It's arrogant to trust anything objective (that is, outside of your subjective self).
It's humble to trust your heart.
The Bible is chiefly man speaking. It is not direct enough from God. If you want to hear God speak, seek the euphoria of an emotional epiphany.
The Spirit comes privately from an internal, private experience of prayer, after having emptied yourself of objective truth (Note: MUCH like Buddhism).
Neither Satan nor demons can feign/manufacture within you good feelings.
The internal burning has more authority than the word of God.
So many diverse interpretations show God did a REALLY BAD JOB of preserving his word.
Moroni's test or "challenge" is supreme, presuppositional, and unable to itself be challenged on any grounds.
Good feelings that please God come directly and mystically, and don't necessary come with a mental connection to objective truths about the glory and beauty of truth and Christ.
Testimonies are subjective and private, and therefore cannot be publicly shared.
All that can be done is to tell others to use the same method to gain the private epiphany.
Christians think:
It's humble to trust God's word over our fickle, self-justifying heart.
The heart is less reliable than God's word. -"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?" - Jeremiah 17:9
It's foolish, not humble, self-justifying, and arrogant to trust your heart over God's objective word. -"He who trusts in his own heart is a fool, but whoever walks wisely will be delivered." - Proverbs 28:26
Satan and demons can give you good feelings, those that superficially seem like "fruits of the Spirit".
So many diverse interpretations show how sinful humans are.
Moroni's test or "challenge" can itself test against the word of God.
Good feelings that please God come mediated; they come with a mental connection to objective truths about the glory and beauty of truth and Christ.
The object of our testimony, our faith, our godly feelings, is for public consumption. You can tell people about it with words.
To be filled with the Spirit, one should think on the objective truth and beauty and glory of Jesus Christ, available in the public display of scripture.
Just a question: Is there any genuine thought on this blog, or is this merely a copy-paste from other blogs, such as the mormon-wiki, the utah lighthouse ministry, blogs from Samuel the Utahnite and other blogs, from which you merely copy and put your personal rant onto? If so, what is the use of this blog? It is merely creating more redundancy in that most articles are insufficient quoted and not backed up. For example the article that the LDS church is postmodern is totally nonsense. If everyone can believe what he wants, why should there be a need for the restoration of the true Church of Jesus Christ?
Viewing the LDS church in light of postmodernism is pure nonsense, as a hierarchical church is inherently conservative.
Maybe the LDS church is not so fierce in its argumentation, we don't bash evangelicals with pamphlets and wearing evangelical underwear in public, so we are seen to be harmony-seeking which in your fanatical eyes equals to post-modernism.
However, that is not the real identity of our church. I know that Joseph Smith is the prophet of the only true Church on this planet, and all other religions are an abomination in God's eye, including man-made denominations such as the Jehova's witnesses (invented by a false prophet) or Calvary chapel (invented by a false prophet), both claiming Jesus' resurrection at a certain date, both prophecies failed.
So, are we post-modern because we don't criticize such false prophets in the public on a daily basis as you criticize us on a daily basis on your blog?
Well Jared, Thank you for your comments and visiting the site. There is lots of genuine thought put into this blog. Just because you happen to find similar information on other sites does not mean it’s not genuine. Now Samuel the Utahnites site I will agree with you that it is total garbage. On the other hand this information is given in love and prayer that the LDS might find the Lord Jesus Christ. Now I have some questions for you Jared…..
1. If the Jehovah’s Witnesses are a false church why is it not important for you to help them? You observation about Calvary is totally irrelevant seeing that it’s not a religion? Do you think I am under the impression that anybody who does not attend Calvary chapel is damned for hell? Calvary is simply a fellowship of believers who belong to the universal body as a whole.
2. If you think that the LDS church is the only way then what does that mean for people like me? I would think it would mean that I am going to hell according to the words of God given to Joseph Smith….correct?
3. By promoting a biblical Christ does not mean I hate others….This is not about flesh and blood Jared. This is about the demonic forces of evil which deceive millions with there lies and evil workmen. So if you think all are doomed why is it not important to save the lost? Are you saying you would rather me just stay quiet in order to keep PR?
1. If the Jehovah’s Witnesses are a false church why is it not important for you to help them?
Actually, we do help them. However, we take a different approach from your "fellowship" and other evangelical denominations. First of all, we have an extensive missionary program. Our program is one of the most extensive ones in the world, sending about 50000 young men around the world to preach the Gospel.
However, we don't launch hate-websites, nor do we distribute pamphlets in front of Calvary Chapels or any other churches to tell them they are an abomination in the eye of God, which they are.
The Spirit of the Lord is a spirit of gentleness, therefore, whenever there is a heart open for the Gospel, there will be a possibility to reach out. This includes not only our full-time missionaries, but also our members who reach out to their neighbours and aquaintances. All this is done in a humble and meek attitude. If people don't accept our message, their heart is hardened, so there is nothing we can do. Cynicism, aggressive behavior shown on your website does not promote your gospel in any way, as people are scared away by a Gospel which is presented in the spirit of hatered and aggression.
1b) You observation about Calvary is totally irrelevant seeing that it’s not a religion?
Calvary Chapel is a Christian denomination founded by Chuck Smith. Denying that it is a denomination is just a matter of relabeling. Chuck Smith has a very special attitude towards the gospel, he proclaims a very special church hierarchy, as some previos posters have pointed out. The LDS church is in this regard no different. When Joseph Smith restored the Gospel on this planet, he also restored the priesthood, and with it the church hierarchy of the Early Church before it became corrupted. However, I don't see that Chuck Smith has any authority given to him by God, as Joseph Smith had. So please stop deceiving yourself by telling that Calvary Chapel is not a denomination. As soon as people have a theological opinion about God, Jesus and the plan of Salvation, they form a singular body, which is a denomination.
"Calvary is simply a fellowship of believers who belong to the universal body as a whole." As Chuck Smith proclaims several special theological opinions about the Gospel, he forms a denomination, and all people who want to belong to his "fellowship" have to agree to HIS gospel.
2. If you think that the LDS church is the only way then what does that mean for people like me?
It means that you don't have the FULLNESS of the gospel. However, in contrast to your evangelical beliefs, we don't condemn every person who is not LDS to eternal hell. This is because Jesus loves every person, disregarding of their religious affiliation. Chances are high that a person has not the possibility to become an LDS member simply for the fact that we cannot proselytize the whole world with 50000 people. Taking this into account, condemning all people who are not LDS or who are not Christian in general is a harsh and injust statement, because you are placing yourself instead of Jesus, being the judge of other people. On the other hand, Jesus gave us many opportunities to become members of his fold. a) in this life, by becoming members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. b) by being baptized in proxy by some faithful member of the LDS church. c) by accepting the gospel after dying. You see, Jesus is loving and forgiving, and if we "miss" a chance, he will offer us another one. Even if a person is nasty to our missionaries and bangs the door in their face, because he has heard some lies about our church, Jesus will give him another chance after death.
3. By promoting a biblical Christ does not mean I hate others.
As I pointed out, you hate others, and what is worse, you claim that Jesus is as hateful, vengeful and unforgiving as yourself.
3b) This is about the demonic forces of evil which deceive millions with there lies and evil workmen.
It is true. With your distorted gospel, you deceive as many people as are reading your website. They think "Jesus doesn't love me if I don't join some conservative evangelical denomination". But Jesus is not like this, and your perspective is distorted.
3c) Are you saying you would rather me just stay quiet in order to keep PR?
No, but you are actually doing a BAD PR for Jesus, because you depict him as evil, unforgiving, vengeful, hateful, nasty, injust, etc. If Jesus was like you depicted him, I doubt many people would willful accept him as their savior and NOT ONLY OUT OF FEAR!!!
The restoration of the Gospel brought the gospel back to the world, that is, the GOOD NEWS.
The evangelical sects which split off from the catholic sect in the 16th century proclaim a hateful Jesus who condemns everyone to hell who does not join an equally hateful conservative bunch of guys interpret their own problematic father relationships into the bible.
