Wednesday, 06 May 2009
-
The sinners prayer - are you saved ?
Please see also : How to produce a false convert
Joh 17:3
And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.Soli Deo Gloria
Post a Comment
- Back to PerilousTimes's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in PerilousTimes's local time zone: GMT 0:00 (Greenwich Mean - Lisbon, Dublin, London)



Comments (25)
@J_Goldens_Shadow - Eh ???
@PerilousTimes - Qualifications for salvation, what we need to do and who has the authority to do it.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - we need to do something ???what do we need to do exactly ?
@PerilousTimes - The Savior said that if we want to see the Kingdom of God, we needed to be born again. To enter we must be baptized. Who can baptize? One who is called of God like Aaron was. Now, I'm going to let you reach the conclusion: How was Aaron called?
@J_Goldens_Shadow - said : " To enter we must be baptized "
Would that not count as a "work" ?
.
@PerilousTimes - It's faith in action.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - So, if someone has faith but does not get baptised, lets say for instance they die before they get the chance, does that mean that they will enter ?
If "Yes" then baptism is not what saves us and is not necessary.
If "No" then that would deny Ephesians 2:8-9.
.
@PerilousTimes - 1 Corinthians 15:29
@J_Goldens_Shadow - What does the Apostle Paul condemning the practice of baptism for the dead, have to do with my last comment ???
.
@PerilousTimes - Paul is actually questioning the logic of the Corinthians by asking them that if there was no such thing as a literal resurrection of the body, then why are they performing baptisms in proxy? If there is no resurrection there is no need for baptism. But there is a resurrection and, therefore, a need for baptism. There are many people who do die without even hearing the name of Jesus Christ. Because of this doctrine, they are given that opportunity. In other words, it has everything to do with your last comment.
Jesus is what saves us, however it is not a one step only thing. It starts with faith, moves us to repent, to exercise that faith further by being baptized, by receiving the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. Being "saved" is not a one time only deal. It's everyday. We must repent everyday. We sin after we're baptized, but we have the opportunity to renew the covenants we make when we are baptized. Not by being baptized again, but through another ordinance. However, like I pointed out earlier, someone with real authority, someone called like Aaron, must be the one to administer those ordinances.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - Sigh!!....Mormon false doctrine...Please read this verse :
Rom 5:1 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
Notice the word "have" we have peace with God and assurance of salvation as soon as we have faith in the true Jesus of the bible...no need for works and 100% forgiveness of sins..now that is good news !!
Please watch this short video :
Click Here
thanks
@PerilousTimes - False Apostate Doctrine!
When viewed in context, the Corinthians, like I said, did not believe in a literal resurrection of the body. The Corinthians did, however, perform baptisms for their dead. Paul told them that they shouldn't be performing those baptisms if they didn't even believe in a resurrection (which is clear that you don't either). Christ was resurrected, why would we not be? Christ was baptized, it says, to "Fulfill all righteousness". He was perfect. Christ also said that the wise "Hear my words and DO them". That requires faith to be a verb, which means action must be done. Baptism is a form of faith in action. Baptism for the dead is faith in action. Why must there be baptisms for the dead? Because a baptism must be performed in this life, but if you never had the opportunity, someone needs to do it in your place.
Your comments based on what you have written both here and on my post, you are right. We do not believe in the same God. Your god is vengeful, and only will select a few people to live with him. My God is a loving Father who sent His Son so that ALL may have the opportunity, living or dead.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - said : " Why must there be baptisms for the dead? Because a baptism must be performed in this life, but if you never had the opportunity, someone needs to do it in your place."
That is false Mormon doctrine...Did you watch the video ?
.
@PerilousTimes - I did. And yet I found that it shows exactly what you know about the Bible: little to nothing at all.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - Said : " I did. And yet I found that it shows exactly what you know about the Bible: little to nothing at all. "
The video was about Mormon false doctrine and I notice you did not refute any of the allegations made against your chosen false religion, that has another Jesus,Gospel and Spirit.
.
@PerilousTimes - "Mormonism" can defend itself. None of the arguments presented there are new. I've brought up many of the points in the video in older posts from at least 2 years ago. I'm sorry, sir, but why should I waste my time answering that video when it's already been answered?
@J_Goldens_Shadow - Said: " Mormonism" can defend itself. "
How does Mormonism defend the false prophecies of Joseph Smith these days ? Here is an example of one :
". . .I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left . . . " (History of the Church, vol. 5, p. 394). "
And this nugget of truth from the false prophet himself :
" Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon who dress like Quakers and live to be nearly 1000 years old. ...Since he was wrong about the moon, is it safe to trust him regarding the way to Heaven?.... (The Young Woman's Journal, vol. 3, p. 263-264. See reprint in Mormonism -- Shadow or Reality? by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, p. 4.)
.
@PerilousTimes - Missouri: Ever hear of a little conflict called the "Civil war"?
Quakers in the Moon: There are two things I want to address here. 1) A prophet is only a prophet when acting as such. It was his personal opinion. Prophets are allowed that. 2) you rely on the Tanners as a source? They have been debunked many times over.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - Said : " Missouri: Ever hear of a little conflict called the "Civil war"? "
The prophecy by smith was : " unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers "...." the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left "
The government did not and was not destroyed.
