Wow, its been a while since I've commented on this thread. I guess I'll pick up where I left off
origamikaren: Latter Day Saints believe that we were sent to earth to try to become more like God. We were to be tested to see who would do the best they could with what they'd been given, and who would be decieved, take the easy way out, or just plain rebel (Think of Christ's Parable of the talents in the New Testament)
While of course we believe that life is a test, Reformed Christian theology differs from this. We believe that mankind was created to demonstrate God's glory: either by showing His grace and love through repentance and acceptance of Christ's gift, or by showing His perfect justice and hatred of sin. Although I might be oversimplifying when I say this, I still think its helpful to see the two perspectives as man-centered and God-centered, respectively.
origamikaren : Those who passed the test would be given more responsibilities, and more opportunities to learn and grow until they became like God, having all that he has. If you have a view of the afterlife that includes Eternal Progression, active work, and a purpose to continue existing, then you can begin to see the reasons for so many of the commandments and prophetic counsel that others see as so restricting. If you don't believe in such an afterlife, then the commandments could easily seem like "a tool to keep the masses in line." What's the point of exercising such self control if your reward is to sit around on a cloud playing a harp... as an asexual being?
I'm not sure that this is what you are saying, but I'll be clear anyway: there are more alternatives than just the LDS view of heaven, including deification and eternal progression (I think I know what you mean by that ) and believing that all we will do is become a harp-strumming cherub! I believe that we will continually grow and progress in knowledge of God and the universe and love, awe, and respectful fear of our Creator, without ever becoming like Him. This might seem like a logical fallacy, but you have to remember that God is infinite, in every sense of the word. His character can never be exhausted; no matter how long you spend in His presence, finite mortal beings can never discover everything about Him.
Origami, thanks for your explanation of the Mormon view of hell. I was really struggling to reconcile one of Ookla's earlier comments, that everyone would live in a really nice place, and the Biblical and apparently Mormon view of hell.
mtbike: the waterfall scenario is a good analogy, except for one problem. there are those who do not believe there is a waterfall and their pleasant river cruise will go on just fine, after all we scouted ahead to make sure. And we can assure you, there is no waterfall.
That would be a neat trick
But then there's this sticky issue of "salvation". What does it mean? If it means being God's inheritors, then we've got a pretty narrow definition of it—most will fall short.
I'm curious; why exactly do LDS generally define salvation as inheriting all that God has (plan of salvation) ? It seems to travel tangentially to what the common definition of salvation really is.
sal·va·tion (sāl-vā'shən)
n.
Preservation or deliverance from destruction, difficulty, or evil.
A source, means, or cause of such preservation or deliverance.
Deliverance from the power or penalty of sin; redemption.
The agent or means that brings about such deliverance.
Christianity
Deliverance from the power or penalty of sin; redemption.
The agent or means that brings about such deliverance.
[Middle English savacioun, from Old French sauvacion, from Late Latin salvātiō, salvātiōn-, from salvātus, past participle of salvāre, to save; see salvage.]
sal·va'tion·al adj.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Many born-agains believe OSAS (once saved, always saved), but I do not. We are allowed such disagreements, I believe, but I also believe that certain egregious sins (there are several lists in the New Testament) separate one from the "True Vine" and that heartfelt repentance is necessary once again in order to be restored to salvation. This is not a popular modern belief and, I believe, is the excuse many so-called believers use to practice all kinds of lawlessness (from gambling to extortion to fornication . . . see 1 Cor. 6:9 & 10 for more), yet be protected by one prayer they might have said at a young age. On that one point, I am more Mormon than modern Christian!
Oh...you're one of those
Jk. Generally I would define this as an Arminian perspective, as opposed to Reformed which I mostly always agree with. I would say that the person who prayed as an eight or nine-year old and then went right on "practicing all kinds of lawlessness" into their twenties and thirties never really repented of their sins and trusted in Christ for salvation. However, and this point must be made, I believe that God does not choose to save people because of His foreknowledge of how they would live as a Christian; grace is all undeserved. The sad truth is that some genuine born-again Christians live worse, more sin-entrenched lives than some unbelievers.
origamikarenCompare that [Mountain Meadows massacre] with the history of the Crusades, the Pogroms, and the hundreds of years of wars, rape and pillage in Europe all in the name of spreading true Christianity, not to mention the Holocaust, and I think that our fruits speak pretty well.
This is a valid point, but I think there is a difference with comparing the life of Brigham Young, probably the second-most well-known Mormon leader after Joseph Smith, with the lives of Popes and kings whom most Christians would not identify with at all and with whom many Christians might say were not born again.
In addition, I find your statement that the Holocaust was committed in the name of Christianity utterly disgusting. And I know what Hitler said about the Jews being to blame for killing Jesus.
We believe that as society and technology changes, specific church programs and traditions may need to change, but the principles they are based on do not change. The Bible has very little to say about internet pornography for instance, and modern revelation is needed to help us fight this new threat. (see http://scriptures.lds.org/a_of_f/1/8-9#8)
I would agree with everything here except your last sentence. The Bible says nothing about internet pornography, but it has lots to say about lusting after women. I don't think we face any challenges categorically different from what the Christians in ages past faced. 1 Corinthians 10:13 "No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it."
The waterfall metaphor is interesting, but still assumes that you have irrefutable evidence. More accurate would be to say that those warning of the waterfall believe that they have power that enables them to predict the future.
Eh, more like we believe the waterfall spoke to us and offered a chance to avoid it, because someone labored for years building a bridge and eventually died finishing it, but was later resurrected. And with that, the metaphor officially fails haha
I have a belief system, and morals as well. I may believe in no god, one god, or many gods. My religion is not taken seriously by, well, basically anyone. Hence I do not disclose it. If I were to disclose it on this thread, I'm sure that some of you would look it up and point out its doctrinal holes. My religion is cheese. Or gravy. Maybe it's cheese and gravy.
Two guesses: the Great Pumpkin or Chuck Norris.