"The Spirit comes privately from an internal, private experience of prayer, after having emptied yourself of objective truth (Note: MUCH like Buddhism)"
clearly shows that you either have no clue what Buddhism is all about or you are willingly distorting the Dharma in order to promote your own personal beliefs.
In either way, I would suggest that you go to one of the local Buddhist centers in Utah and inform yourself about what Buddhism means, what it is about, if what you claim to be "objective truth" really is objective truth and how to experience truth most objectively.
Here is a link to the Utah Buddhist Community, you can freely choose to visit one of them: http://faculty.weber.edu/bdavis/ubc/Default.htm
Good luck on your way in any case, be it on the path of the Dharma, be it on the path of your personal beliefs, but never forget the compassion and love for all sentient beings our masters urged us to bring forth.
Jane Winsley, Buddhist lay follower in Southern California.
”As I pointed out, you hate others, and what is worse, you claim that Jesus is as hateful, vengeful and unforgiving as yourself.”
Do I really hate Mormons? When did I say that? I disagree highly with you theology but I do not hate you Jared. In fact I love you. I think you are under the impression I am one of those guys who stands out in front of temple square burning sacred garments and shouting all kinds of hateful personal attacks on people. I have seen those guys Jared. They are not representing the Lord’s heart. You disagree highly with my faith….does this mean you hate me? I hope not.
You said:
“With your distorted gospel, you deceive as many people as are reading your website.”
Just what is my gospel? I do not think one has to join Calvary church in order to be saved. I think one must except Jesus as their savior in order to be saved. You know, I see people like you Jared who want the Jesus who fed the four thousand and the Jesus who fed the five thousand and the Jesus who performed miracles….but you don’t want the Jesus who said, “I come not to bring peace but a sword.” You don’t want the Jesus who said follow me or parish. You said:
"You see, Jesus is loving and forgiving, and if we "miss" a chance, he will offer us another one.”
But the bible says:
”And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.” Hebrews 9:27-28
Jared can you provide me some scripture that sow me where it says we get another chance? (outside of LDS doctrine)
Jared from what I can see Jesus did love every last living thing on the planet….being that He is God and created everything. That’s why he came to save the world. (John 3:16) But what is He saving us from? Why come and save the world if we can hear about it in the next life?
Jared my mission is not to spread hate and anger, but to spread truth. You find me hateful just because I disagree with your theological views.
Jared the LDS churches mission is to send out LDS youth and knock on the doors of millions….why? Because LDS church believes all churches are an abomination…correct?
Jared I really do appreciate you honesty in telling me that you think all churches are wrong in the eyes of God. Not many LDS are willing to say these kinds of things for sake of being “nice.” So, I really do sincerely appreciate the honesty. It shows me that maybe we can continue to dialogue. If you want you can skype me and we can talk… my skype name is “livingtruth.eric”
Grace and Peace in the Lord Jesus Christ….. -Eric Psalm 18:2
Your comment: "c) by accepting the gospel after dying. You see, Jesus is loving and forgiving, and if we "miss" a chance, he will offer us another one. Even if a person is nasty to our missionaries and bangs the door in their face, because he has heard some lies about our church, Jesus will give him another chance after death."
Flies in the face of Alma 34:32-35: 32 For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors. 33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed. 34 Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful acrisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world. 35 For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he doth seal you his; therefore, the Spirit of the Lord hath withdrawn from you, and hath no place in you, and the devil hath all power over you; and this is the final state of the wicked."
How can modern LDS teach of this repentance in the after life with the Book of Mormon says it is not possible, and that if you die without full repentance (i.e. you *stopped sinning in this life*), you are sealed to the devil. That means outer darkness Jared.
is this hate speech? To point out the hopelessness of the LDS doctrine? Jesus taught of hope, he said his burden is light and his yoke is easy ... the LDS doctrine that you have to stop sinning before you draw your last breath here on earth is an impossibility.
Likewise, Spencer W. Kimball (prophet/seer/revelator/president) said in The Miracle of Forgiveness, that true repentance does not allow for making the same sin again. True repentance means that the desire or urge to sin is gone from you.
The LDS Church teaches that you must actually become sin-free in THIS LIFE or you are sealed to the Devil at your death.
Jane thanks for the comment. Jane you are right. You have the right to believe in whatever you want, but what you believe must be spiritually right. The Bible says: ”I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to Father except through me.” -John 14:6
” And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved,” –Acts 4:12
”He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.” -1 John 5:12
”All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” –Matthew 28:18
"For unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins" -John 8:24
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" -1 Timothy 2:5
There for I would agree that Jesus is the only way. This is why we cannot accept Buddha as a means to salvation.
Hello Brian, thanks for sharing your point of view. It shows a slight but important methodological problem you have.
"...Flies in the face of Alma 34:32-35... How can modern LDS teach of this repentance in the after life with the Book of Mormon says it is not possible, and that if you die without full repentance (i.e. you *stopped sinning in this life*), you are sealed to the devil. That means outer darkness Jared."
The mistake you make is that you think every quote from the bible and the book of Mormon are eternally unchangeable. Moreover, you equate the speeches men have made to be totally inspired by God to the last iota.
Even if we set aside the book of Mormon, as you don't believe in it, the bible in itself shows that God HAS CHANGED his attitude / opinion about certain topics in the course of history. Therefore, quoting one verse and taking it to be eternally true, you are risking contrasting the will of God who might have changed his opinion.
Lets take an example from the old testament: Lev 11:10-11 "And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which [is] in the waters, they [shall be] an abomination unto you:They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination."
God teaches us to not eat certain types of seafood. As this is a bible verse, it must be eternally true, right?
Lets see what Jesus thinks about this verse, some centuries later. He talks about washing your hands, but his talk includes food as a source of defilement as well.
Mt 15:16-19: "And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies."
Jesus pointed out that defilement is created by sinful behavior, not by eating certain food or not washing one's hands, because the food is eaten, digested, then goes into the toilet, there is no connection between food and sin/cleanness.
This is a classical example of a DEVELOPMENT within the bible. While God declared certain food rules for the ancient people of Israel, Jesus changed these rules. Especially in his sermon on the mount, Jesus contrasts his message with that of the people of old.
Brian, your problem is that you quote a few number of verses, without taking into account their relevance today, and thus make wrong conclusions. In the same way, someone could quote old testament verses and tell you not to eat certain kinds of sea-food, because it is an abomination in the eye of God!
As there is a development in the Gospel, there was also a change when God introduced baptism for the dead (known in the new testament as well as in the LDS church), because he decided that people CAN get another chance.
Quoting Alma against this background is like quoting Mose to forbid a Christian eating seafood.
Either you accept that there is a development in God's plan of salvation, or you quickly get the Barmitsva ceremony ready to get yourself cut as a sign for the old covenant.
So then Moroni 10:32, 2 Nephi 25:23, Alma 11:37, 1 Nephi 3:7, D&C 1:31-35, and D&C 58:42-43 are all out-of-date scriptures that do not pertain to the "fulness" that you have?
All reinforce the same concept : it is by grace you are saved after ALL you can do. God cannot look upon sin with the least allowance. If you die without complete repentance you are bound to the devil in outer darkness.
You are dancing around uncomfortable truths about LDS doctine that do not fit with your views, and I might also add that you appear to also be discounting the revelations and teachings of Joseph Smith Jr. and Spencer W. Kimball.
This is dangerous ground on which you are treading.
Jared, You have proven to live up to one of the points I made in this original post that Mormons are closer to Postmodernism that one thinks
I wrote:
-The Bible is chiefly man speaking. It is not direct enough from God. If you want to hear God speak, seek the euphoria of an emotional epiphany.
COMPARE THAT TO WHAT YOU SAID:
“Moreover, you equate the speeches men have made to be totally inspired by God to the last iota.”
I think you totally evaded Brian’s comment. What does the Lord changing have to do with what Brian’s comment entailed? And God does not change. For if he did scriptures like Malachi 3:6 would not exist. God fulfilled the Law…he did not change it. This is why the Jews crucified Him. I think Brian is owed an answer to posed impossible gospel that the LDS church has presented.
"Jane you are right. You have the right to believe in whatever you want, but what you believe must be spiritually right. The Bible says: ... bible quotes ...