Interesting you bring up the civil war, this reminds me of another false prophecy smith made .." it says, "and the Southern states will call upon other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations." The South did call upon Great Britain for help, but Great Britain did not get involved in the Civil War, nor did Great Britain call on other nations "in order to defend themselves" and war was not "poured out upon all nations" as a result of the Civil War. LDS often claim that the Civil War was the beginning of World Wars I and II. But, there is no more relationship between the Civil War and World Wars I and II than there is between the Spanish-American War and the Vietnam War! " D&C 87
One more for Mormonism to defend itself " In 1835 Joseph Smith prophesied that the coming of the Lord was near and that fifty-six years should wind up the scene. In the History of the Church, volume 2, page 182, we read as follows: "President Smith then stated ... it was the will of God that those who went to Zion, with a determination to lay down their lives, if necessary, should be ordained to the ministry, and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, or the coming of the Lord, which was nigh—even fifty-six years should wind up the scene."
Since this did not happen and smith (the founder of your religion thought that men lived on the moon dressed like Quakers)...when will you awake from your sleep and accept the very obvious fact, that smith was a false prophet that Jesus told us to watch out for ?
Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
.
@PerilousTimes - It's funny that you take into account that the source that you used did not even use the full context. Oh well. Look here and here for answers on the civil war.
Joseph Smith did make several interesting statements about seeing the Savior. B.H. Roberts in
History of the Churchnotes the Prophet's remark in 1835 when he is reported to have said that. In Feb 1835, fifty six years in the future was February 1891. This would be shortly after Joseph's 85th birthday (he was born 23 December 1805). He made references to that since he received the revelation that is now recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 130. However, he still wasn't entirely sure if that was the day the Savior was to return. In fact, he expressed his uncertainty in Section 130 by recording, "I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and this see his face. I believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time". He was right.
If this prophecy is read in its entirety, instead it being an "unfulfilled prophecy" as asserted by you, it actually testifies to the truthfulness of the mission and prophetic stature of the Prophet Joseph Smith. No man knows the exact time the Savior will return, and Joseph Smith never claimed to.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - There are more false prophecies for you to attempt to sweep under the rug, so to speak, and they can be found HERE.
However I want to take this conversation in a different direction for a while in an attempt to try to get you to admit you are following a lie.
Which account of the first vision are you now currently believing in please ?
1) I received the first visitation of Angels which was when I was about 14 years old.
Joseph Smith
Joseph Smith’s Diary 1835-1836
An American Prophet’s Record: The Diaries and Journals of Joseph Smith
Page 59
--------------------------------------------------------
2) It commenced by an angel of God flying through the midst of heaven and visiting a young man named Joseph Smith, in the year 1827.
Wilford Woodruff
Journal of Discourses
Volume 13 Page 324
1869
--------------------------------------------------------
3)
How did this state of things called Mormonism originate?We read that an angel came down and revealed himself to Joseph Smith and manifested unto him in vision the true position of the world in a religious point of view.He was surrounded with light and glory while the heavenly messenger communicated these things unto him, after a series of visitations and communications from the Apostle Peter and others who held the authority of the holy Priesthood, not only on the earth formerly but in the heavens afterwards.
John Taylor
Journal of Discourses
Volume 10 Page 127
1863
------------------------------------------
4) Some one may say, “If this work of the last days be true, why did not the Saviour [sic] come himself to communicate this intelligence to the world?”Because to the angels was committed the power of reaping the earth, and it was committed to none else.
Orson Hyde
Journal of Discourses
Volume 6 Page 335
1854
---------------------------------------------
5) Just as it was when the Prophet Joseph asked the angel which of the sects was right that he might join it.The answer was that none of them are right.What, none of them?No.We will not stop to argue that question; the angel merely told him to join none of them that none of them were right.
John Taylor
Journal of Discourses
Volume 20 Page 167
1879
------------------------------------------------------------
1820 – 1838 The first vision consisted of angels only.
1842 The introduction of the “God the Father and Jesus the Son” version of the first vision.
1838 – 1890 The first account of “angels only” continued to linger on in spite of the new 1842 version.
1890 – Present The “God the Father and Jesus the Son” version is the only one accepted (and most Mormons today don’t even know about the whole “angels only” version).
To view a downloadable, easy to read, superbly detailed, full-color pamphlet on the various versions of the first vision Click Here
.
@PerilousTimes - My goodness, the unoriginality never ceases. These are some of the easiest ones to answer. But I won't. I'll let someone else do it for me, just to show you that none of what you have brought up is new, and that the honest in heart will not just take your word or mine for what is truth, but the Lord's. I will say this, though: Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ. He established a Church built on a foundation of Apostles and Prophets, with Christ being the Chief Cornerstone. Jesus the Christ showed us the way to return to our Father, if we so choose. He called and ordained Apostles to carry on the work when He ascended, and to continue until He returned.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - The link you posted failed to give an adequate answer why smith first of all said he was visited by angels then later on it was changed to God and Jesus.
@PerilousTimes - If you looked on the links on that page, it went over every single quote you posted. But then again, you could always go straight to the source about it from the Journal of Discourses. That way you can see the context for yourself. It still does not change the fact that the sources you rely on twist the truth. The link I just posted in this reply has the quotes in their context; you will see that once the infamous "..." is taken away, it means something completely different.
@J_Goldens_Shadow - I maintain that those links you posted did not give an adequate and logical response. They merely danced around the subject then changed it in order to confuse the reader and make them think that they had answers.
Nonetheless I was wondering if any of those Mormon websites had an explanation why Mormons teach that Adam is God ?
I look forward to hearing a simple and logical explanation to this one, thanks.