., and then says "the former things have passed away." All those bad things were part of the salvation story, death was part of the road to heaven, but they won't be anymore. The text is certainly not saying love and worship will not continue, but I am sure that even those things will not be the same. Not sure what IMHO stands for. Yes, evangelicals do not believe in big sleep either: to be absent from here is to be present with the Lord. But remember Jesus who cried at death even when he knew that in the next five minutes he would raise Lazarus. And aren't unbelievers spiritually dead at this very moment as they go through life? I think Paul would say so (Eph. 2:1-3). Also, if that future exalted Mormon has a three-kingdom system in heaven with Celestial, Terrestrial and Telestial levels, won't that also cause a degree of separation? And finally there is eternal/spiritual death in outer darkness. I do not think your system protects you from any of these pains and reasons to mourn that come from death. If that is the case, then the promise of Rev 21 is made void for you individually. I do not think Jesus ever wept over an inconvenience. Yes, death is no boogeyman, it is the last enemy to be defeated (1 Cor. 15:26)! I do not think you can say "death will be defeated once and for all" like I can. My best wishes to you my friend!
  11. Thank you all for your answers! You have been clear and concise! For an evangelical like me it is somewhat startling to hear you acknowledge a probability that death will recur after Rev. 21, and that you seem to be "okay" with that. You also read Rev. 21 as if it says "death will be no more for us" vs. "death will be no more." Of course, we are starting from different assumptions: you read our creation as being a part of a larger context of multiple (infinite?) creations, and I count this creation as the entire context. About death being a part of the plan of salvation I agree. If God allows evil (and in turn death) to exist, it is for His ultimate good purpose of conforming us to the image of Christ and allows us to go from knowing Him as Father, to knowing Him as Savior. I would never give that up, not even if I were given the chance to change the past. So as a follow up to the previous questions, my issue is not with the existence of evil, sin and death, but with the promise of Rev. 21 being nullified. It not only says that "death will be no more" but also that "the former things have passed away," and in verse 5 God is "making all things new." In other words, the way things will be going forward after Rev. 21 will not be like the way things were to get there. Also, I do not believe that your view, if true, actually frees you as individuals or humanity as a whole from death. Even though you yourselves will not die, you will experience the pain and mourning that will come with the deaths of your future children. And in the sense of experiencing separation from them, whether temporarily or in some cases eternally, you will experience that kind of death countless more times. I say all this because I would appreciate a response to learn how you process these things, but also I cannot hide my evangelistic concern for your sakes. The thought of this kind of a future makes my heart heavy for you! But imagine: what if death were truly defeated in the most complete way? What if all we know about the New Creation is that all creation will be free and completely new? What if all we know is that we will be with our beloved God and serve Him? Beyond that, who knows what is in store? That future would be entirely open, a mystery and an adventure! The truest happy ending you've ever heard of!
  12. A few weeks ago, Glenn Beck (yes I'm a fan) opened an email address to take questions on Mormonism and did a show addressing the various issues outsiders take. I didn't see the show ('starving' students can't afford the subscription) but I read the article, and it was good stuff. I have a feeling however, that his inbox is backed up till the Millennium. So if you guys don't mind I'll ask you the same question (full disclosure I'm thinking about using this to guide my research for a paper in the future). I started this way: Would a Mormon couple who achieved exaltation continue to have spirit children into eternity? If so, would those children need to live mortal lives on a future sinful world in order to have a chance at exaltation themselves? I'm expecting answer to be "yes," to both questions in light of D/C 132 and 2 Nephi 2. Then my follow-up question is this: If the above is true will death ever be defeated once and for all? I'm thinking the answer would have to be "no," but that does not jive with Revelation 21: "death will be no more" (v4). So here is finally the real question(s): how do you resolve that tension? is there a tension? do you expect death to recur, why/why not? how do you feel about that? I am actually curious to hear your answers, and while I'm hoping for a good debate, I'm not here for a fight. My responses will be minimal.
  13. "... τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ..." (John 3:16 BGT) "...the son the one-of-a-kind..." "58.52 monogenh,j, e,j: pertaining to what is unique in the sense of being the only one of the same kind or class - 'unique, only.' ..." -Low & Nida "18705 monogenh,j, e,j of what is the only one of its kind of class unique; (1) an only child born to human parents one and only ( LU 7.12; 8.42); substantivally only child (LU 9.38); (2) as a child born in a unique way; (a) used of God's Son Jesus only, only begotten; substantivally (JN 1.14); (b) used of Abraham's son Isaac only; substantivally o` m. his only true son." -Friberg "μονο" means "only," "one," and "γενῆ" means "kind." There is no one or thing like Jesus. The phrase "only begotten" is misleading nowadays because we think it implies "having kids." I was used more generally to describe uniqueness. The Christians at Nicea who spoke Greek used the word properly when they said Jesus is "eternally begotten of the Father ... begotten, not made." They certainly did not mean that Jesus was "procreated" by the Father when they were refuting a man who taught that there was time when Jesus was not. Instead Jesus is the eternal unique one who is of or from the Father.
  14. Here is an "at a glance" response to your answers. There are also some very good posts that I want to respond to more specifically. You all gave a wide spectrum of answers, but with two common denominators. The consensus seemed to be that whether there will be less or more, finite or infinite numbers of people in outer darkness, it is irrelevant because they have sent or relegated themselves to it. Your main concern is to maintain God's justice by affirming their free agency. Also, no one here likes the thought of massive quantities of people suffering that fate and so you want to believe that a minimal number end up that way, and some of you even said that those who do may eventually cease to exist (though there is no LDS source that would go that far). In a sense then, you have indirectly answered my question by exposing the Elders' argument as self defeating. You cannot criticize the Evangelical view of hell (that is, how many will be there) when you yourself admit that God is righteous to allow (even passively) such a thing to happen to even one person. Did you know that you were Calvinists already? (wink-wink). 'But God tries to save them, and they refuse!' Yes, but it was God who was righteous in allowing a world of sin to exist which would guarantee the fall of some. Doesn't the PGP teach this? Big hell, little hell, infinite hell, or even the cessation of existence, God is still holy and righteous to allow it. Something that also struck me was this: while you see yourselves as owing general salvation and the opportunity of exaltation to Jesus' Atonement, you must then save, progress, grow ,or advance yourselves to attain the complete eternal life/exaltation. Likewise, those in outer darkness fail to do so. You then make yourselves into your own personal saviors or condemners. But it is the Lord who saves (Jesus means "Yahweh Saves," Matthew 1:21, Psalm 37:40). Have you ever given thought to the possibility that our agency is corrupt and cannot save us (Romans 8:7)? What if we do not begin at a neutral stance with God, but as something more like apostates in outer darkness (Romans 1:21, 3:10-12)? What if God then, is in the business of saving his apostate enemies (Romans 5:8-10)?