There for I would agree that Jesus is the only way. This is why we cannot accept Buddha as a means to salvation."
Let me quote from one of my scriptures:
The criterion for rejection: "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them."
and
The criterion for acceptance: "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them."
As you see, the Buddha rejected taking anything for granted only because it was written in some ancient scripture (at that time, these were the Vedas), or that any old tradition holds it, or that some teacher holds it. Instead, we should think for ourselves if a deed is wholesome or unwholesome.
Let's take the argument of Jared (sorry that I as a Buddhist take over an argument from you, an LDS believer): Is it unwholesome to eat certain kinds of seafood in contrast to other allowed types of fish? Certainly not. The distinction between animals who have fins and those who don't have fins does not make any difference in reality. Therefore, a Buddhist would reject the old testament writings in which supposedly God told you not to eat this kind of seafood. In reality, these texts were made up by human beings. They might have had a reason, for example, people died after eating poisonous seafood, or rotten seafood, or sth. similar. To prevent this, the Hebrews put this food law into their canon. However, nowadays that we know which seafood to eat and which to avoid (compare the japanese Fugu-fish), this law is totally useless.
I would agree to Jared that reality is changing. Old testament Hebrews didn't have our knowledge about hygiene, that's why they needed some simple rules. These were put in the context of the culture of their day, which was Jewish Religion. Therefore, their religion also comprised simple rules of sanitation. Nowadays, these rules are hopelessly outdated. We don't need priests to cure leprosy, we need doctors. But I would disagree with Jared in that it is not God who is changing, but our knowledge of the world, and our culture/circumstances. Therefore, we have to adapt to these circumstances and also change our religious laws if they are out of fashion.
This holds true for equality rights for women. In today's society, gender equality is almost a given thing, though we still struggle with some details. But in the biblical days, gender equality was unknown. Therefore, any comments made by sexist people such as Paul cannot be taken seriously in today's society.
The change in society, culture and our way of life is a REALITY, an OBJECTIVE FACT. So claiming that Buddhists do neglect objective reality to only regard subjective emotions is far from the truth. On the contrary, Christians who are biblical fundamentalists ignore the simple fact that lots of their scripture is culturally outdated, not relevant and even harmful today.
On the contrary, the Buddha stated that everything is impermanent, so even statements he made can be criticized and changed if necessary, and if you take a look at the course of the development of Buddhism, many aspects of Buddhism actually did change to accomodate for different characters, different culture in the countries where Buddhism flourished. One striking example for this is China, where Buddhism took over quite a new form, because it had to be translated into the chinese language and the chinese way of thinking. Consequently, it became mixed with the contemporary chinese philosophy of Daoism. Therefore, the Dao and the Dharma are often used interchangably, and many Chinese and Japanese Buddhists use the Dao or Dou to express the Way of Buddhism (all japanese (martial) arts are dous, Ken-dou, Karate-dou, Aiki-dou, Ju-dou, etc).
Seeing the reality as it is is a great step of liberation. In a Buddhist's opinion, this is only partly realized by a Christian, because they mix reality with old fashioned beliefs, correct moral laws with superstition.
I am wondering why you keep a blog and a forum, Eric, because as you cannot argue about your scripture anyway, there is no reason to keep a forum. Only if scriptures can be questioned, then there is place for argument and debate. If only some 2000 year scripture, which wasn't transmitted correctly anyway, is your eternal truth, then all you can do is debate about the correct interpretation (which also is one of the Christian problems. Thousands of Christian denominations in America alone prove that the scripture is not unambiguous). But by making the wrong assertion that your old book contains eternal truth, you are missing the very reality which lies at your doorsteps, a reality in which eating shrimp is as sinful as eating pork, and women who are as intelligent as their authoritative husbands, and a world which is full of suffering, inspite of an all-loving, yet invisible and non-acting god.
Hope this comment fits onto the blog. Jane Winsley.
" If only some 2000 year scripture, which wasn't transmitted correctly anyway, is your eternal truth, then all you can do is debate about the correct interpretation (which also is one of the Christian problems."
Do you not know what the Septuagint is? Do you not know what the Dead Sea Scrolls are? So...now we can go back to my original reply.....
Jane, Would you like to take this to debate on a my podcast?
I would be willing to debate you on the Septuagint. Dead Sea scrolls do not help your case either.... What do you say?
Hello Eric, I don't really see the point in this. I have heard about the Septuagint and the Dead Sea scrolls, but I am no expert in it. So what benefit would it bring for me to show up in your podcast and discuss a topic I am not an expert in?
Would you like to be the glorious Christian who knows so much more about his own religion than this Buddhist woman who has neighther deep expertise nor big interest in those details? Do you need this to boost your bad ego?
Maybe you should start some basic meditation, it will also help you clarify your problems with your ego. As I said, there are dozen of meditation centers in Utah.
For topics such as the reliability of your own christian scriptures, you will probably find better people who have a deeper knowledge and can actually answer your questions about them. And here I will give you a suggestion:
Prof. Robert M. Price, also known as "the bible geek", has a huge expertise in points of biblical topics such as canonization, development and historicity of the bible. You might reach him at his homepage: http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/theolist.htm As he was a guest of several podcasts at the infidel-guy (www.infidelguy.com), discussing topics of the bible, I assume that he might be willing to be the guest of one of your podcasts, discussing with a biblical fundamentalist like you. However, as I assume you are not proficient enough to speak with him alone, I would suggest that you also invite your friend Joe McCormick to support your theological views.
Isn't that a good suggestion? Should he not agree to come to your podcast, maybe you can have a look at someone as outstanding as Mr. Price, and maybe he can refer you to someone else.
I am very interested in the resulting podcast. Good luck and metta (Buddhist term for loving kindness), Jane Winsley.
Jane, If you are no expert in the Septuagint and no "some" concerning the subject then what makes you an expert in denying the fact that the Bible is the Word of God and is perfect in its entirety and preservation? Remember Jane that you were the one who came to this blog pointing out the many flaws within Christianity. I do not invite you on my podcast to boost my "bad" ego but to defend the Word of God from an apologetic stand point. If you cant back your belief up outside of Buddhist writings and then I suppose you come back some other time whe you are willing to and can. Jane.... I have not taken the liberal standpoint as you have by making personal attacks on me. Saying I want to boost my "bad" ego seems to be more on the personal side rather than rational and factual.
Jane ...... Isaiah 43:10 says "Ye [are] my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may KNOW and BELIEVE me, and UNDERSTAND that I [am] he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me." Sorry Jane but aint no Buddhist gonna make it.
Grace and Peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.... Psalm 18:2 -Eric
I have not taken the liberal standpoint as you have by making personal attacks on me. Saying I want to boost my "bad" ego seems to be more on the personal side rather than rational and factual.
As I pointed out, there is no rational reason to discuss scientific topics such as the reliability of today's bible with someone who doesn't have the expertise. Therefore, there must be some irrational reason, wherefore I suggested that you might have such personal problems. I referred you to someone who has the sufficient expertise to discuss this topic. If you are really interested to discuss the topic, contact Mr. Price. However, as I assumed, you only want to boost your ego, not search for an enlightening dialogue.
If quoting from your scripture makes you happy, lets have some quotes from mine: "Now a good report of Master Gotama has been spread to this effect: 'That Blessed One is such since he is arahant and Fully Enlightened, perfect in true knowledge and conduct, sublime, knower of worlds, incomparable teacher of men to be tamed, teacher of gods and humans, enlightened, blessed. He describes this world with its gods, its Maras(devils), and its (Brahma) Divinities, this generation with its monks and brahmans(priests), with its kings and its people, which he has himself realized through direct knowledge. He teaches a Dhamma that is good in the beginning, good in the middle and good in the end with (the right) meaning and phrasing, he affirms a holy life that is utterly perfect and pure.'"
An introduction to some Suttas states: "The Buddha teaches deities when they visit the human plane where he normally resides,5 and sometimes too by visiting them on the higher planes. On some occasions devas and brahmas come to the Buddha for clarification of Dhamma problems. On other occasions the Buddha becomes aware, through his supernormal knowledge, that a god needs some instruction to correct a wrong view or to goad him further on the path to awakening. Then the Buddha travels to the higher plane and gives the deity a personal discourse."
