Not LDS here, but I have the utmost respect for every one of them I have got to know. I was broke down up in the Utah mountains, they towed my truck 37 miles with a chain to someone that would open their repair shop and fix my vehicle, stayed with me till the job was done. They would not take one penny.
I knew a lot of LDS when I lived in Az, rode horses and hunted with a lot of them.
They deserve better than to be made fun of.
I agree.
They don't need to be made fun if, but they need those who actually care enough about them to tell them about the real God of the Bible and how to be with him someday
And who says you are a spokesman for the real God? You are competing with 1500 other Christian faiths for that title who are as insistent you're wrong as you are they're wrong.
I don't see it as a competition.
What I'm sharing is a gift ...."The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.". Romans 6:23
That's One faith, regardless of what denomination may say on some other issues.
The other "faith" either adds to faith in Jesus, or takes away from Him. Those are basically the two faiths.
Grace is the kindness that God extends to us all through His Son Who purchased that gift by His own body on the cross.
When I was raised, I knew something about this, but never had anybody who took the time or knew how to show me from God's Word what He says about that.
Have you ever had that personal offer?
But others believe in the same Bible you do and see the salvific truth very differently. There is also the issue of baptism. It is an essential ordinance, but who has the authority? You see, you can't avoid the problem of "says who"?
There's lots written about baptism that clearly shows that it is not a requirement for salvation, but rather an "ordinance" if you will, or first step of obedience that is supposed to follow the gift received by faith.
The couple of references that certain sects use as their proof texts are understood by basic rules of interpretation that a teenager can learn.
For example, if the word " believe," is used in regards to Christ and His resurrection in the gospel of John alone, and it is......we should not assume that Peter is adding a new requirement of water baptism to salvation in Acts chapter two, verse 38 which is used as one of those " proof texts" for the denominations that promote works based salvation.
Except one is born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God, says Jesus to Nicodemus. And you say it's not essential to salvation? Says who? Not Jesus. Which then gets back to your authority problem: neither you or your minister have had hands laid on him (conveying authority) by anyone who themselves had authority.
Context:. He went on to explain...
"That which is
born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be
born again. ...
...so is every one that is
born of the Spirit. Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be? Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a
master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?"
Jesus is addressing a man with some credentials.
It really doesn't matter as you can read. He doesn't even understand the simple teaching as one of Israel's officially ordained master teachers.
Jesus never mentioned baptism in this passage.
He never even brings up what baptism represents.
The point Jesus is making is that this religious man with credentials needs to be born spiritually.
Jesus refers to the FIRST birth, then to the second/spiritual birth.
The First birth is "of the flesh."
It is being "born of water"and of the spirit ,
then the spirit.
The first birth most women would understand immediately. For nine months her baby is in water and the sign of birth is the breaking of water from which the child emerges. We know that is not a baby baptism, but a birth.
Nicodemus is rebuked by Jesus for not understanding the second birth. He did not even believe the earthly thing Jesus just explained about the first birth and the example of wind.
The ONLY thing he says concerning the second birth was that it was of the Spirit.
Then Jesus gives the details in vss. 14-18.
"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness,
even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be
saved.
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
If anyone had credentials, then Nicodemus and Caiaphas the High priest did.They were officially ordained by THE major recognized religion that was supposed to teach the Bible, make copies and evangelize unbelievers.
I wouldn't ask them.
Where is baptism mentioned here?What did Jesus teach Nicodemus he had to do to be saved?