In another Sutta, the Buddha explains: "It is human existence, bhikkhus, that is reckoned by the devas to be a good bourn. When a human being acquires faith in the Dhamma-Vinaya taught by the Tathagata, this is reckoned by the devas to be a gain that is good to gain. When faith is steadfast in him, firmly rooted, established and strong, not to be destroyed by any recluse or brahman or deva or Mara or brahma or by anyone else in the world, this is reckoned by the devas to be firmly established." Some devas long to be reborn as human beings because they are aware of the greater possibility of comprehending impermanence, suffering, and non-self on the human plane. There is no real illness on the deva planes. When a deva faces death, his aura begins to fade and dirt appears on his clothes for the first time.
Jesus was one of these devas who were reborn as a human being.
Anyway, I am looking forward to your podcast with an expert on the tradition of scripture. I suppose this topic deserves some effort. Greetings, Jane Winsley
My Dear Jane, Have you ever been to Tibet? I encourage you to go and subject yourself to a radical authentic buddhist fundementalist group. They call Americans wanabees. Jane, America has transformed Buddhism into this happy love everyone faith. But in the real atmosphere of Buddhists young boys are beaten almost to the point of death for converting to Christianity. Is this the Buddhism you teach? No. From what I can see you have asttached yourself to the this neo-Hollywood Buddhism that so many people find "cool"
Hello Melissa, yes, I have been to Tibet, Thailand and Japan, all three Buddhist countries, and I had many fascinating and good experiences there. I had retreats in several Buddhist monasteries, staying with the local nuns for some weeks meditating.
So far, I have only heard that Japanese Zen monks beat their novices with sticks when they are unattentive. I have also seen this in a video in which a westerner (Australian) gets beaten, but rather lightly. Although I don't appreciate this, I would rather count that as part of their education practice than as part of Buddhist core beliefs.
On the contrary, I have heard about many cases in which conservative evangelicals beat their gay sons almost to death or send them to so called Christian change ministries, in which they are treated with electric shocks, endless prayer sessions and other kinds of tortures. To my information, Eric's church also offers such torture programs. So you don't have to go far away to see the injustice in biblical fundamentalist churches such as the church Eric is promoting on this website, but you can stay in your own country or even state to see injustice, inhumanity and sheer brutality.
When talking about Tibet, there are many problems in this country which make a comparison to American standards of morality and education difficult. Many people are very uneducated. This is also due to the Chinese occupation, for lots of the natural ressources Tibet had were exploited by the Chinese, including the clearing of woods etc. On the other hand, it is remarkable how calm the Dalai Lama can be in face of this sheer injustice. If one person on the whole world follows the advice of non-violence both the Buddha, and 5 centuries later in almost identical words also Jesus gave, it is the Dalai Lama, not any christian leader such as the Pope, the LDS prophet or Chuck Smith.
Here you can look up the Calvary Chapel of Melbourne ex-gay ministry: http://www.calvarymelbourne.org/ministry.aspx?aID=138
Here are two critical articles about ex-gay ministries: http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2005/01/tx-billboards-promote-focus-on-familys.html http://www.gayrightswatch.com/2005/06/zach-another-6-weeks-of-psychological.html Can you as a woman ignore the suffering of these young men when their conservative fathers would rather kill their sons than accepting that their bible principles are outdated?
So Melissa, have you ever been in America and seen the brutal reality of Christian fundamentalists, behind their hollywood "Jesus loves you!" facade??? Please visit one of those ministries and see the suffering.
Greets and lots of metta (loving kindness), Jane Winsley.
Jane, I am actually Eric's husband. Yes we have our homosexual torture room right next to my daughters Sunday school class. Get real!! People who do such things "call" themselves Christians but this is NOT christian. Jane, be secure in your beliefs. What's your obsession with coming to this site? Take my husband up on his challenge. You seem to claim the Bible is nonsense but then claim to not be expert in the topic? I have heard of many Calvary chapels doing lots of weird things. This does not mean the church I go to does. Nor does it represent me. When you make statements like this, it shows me that you are religious and do not seek to understand. Your comments are fruitless as well as Buddhism. By the way, its "Gautama" NOT "Gatoma" You are in our prayers Jane.
Grace and Peace be with you in Christ Jesus. -Melissa
You said: "People who do such things call themselves Christians but this is NOT christian." and "I have heard of many Calvary chapels doing lots of weird things. This does not mean the church I go to does. Nor does it represent me."
It is interesting. So when somewhere in Tibet a person reacts violently, that represents Buddhism as a whole, but when the very same thing happens in the denomination of your husband, that is of course not representative for anyone.
Fact is that many Calvary Chapels have strange and inhumane practices, wherefore they cannot be called Christian if you take the standards Jesus who like the Buddha was for non-violence and peace.
(Of course, your husband will be fast in quoting the "I came to bring the sword" verses, and should your daughter turn out to be lesbian, your husband will probably not hesitate to use the sword of wrath on her!)
So you seem to agree with me that Calvary Chapel is a strange cult in which many things happen which are not according to the principles set up by Jesus. Please also tell your husband about your knowledge, for he seems to be trapped in this cult, because he gets more fanatic every week defending this church of Chuck Smith.
Moreover, you said: "By the way, its "Gautama" NOT "Gatoma" (you mean Gotama).
While you and your husband may have more knowledge on the septuagint and other Christian nitpicking, you surely have not even the slightest basic knowledge about Buddhism.
So, here is Buddhism 101: In Buddhism, two old dialects of Indian are used, Pali and Sanskrit. While in Theravada Buddhism, Pali is used, in other traditions often Sanskrit is used. The name of the Buddha in Sanskrit is "Siddharta Gautama", in Pali it is "Siddhattha Gotama".
Moreover, the sanskrit word for the teachings of the Buddha is "Dharma", in Pali it is "Dhamma".
(It is similar to British English and American English: British people say "water" while many Americans say "wader".)
You see, Pali and Sanskrit are two dialects, and while they are very similar, they have a different way of writing words.
Therefore, your arrogant comment has no substance, as you were using the Sanskrit version and I was quoting from the Pali canon, which of course uses Pali, not Sanskrit.
Both your husband and you are in my meditation of loving kindness, metta to you and to all who suffer, may the wisdom of the Buddha also reach into your heart.
Interesting discussion. As a former LDS missionary in Texas I can tell you that I've heard most of these arguments before and I've yet to see much come from them on either side except for some entertaining debate. I find your assumptions of postmodernism to mormons very interesting and somewhat factual depending on your definition of postmodern. I always thought that posmodernism refers to a more decentralized and media-based society spurred by economic and technoligical factors; an agenda fit for very liberal politics. Most of your assumptions point out the differences between your religion and mine calling it postmodern when in fact it is simply just modern. Mormonism was founded in the Modern Era and many principles reflect modern philosophies such as:
-Nationalism in its principles
-Democracy and freedom are embraced as principles and used in organization.
-A corporate management style (often the site of comtempt with other churches) is very effective in the LDS Church. I would argue that the LDS Church is the most well organized and wealthiest per capita church on earth.
Many other examples can be raised and you would right because this is a modern church and we believe it is THE modern church of Jesus Christ.
I forgot to bring my comdemnation staff of righteousness so I will express a compliance in the joy of religion. I know that sounds dull but I really enjoy learning about lots of religions. I've recently visited Jordan and seen many of the holy sites including Mt. Nebo, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Jordan River, and Jesus's Baptismal site and can testify that the spirit of God runs through many religions that claim their heritage in that land. After my trip, I attended my brother's Jewish wedding to a beautiful jewish girl and although he doesn't practice any religion, I saw a distinct spirit of God in that wonderful ceremony. I get a general feeling of the Divine as well in many marvelous Cathedrals in Europe. I enjoy the wondrous variety of religion among our brothers and sisters.
I, of course, choose to be LDS because I find a certain peace and joy in its teachings that can't be found else where. I know it's quirky in some eyes and abominable in others but that really doesn't matter because Mormonism is based on the faith and hearts of its members. As long as the Spirit of God exists and touches mankind, Mormonism will thrive especially since this information age leaves us longing for feelings of the heart that are reflective of our modern lives. This is a modern church and I love it. Any words against it don't really bother me because my modern heart tells in the end words don't matter as much as feelings of the heart.
23 Comments:
Just a question:
Is there any genuine thought on this blog, or is this merely a copy-paste from other blogs, such as the mormon-wiki, the utah lighthouse ministry, blogs from Samuel the Utahnite and other blogs, from which you merely copy and put your personal rant onto?
If so, what is the use of this blog? It is merely creating more redundancy in that most articles are insufficient quoted and not backed up.
For example the article that the LDS church is postmodern is totally nonsense. If everyone can believe what he wants, why should there be a need for the restoration of the true Church of Jesus Christ?
Viewing the LDS church in light of postmodernism is pure nonsense, as a hierarchical church is inherently conservative.
Maybe the LDS church is not so fierce in its argumentation, we don't bash evangelicals with pamphlets and wearing evangelical underwear in public, so we are seen to be harmony-seeking which in your fanatical eyes equals to post-modernism.
However, that is not the real identity of our church.
I know that Joseph Smith is the prophet of the only true Church on this planet, and all other religions are an abomination in God's eye, including man-made denominations such as the Jehova's witnesses (invented by a false prophet) or Calvary chapel (invented by a false prophet), both claiming Jesus' resurrection at a certain date, both prophecies failed.
So, are we post-modern because we don't criticize such false prophets in the public on a daily basis as you criticize us on a daily basis on your blog?
Just my standpoint,
Jared.
Well Jared,
Thank you for your comments and visiting the site. There is lots of genuine thought put into this blog. Just because you happen to find similar information on other sites does not mean it’s not genuine. Now Samuel the Utahnites site I will agree with you that it is total garbage.
On the other hand this information is given in love and prayer that the LDS might find the Lord Jesus Christ.
Now I have some questions for you Jared…..
1. If the Jehovah’s Witnesses are a false church why is it not important for you to help them? You observation about Calvary is totally irrelevant seeing that it’s not a religion? Do you think I am under the impression that anybody who does not attend Calvary chapel is damned for hell? Calvary is simply a fellowship of believers who belong to the universal body as a whole.
2. If you think that the LDS church is the only way then what does that mean for people like me? I would think it would mean that I am going to hell according to the words of God given to Joseph Smith….correct?
3. By promoting a biblical Christ does not mean I hate others….This is not about flesh and blood Jared. This is about the demonic forces of evil which deceive millions with there lies and evil workmen. So if you think all are doomed why is it not important to save the lost? Are you saying you would rather me just stay quiet in order to keep PR?
God Bless....
-Eric
1. If the Jehovah’s Witnesses are a false church why is it not important for you to help them?
Actually, we do help them. However, we take a different approach from your "fellowship" and other evangelical denominations.
First of all, we have an extensive missionary program. Our program is one of the most extensive ones in the world, sending about 50000 young men around the world to preach the Gospel.
However, we don't launch hate-websites, nor do we distribute pamphlets in front of Calvary Chapels or any other churches to tell them they are an abomination in the eye of God, which they are.
The Spirit of the Lord is a spirit of gentleness, therefore, whenever there is a heart open for the Gospel, there will be a possibility to reach out. This includes not only our full-time missionaries, but also our members who reach out to their neighbours and aquaintances.
All this is done in a humble and meek attitude. If people don't accept our message, their heart is hardened, so there is nothing we can do. Cynicism, aggressive behavior shown on your website does not promote your gospel in any way, as people are scared away by a Gospel which is presented in the spirit of hatered and aggression.
1b) You observation about Calvary is totally irrelevant seeing that it’s not a religion?
Calvary Chapel is a Christian denomination founded by Chuck Smith. Denying that it is a denomination is just a matter of relabeling.
Chuck Smith has a very special attitude towards the gospel, he proclaims a very special church hierarchy, as some previos posters have pointed out.
The LDS church is in this regard no different. When Joseph Smith restored the Gospel on this planet, he also restored the priesthood, and with it the church hierarchy of the Early Church before it became corrupted.
However, I don't see that Chuck Smith has any authority given to him by God, as Joseph Smith had.
So please stop deceiving yourself by telling that Calvary Chapel is not a denomination. As soon as people have a theological opinion about God, Jesus and the plan of Salvation, they form a singular body, which is a denomination.
"Calvary is simply a fellowship of believers who belong to the universal body as a whole."
As Chuck Smith proclaims several special theological opinions about the Gospel, he forms a denomination, and all people who want to belong to his "fellowship" have to agree to HIS gospel.
2. If you think that the LDS church is the only way then what does that mean for people like me?
It means that you don't have the FULLNESS of the gospel. However, in contrast to your evangelical beliefs, we don't condemn every person who is not LDS to eternal hell. This is because Jesus loves every person, disregarding of their religious affiliation. Chances are high that a person has not the possibility to become an LDS member simply for the fact that we cannot proselytize the whole world with 50000 people. Taking this into account, condemning all people who are not LDS or who are not Christian in general is a harsh and injust statement, because you are placing yourself instead of Jesus, being the judge of other people.
On the other hand, Jesus gave us many opportunities to become members of his fold.
a) in this life, by becoming members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
b) by being baptized in proxy by some faithful member of the LDS church.
c) by accepting the gospel after dying.
You see, Jesus is loving and forgiving, and if we "miss" a chance, he will offer us another one. Even if a person is nasty to our missionaries and bangs the door in their face, because he has heard some lies about our church, Jesus will give him another chance after death.
3. By promoting a biblical Christ does not mean I hate others.
As I pointed out, you hate others, and what is worse, you claim that Jesus is as hateful, vengeful and
unforgiving as yourself.
3b) This is about the demonic forces of evil which deceive millions with there lies and evil workmen.
It is true. With your distorted gospel, you deceive as many people as are reading your website.
They think "Jesus doesn't love me if I don't join some conservative evangelical denomination". But Jesus is not like this, and your perspective is distorted.
3c) Are you saying you would rather me just stay quiet in order to keep PR?
No, but you are actually doing a BAD PR for Jesus, because you depict him as evil, unforgiving, vengeful, hateful, nasty, injust, etc.
If Jesus was like you depicted him, I doubt many people would willful accept him as their savior and NOT ONLY OUT OF FEAR!!!
The restoration of the Gospel brought the gospel back to the world, that is, the GOOD NEWS.
The evangelical sects which split off from the catholic sect in the 16th century proclaim a hateful Jesus who condemns everyone to hell who does not join an equally hateful conservative bunch of guys interpret their own problematic father relationships into the bible.
So much for now,
Jared.
Dear Eric Hoffman, your statement
"The Spirit comes privately from an internal, private experience of prayer, after having emptied yourself of objective truth (Note: MUCH like Buddhism)"
clearly shows that you either have no clue what Buddhism is all about or you are willingly distorting the Dharma in order to promote your own personal beliefs.
In either way, I would suggest that you go to one of the local Buddhist centers in Utah and inform yourself about what Buddhism means, what it is about, if what you claim to be "objective truth" really is objective truth and how to experience truth most objectively.
Here is a link to the Utah Buddhist Community, you can freely choose to visit one of them:
http://faculty.weber.edu/bdavis/ubc/Default.htm
Good luck on your way in any case, be it on the path of the Dharma, be it on the path of your personal beliefs, but never forget the compassion and love for all sentient beings our masters urged us to bring forth.
Jane Winsley,
Buddhist lay follower in Southern California.
Jared,
You said:
”As I pointed out, you hate others, and what is worse, you claim that Jesus is as hateful, vengeful and
unforgiving as yourself.”
Do I really hate Mormons? When did I say that? I disagree highly with you theology but I do not hate you Jared. In fact I love you. I think you are under the impression I am one of those guys who stands out in front of temple square burning sacred garments and shouting all kinds of hateful personal attacks on people. I have seen those guys Jared. They are not representing the Lord’s heart. You disagree highly with my faith….does this mean you hate me? I hope not.
You said:
“With your distorted gospel, you deceive as many people as are reading your website.”
Just what is my gospel? I do not think one has to join Calvary church in order to be saved. I think one must except Jesus as their savior in order to be saved. You know, I see people like you Jared who want the Jesus who fed the four thousand and the Jesus who fed the five thousand and the Jesus who performed miracles….but you don’t want the Jesus who said, “I come not to bring peace but a sword.” You don’t want the Jesus who said follow me or parish.
You said:
"You see, Jesus is loving and forgiving, and if we "miss" a chance, he will offer us another one.”
But the bible says:
”And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.” Hebrews 9:27-28
Jared can you provide me some scripture that sow me where it says we get another chance?
(outside of LDS doctrine)
Jared from what I can see Jesus did love every last living thing on the planet….being that He is God and created everything. That’s why he came to save the world. (John 3:16)
But what is He saving us from? Why come and save the world if we can hear about it in the next life?
Jared my mission is not to spread hate and anger, but to spread truth. You find me hateful just because I disagree with your theological views.
Jared the LDS churches mission is to send out LDS youth and knock on the doors of millions….why?
Because LDS church believes all churches are an abomination…correct?
Jared I really do appreciate you honesty in telling me that you think all churches are wrong in the eyes of God. Not many LDS are willing to say these kinds of things for sake of being “nice.” So, I really do sincerely appreciate the honesty. It shows me that maybe we can continue to dialogue.
If you want you can skype me and we can talk… my skype name is “livingtruth.eric”
Grace and Peace in the Lord Jesus Christ…..
-Eric
Psalm 18:2
Jared-
Your comment:
"c) by accepting the gospel after dying.
You see, Jesus is loving and forgiving, and if we "miss" a chance, he will offer us another one. Even if a person is nasty to our missionaries and bangs the door in their face, because he has heard some lies about our church, Jesus will give him another chance after death."
Flies in the face of Alma 34:32-35:
32 For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors.
33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.
34 Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful acrisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world.
35 For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he doth seal you his; therefore, the Spirit of the Lord hath withdrawn from you, and hath no place in you, and the devil hath all power over you; and this is the final state of the wicked."
How can modern LDS teach of this repentance in the after life with the Book of Mormon says it is not possible, and that if you die without full repentance (i.e. you *stopped sinning in this life*), you are sealed to the devil. That means outer darkness Jared.
is this hate speech? To point out the hopelessness of the LDS doctrine? Jesus taught of hope, he said his burden is light and his yoke is easy ... the LDS doctrine that you have to stop sinning before you draw your last breath here on earth is an impossibility.
Likewise, Spencer W. Kimball (prophet/seer/revelator/president) said in The Miracle of Forgiveness, that true repentance does not allow for making the same sin again. True repentance means that the desire or urge to sin is gone from you.
The LDS Church teaches that you must actually become sin-free in THIS LIFE or you are sealed to the Devil at your death.
Where is the good news in that "gospel?"
Jane thanks for the comment.
Jane you are right. You have the right to believe in whatever you want, but what you believe must be spiritually right.
The Bible says:
”I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to Father except through me.” -John 14:6
” And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved,” –Acts 4:12
”He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.” -1 John 5:12
”All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” –Matthew 28:18
"For unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins" -John 8:24
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" -1 Timothy 2:5
There for I would agree that Jesus is the only way. This is why we cannot accept Buddha as a means to salvation.
God Bless…
-Eric
Hello Brian,
thanks for sharing your point of view. It shows a slight but important methodological problem you have.
"...Flies in the face of Alma 34:32-35...
How can modern LDS teach of this repentance in the after life with the Book of Mormon says it is not possible, and that if you die without full repentance (i.e. you *stopped sinning in this life*), you are sealed to the devil. That means outer darkness Jared."
The mistake you make is that you think every quote from the bible and the book of Mormon are eternally unchangeable. Moreover, you equate the speeches men have made to be totally inspired by God to the last iota.
Even if we set aside the book of Mormon, as you don't believe in it, the bible in itself shows that God HAS CHANGED his attitude / opinion about certain topics in the course of history. Therefore, quoting one verse and taking it to be eternally true, you are risking contrasting the will of God who might have changed his opinion.
Lets take an example from the old testament:
Lev 11:10-11 "And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which [is] in the waters, they [shall be] an abomination unto you:They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination."
God teaches us to not eat certain types of seafood. As this is a bible verse, it must be eternally true, right?
Lets see what Jesus thinks about this verse, some centuries later. He talks about washing your hands, but his talk includes food as a source of defilement as well.
Mt 15:16-19:
"And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies."
Jesus pointed out that defilement is created by sinful behavior, not by eating certain food or not washing one's hands, because the food is eaten, digested, then goes into the toilet, there is no connection between food and sin/cleanness.
This is a classical example of a DEVELOPMENT within the bible.
While God declared certain food rules for the ancient people of Israel, Jesus changed these rules.
Especially in his sermon on the mount, Jesus contrasts his message with that of the people of old.
Brian, your problem is that you quote a few number of verses, without taking into account their relevance today, and thus make wrong conclusions.
In the same way, someone could quote old testament verses and tell you not to eat certain kinds of sea-food, because it is an abomination in the eye of God!
As there is a development in the Gospel, there was also a change when God introduced baptism for the dead (known in the new testament as well as in the LDS church), because he decided that people CAN get another chance.
Quoting Alma against this background is like quoting Mose to forbid a Christian eating seafood.
Either you accept that there is a development in God's plan of salvation, or you quickly get the Barmitsva ceremony ready to get yourself cut as a sign for the old covenant.
Jared.
Jared-
So then Moroni 10:32, 2 Nephi 25:23, Alma 11:37, 1 Nephi 3:7, D&C 1:31-35, and D&C 58:42-43 are all out-of-date scriptures that do not pertain to the "fulness" that you have?
All reinforce the same concept : it is by grace you are saved after ALL you can do. God cannot look upon sin with the least allowance. If you die without complete repentance you are bound to the devil in outer darkness.
You are dancing around uncomfortable truths about LDS doctine that do not fit with your views, and I might also add that you appear to also be discounting the revelations and teachings of Joseph Smith Jr. and Spencer W. Kimball.
This is dangerous ground on which you are treading.
Jared,
You have proven to live up to one of the points I made in this original post that Mormons are closer to Postmodernism that one thinks
I wrote:
-The Bible is chiefly man speaking. It is not direct enough from God. If you want to hear God speak, seek the euphoria of an emotional epiphany.
COMPARE THAT TO WHAT YOU SAID:
“Moreover, you equate the speeches men have made to be totally inspired by God to the last iota.”
I think you totally evaded Brian’s comment. What does the Lord changing have to do with what Brian’s comment entailed? And God does not change. For if he did scriptures like Malachi 3:6 would not exist. God fulfilled the Law…he did not change it. This is why the Jews crucified Him.
I think Brian is owed an answer to posed impossible gospel that the LDS church has presented.
Eric, you wrote:
"Jane you are right. You have the right to believe in whatever you want, but what you believe must be spiritually right.
The Bible says:
... bible quotes ...
There for I would agree that Jesus is the only way. This is why we cannot accept Buddha as a means to salvation."
Let me quote from one of my scriptures:
The criterion for rejection:
"It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them."
and
The criterion for acceptance:
"Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them."
As you see, the Buddha rejected taking anything for granted only because it was written in some ancient scripture (at that time, these were the Vedas), or that any old tradition holds it, or that some teacher holds it.
Instead, we should think for ourselves if a deed is wholesome or unwholesome.
Let's take the argument of Jared (sorry that I as a Buddhist take over an argument from you, an LDS believer):
Is it unwholesome to eat certain kinds of seafood in contrast to other allowed types of fish? Certainly not. The distinction between animals who have fins and those who don't have fins does not make any difference in reality.
Therefore, a Buddhist would reject the old testament writings in which supposedly God told you not to eat this kind of seafood.
In reality, these texts were made up by human beings. They might have had a reason, for example, people died after eating poisonous seafood, or rotten seafood, or sth. similar.
To prevent this, the Hebrews put this food law into their canon. However, nowadays that we know which seafood to eat and which to avoid (compare the japanese Fugu-fish), this law is totally useless.
I would agree to Jared that reality is changing. Old testament Hebrews didn't have our knowledge about hygiene, that's why they needed some simple rules. These were put in the context of the culture of their day, which was Jewish Religion. Therefore, their religion also comprised simple rules of sanitation. Nowadays, these rules are hopelessly outdated. We don't need priests to cure leprosy, we need doctors.
But I would disagree with Jared in that it is not God who is changing, but our knowledge of the world, and our culture/circumstances.
Therefore, we have to adapt to these circumstances and also change our religious laws if they are out of fashion.
This holds true for equality rights for women. In today's society, gender equality is almost a given thing, though we still struggle with some details. But in the biblical days, gender equality was unknown. Therefore, any comments made by sexist people such as Paul cannot be taken seriously in today's society.
The change in society, culture and our way of life is a REALITY, an OBJECTIVE FACT. So claiming that Buddhists do neglect objective reality to only regard subjective emotions is far from the truth.
On the contrary, Christians who are biblical fundamentalists ignore the simple fact that lots of their scripture is culturally outdated, not relevant and even harmful today.
On the contrary, the Buddha stated that everything is impermanent, so even statements he made can be criticized and changed if necessary, and if you take a look at the course of the development of Buddhism, many aspects of Buddhism actually did change to accomodate for different characters, different culture in the countries where Buddhism flourished.
One striking example for this is China, where Buddhism took over quite a new form, because it had to be translated into the chinese language and the chinese way of thinking. Consequently, it became mixed with the contemporary chinese philosophy of Daoism.
Therefore, the Dao and the Dharma are often used interchangably, and many Chinese and Japanese Buddhists use the Dao or Dou to express the Way of Buddhism (all japanese (martial) arts are dous, Ken-dou, Karate-dou, Aiki-dou, Ju-dou, etc).
Seeing the reality as it is is a great step of liberation. In a Buddhist's opinion, this is only partly realized by a Christian, because they mix reality with old fashioned beliefs, correct moral laws with superstition.
I am wondering why you keep a blog and a forum, Eric, because as you cannot argue about your scripture anyway, there is no reason to keep a forum. Only if scriptures can be questioned, then there is place for argument and debate. If only some 2000 year scripture, which wasn't transmitted correctly anyway, is your eternal truth, then all you can do is debate about the correct interpretation (which also is one of the Christian problems. Thousands of Christian denominations in America alone prove that the scripture is not unambiguous).
But by making the wrong assertion that your old book contains eternal truth, you are missing the very reality which lies at your doorsteps, a reality in which eating shrimp is as sinful as eating pork, and women who are as intelligent as their authoritative husbands, and a world which is full of suffering, inspite of an all-loving, yet invisible and non-acting god.
Hope this comment fits onto the blog.
Jane Winsley.
Jane,
Would you like to take this to debate on a my pdcast?
I would be willing to debate you on the Septuagint.
Dead Sea scrolls do not help your case either....
Wht do you say?
Hi Eric,
I don't know what you are talking about. Was your comment related to mine? I don't see any connection.
Jane
Yes Jane my Comment was directed toward you..
YOU SAID:
" If only some 2000 year scripture, which wasn't transmitted correctly anyway, is your eternal truth, then all you can do is debate about the correct interpretation (which also is one of the Christian problems."
Do you not know what the Septuagint is? Do you not know what the Dead Sea Scrolls are?
So...now we can go back to my original reply.....
Jane,
Would you like to take this to debate on a my podcast?
I would be willing to debate you on the Septuagint.
Dead Sea scrolls do not help your case either....
What do you say?
Hello Eric,
I don't really see the point in this. I have heard about the Septuagint and the Dead Sea scrolls, but I am no expert in it. So what benefit would it bring for me to show up in your podcast and discuss a topic I am not an expert in?
Would you like to be the glorious Christian who knows so much more about his own religion than this Buddhist woman who has neighther deep expertise nor big interest in those details?
Do you need this to boost your bad ego?
Maybe you should start some basic meditation, it will also help you clarify your problems with your ego. As I said, there are dozen of meditation centers in Utah.
For topics such as the reliability of your own christian scriptures, you will probably find better people who have a deeper knowledge and can actually answer your questions about them.
And here I will give you a suggestion:
Prof. Robert M. Price, also known as "the bible geek", has a huge expertise in points of biblical topics such as canonization, development and historicity of the bible.
You might reach him at his homepage:
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/theolist.htm
As he was a guest of several podcasts at the infidel-guy (www.infidelguy.com), discussing topics of the bible, I assume that he might be willing to be the guest of one of your podcasts, discussing with a biblical fundamentalist like you. However, as I assume you are not proficient enough to speak with him alone, I would suggest that you also invite your friend Joe McCormick to support your theological views.
Isn't that a good suggestion?
Should he not agree to come to your podcast, maybe you can have a look at someone as outstanding as Mr. Price, and maybe he can refer you to someone else.
I am very interested in the resulting podcast.
Good luck and metta
(Buddhist term for loving kindness),
Jane Winsley.
Jane,
If you are no expert in the Septuagint and no "some" concerning the subject then what makes you an expert in denying the fact that the Bible is the Word of God and is perfect in its entirety and preservation? Remember Jane that you were the one who came to this blog pointing out the many flaws within Christianity. I do not invite you on my podcast to boost my "bad" ego but to defend the Word of God from an apologetic stand point. If you cant back your belief up outside of Buddhist writings and then I suppose you come back some other time whe you are willing to and can.
Jane....
I have not taken the liberal standpoint as you have by making personal attacks on me. Saying I want to boost my "bad" ego seems to be more on the personal side rather than rational and factual.
Jane ......
Isaiah 43:10 says
"Ye [are] my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may KNOW and BELIEVE me, and UNDERSTAND that I [am] he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me."
Sorry Jane but aint no Buddhist gonna make it.
Grace and Peace in the Lord Jesus Christ....
Psalm 18:2
-Eric
Hello Eric,
you stated:
I have not taken the liberal standpoint as you have by making personal attacks on me. Saying I want to boost my "bad" ego seems to be more on the personal side rather than rational and factual.
As I pointed out, there is no rational reason to discuss scientific topics such as the reliability of today's bible with someone who doesn't have the expertise. Therefore, there must be some irrational reason, wherefore I suggested that you might have such personal problems.
I referred you to someone who has the sufficient expertise to discuss this topic. If you are really interested to discuss the topic, contact Mr. Price. However, as I assumed, you only want to boost your ego, not search for an enlightening dialogue.
If quoting from your scripture makes you happy, lets have some quotes from mine:
"Now a good report of Master Gotama has been spread to this effect: 'That Blessed One is such since he is arahant and Fully Enlightened, perfect in true knowledge and conduct, sublime, knower of worlds, incomparable teacher of men to be tamed, teacher of gods and humans, enlightened, blessed. He describes this world with its gods, its Maras(devils), and its (Brahma) Divinities, this generation with its monks and brahmans(priests), with its kings and its people, which he has himself realized through direct knowledge. He teaches a Dhamma that is good in the beginning, good in the middle and good in the end with (the right) meaning and phrasing, he affirms a holy life that is utterly perfect and pure.'"
An introduction to some Suttas states:
"The Buddha teaches deities when they visit the human plane where he normally resides,5 and sometimes too by visiting them on the higher planes. On some occasions devas and brahmas come to the Buddha for clarification of Dhamma problems. On other occasions the Buddha becomes aware, through his supernormal knowledge, that a god needs some instruction to correct a wrong view or to goad him further on the path to awakening. Then the Buddha travels to the higher plane and gives the deity a personal discourse."
In another Sutta, the Buddha explains:
"It is human existence, bhikkhus, that is reckoned by the devas to be a good bourn. When a human being acquires faith in the Dhamma-Vinaya taught by the Tathagata, this is reckoned by the devas to be a gain that is good to gain. When faith is steadfast in him, firmly rooted, established and strong, not to be destroyed by any recluse or brahman or deva or Mara or brahma or by anyone else in the world, this is reckoned by the devas to be firmly established."
Some devas long to be reborn as human beings because they are aware of the greater possibility of comprehending impermanence, suffering, and non-self on the human plane. There is no real illness on the deva planes. When a deva faces death, his aura begins to fade and dirt appears on his clothes for the first time.
Jesus was one of these devas who were reborn as a human being.
Anyway, I am looking forward to your podcast with an expert on the tradition of scripture. I suppose this topic deserves some effort.
Greetings,
Jane Winsley
My Dear Jane,
Have you ever been to Tibet?
I encourage you to go and subject yourself to a radical authentic buddhist fundementalist group. They call Americans wanabees. Jane, America has transformed Buddhism into this happy love everyone faith. But in the real atmosphere of Buddhists young boys are beaten almost to the point of death for converting to Christianity. Is this the Buddhism you teach? No. From what I can see you have asttached yourself to the this neo-Hollywood Buddhism that so many people find "cool"
Good luck to you Jane and God Bless.
-Melissa
Hello Melissa,
yes, I have been to Tibet, Thailand and Japan, all three Buddhist countries, and I had many fascinating and good experiences there. I had retreats in several Buddhist monasteries, staying with the local nuns for some weeks meditating.
So far, I have only heard that Japanese Zen monks beat their novices with sticks when they are unattentive. I have also seen this in a video in which a westerner (Australian) gets beaten, but rather lightly.
Although I don't appreciate this, I would rather count that as part of their education practice than as part of Buddhist core beliefs.
On the contrary, I have heard about many cases in which conservative evangelicals beat their gay sons almost to death or send them to so called Christian change ministries, in which they are treated with electric shocks, endless prayer sessions and other kinds of tortures.
To my information, Eric's church also offers such torture programs.
So you don't have to go far away to see the injustice in biblical fundamentalist churches such as the church Eric is promoting on this website, but you can stay in your own country or even state to see injustice, inhumanity and sheer brutality.
When talking about Tibet, there are many problems in this country which make a comparison to American standards of morality and education difficult. Many people are very uneducated.
This is also due to the Chinese occupation, for lots of the natural ressources Tibet had were exploited by the Chinese, including the clearing of woods etc.
On the other hand, it is remarkable how calm the Dalai Lama can be in face of this sheer injustice.
If one person on the whole world follows the advice of non-violence both the Buddha, and 5 centuries later in almost identical words also Jesus gave, it is the Dalai Lama, not any christian leader such as the Pope, the LDS prophet or Chuck Smith.
Here you can look up the Calvary Chapel of Melbourne ex-gay ministry:
http://www.calvarymelbourne.org/ministry.aspx?aID=138
Here are two critical articles about ex-gay ministries:
http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2005/01/tx-billboards-promote-focus-on-familys.html
http://www.gayrightswatch.com/2005/06/zach-another-6-weeks-of-psychological.html
Can you as a woman ignore the suffering of these young men when their conservative fathers would rather kill their sons than accepting that their bible principles are outdated?
So Melissa,
have you ever been in America and seen the brutal reality of Christian fundamentalists, behind their hollywood "Jesus loves you!" facade??? Please visit one of those ministries and see the suffering.
Greets and lots of metta
(loving kindness),
Jane Winsley.
Jane,
I am actually Eric's husband. Yes we have our homosexual torture room right next to my daughters Sunday school class. Get real!!
People who do such things "call" themselves Christians but this is NOT christian. Jane, be secure in your beliefs. What's your obsession with coming to this site?
Take my husband up on his challenge.
You seem to claim the Bible is nonsense but then claim to not be expert in the topic?
I have heard of many Calvary chapels doing lots of weird things. This does not mean the church I go to does. Nor does it represent me. When you make statements like this, it shows me that you are religious and do not seek to understand.
Your comments are fruitless as well as Buddhism.
By the way, its "Gautama" NOT "Gatoma"
You are in our prayers Jane.
Grace and Peace be with you in Christ Jesus.
-Melissa
Hello Melissa,
You said:
"People who do such things call themselves Christians but this is NOT christian."
and
"I have heard of many Calvary chapels doing lots of weird things. This does not mean the church I go to does. Nor does it represent me."
It is interesting. So when somewhere in Tibet a person reacts violently, that represents Buddhism as a whole, but when the very same thing happens in the denomination of your husband, that is of course not representative for anyone.
Fact is that many Calvary Chapels have strange and inhumane practices, wherefore they cannot be called Christian if you take the standards Jesus who like the Buddha was for non-violence and peace.
(Of course, your husband will be fast in quoting the "I came to bring the sword" verses, and should your daughter turn out to be lesbian, your husband will probably not hesitate to use the sword of wrath on her!)
So you seem to agree with me that Calvary Chapel is a strange cult in which many things happen which are not according to the principles set up by Jesus. Please also tell your husband about your knowledge, for he seems to be trapped in this cult, because he gets more fanatic every week defending this church of Chuck Smith.
Moreover, you said:
"By the way, its "Gautama" NOT "Gatoma" (you mean Gotama).
While you and your husband may have more knowledge on the septuagint and other Christian nitpicking, you surely have not even the slightest basic knowledge about Buddhism.
So, here is Buddhism 101:
In Buddhism, two old dialects of Indian are used, Pali and Sanskrit.
While in Theravada Buddhism, Pali is used, in other traditions often Sanskrit is used.
The name of the Buddha in Sanskrit is "Siddharta Gautama", in Pali it is "Siddhattha Gotama".
Moreover, the sanskrit word for the teachings of the Buddha is "Dharma", in Pali it is "Dhamma".
(It is similar to British English and American English:
British people say "water" while many Americans say "wader".)
You see, Pali and Sanskrit are two dialects, and while they are very similar, they have a different way of writing words.
Therefore, your arrogant comment has no substance, as you were using the Sanskrit version and I was quoting from the Pali canon, which of course uses Pali, not Sanskrit.
Both your husband and you are in my meditation of loving kindness,
metta to you and to all who suffer,
may the wisdom of the Buddha also reach into your heart.
Jane Winsley.
Jane,
One question for you...
Do you deny Jesus Chrsit as Lord and savior?
Interesting discussion. As a former LDS missionary in Texas I can tell you that I've heard most of these arguments before and I've yet to see much come from them on either side except for some entertaining debate. I find your assumptions of postmodernism to mormons very interesting and somewhat factual depending on your definition of postmodern. I always thought that posmodernism refers to a more decentralized and media-based society spurred by economic and technoligical factors; an agenda fit for very liberal politics. Most of your assumptions point out the differences between your religion and mine calling it postmodern when in fact it is simply just modern. Mormonism was founded in the Modern Era and many principles reflect modern philosophies such as:
-Nationalism in its principles
-Democracy and freedom are embraced as principles and used in organization.
-A corporate management style (often the site of comtempt with other churches) is very effective in the LDS Church. I would argue that the LDS Church is the most well organized and wealthiest per capita church on earth.
Many other examples can be raised and you would right because this is a modern church and we believe it is THE modern church of Jesus Christ.
I forgot to bring my comdemnation staff of righteousness so I will express a compliance in the joy of religion. I know that sounds dull but I really enjoy learning about lots of religions. I've recently visited Jordan and seen many of the holy sites including Mt. Nebo, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Jordan River, and Jesus's Baptismal site and can testify that the spirit of God runs through many religions that claim their heritage in that land. After my trip, I attended my brother's Jewish wedding to a beautiful jewish girl and although he doesn't practice any religion, I saw a distinct spirit of God in that wonderful ceremony. I get a general feeling of the Divine as well in many marvelous Cathedrals in Europe. I enjoy the wondrous variety of religion among our brothers and sisters.
I, of course, choose to be LDS because I find a certain peace and joy in its teachings that can't be found else where. I know it's quirky in some eyes and abominable in others but that really doesn't matter because Mormonism is based on the faith and hearts of its members. As long as the Spirit of God exists and touches mankind, Mormonism will thrive especially since this information age leaves us longing for feelings of the heart that are reflective of our modern lives. This is a modern church and I love it. Any words against it don't really bother me because my modern heart tells in the end words don't matter as much as feelings of the heart.
Post a Comment
<< Home