LDS Why are Christian creeds considered abominations?

[ToBeLoved]

hey TBL. I agree that we should be willing to accept another Christian's sincerity (i.e. giving them the benefit of the doubt to some degree) and that the HS can work in the hearts of people in ways that we can't know. I think it's good that we've been able to find agreement on that.

It's a bit strange saying this, bit it's somehow fortunate and unfortunate that you've not experienced what I'm suggesting; fortunate because it's not particularly pleasant to witness people fall for formulaic expressions of faith and unfortunate because it's something that happens often and we all need to be able to recognize when it happens.

For example, the Billy Graham crusades were famous for, at times, thousands of people performing an "alter call" where they go to the front of the stage, say the prayer and wham, they're saved. They're in a huge arena, they've been pumped up on encouragement from the pastor, music, the cheering crowd, and a whole heap of prodding at their various emotional issues. But we don't see anything like that from Jesus. He was famous for telling his would-be followers to count the cost, telling a story about people laughing at embarrassed craftsmen and kings who started projects they could not finish.

To be sure there are wolves in the flock pretending to be sheep. I think there are many wolves (not talking about anyone in particular) all over. I think that wolves put themselves in position of power, purposely.

What we must do is be diligent and contest for the faith, the gospel. Each individual one of us. We cannot stop others from what they do. I wish we could.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Something similar happens with creeds. Over time they lose their meaning, made all the more difficult to realize because the words sound so true.

Other than brevity, why should we even need creeds?

But the purpose of creeds is something totally different.

Creeds are usually to show 'agreed upon tenants of the faith' and to write them down. To show unity of doctrine, whatever that doctrine is in the creed.

Now reading the specific words, I do not feel looses meaning. Because the words in a creed do not change.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Something similar happens with creeds. Over time they lose their meaning, made all the more difficult to realize because the words sound so true. It reminds me of the Isralites sacrificing animals for their sins. They were supposed to take the animal into their house for a time, feed it, take care of it and then kill it. It was meant to make the people feel genuine remorse, which it probably did at first. But, over time it became a ritual. People got used to it and the shock value wore off. It all became so much ritualistic obligation.

There is no comparison between creeds and OT animal sacrifices.

OT sacrifices by the Levitical priesthood was commanded by God. It may have served that the Israelite's thought about their sin throughout the ceremony, but God is clear that He DEMANDS blood for sin atonement.

So, He demanded blood by Jesus on the cross.

There is a verse in the Bible that explains that life is in the blood.

That is the just and righteous God, that He demands righteousness.

 

[Endtime Survivors]

There is no comparison between creeds and OT animal sacrifices.

OT sacrifices by the Levitical priesthood was commanded by God. It may have served that the Israelite's thought about their sin throughout the ceremony, but God is clear that He DEMANDS blood for sin atonement.

So, He demanded blood by Jesus on the cross.

There is a verse in the Bible that explains that life is in the blood.

That is the just and righteous God, that He demands righteousness.

Hi TBL. Sure, I understand God had a role in organizing the sacrifices. I'm talking more about the attitude of the people toward the sacrifice.

Creeds are usually to show 'agreed upon tenants of the faith' and to write them down. To show unity of doctrine, whatever that doctrine is in the creed.

Now reading the specific words, I do not feel looses meaning. Because the words in a creed do not change.

The words don't change, but the hearts of people change. Again, I feel this is why Jesus said, "this people draws near to me with their lips, but their heart is far from me". The tenants of faith are already written. That's why we have a Bible. Surely unity can be there without a selected list of verses from the Bible? And what about the parts which don't make it onto the list? I don't think I've ever seen a creed which includes something like, "We believe in working against greed and materialism, helping orphans/widows, and praying, fasting, and giving charity in secret", but those are fairly important practical teachings from Jesus.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The words don't change, but the hearts of people change. Again, I feel this is why Jesus said, "this people draws near to me with their lips, but their heart is far from me". The tenants of faith are already written. That's why we have a Bible. Surely unity can be there without a selected list of verses from the Bible? And what about the parts which don't make it onto the list? I don't think I've ever seen a creed which includes something like, "We believe in working against greed and materialism, helping orphans/widows, and praying, fasting, and giving charity in secret", but those are fairly important practical teachings from Jesus.

Why do all churches support non-profit causes then?

Should we all boast about what we do for charity in creeds? Each show the Balance Sheets as proof? The official allocation of funds?

A creed is tenants of the faith, not a charitable giving boasting club. Who gives more, who is better, ect.

Those things should not be in a creed, but in actions that show results.

 

[ViaCrucis]

But the purpose of creeds is something totally different.

Creeds are usually to show 'agreed upon tenants of the faith' and to write them down. To show unity of doctrine, whatever that doctrine is in the creed.

Now reading the specific words, I do not feel looses meaning. Because the words in a creed do not change.

When in the course of worship we, at my church, recite the Apostles' Creed we are affirming our own faith, not just as individuals, but as the people of God. And we aren't being novel or original, rather we are adding our "Amen" to what has been believed and confessed by Christians around the globe for centuries. We are participating in a confessional act that transcends just ourselves as individuals or even as a congregation; we are confessing the universal faith of the Christian Church; we are joining together with the Faithful across time and space to declare immutable truths.

That there is one God, the Father the Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
In His only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary;
Who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried. He descended into the place of the dead.
On the third day He rose from the dead, He ascended into the heavens, and sits at the right hand of the Father.
From there He shall come again, in glory, to judge the living and the dead.
In the Holy Spirit.
In the holy catholic Church.
In the forgiveness of sins.
In the resurrection of the body.
In the life everlasting.
Amen.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Endtime Survivors]

Why do all churches support non-profit causes then?

Should we all boast about what we do for charity in creeds? Each show the Balance Sheets as proof? The official allocation of funds?

A creed is tenants of the faith, not a charitable giving boasting club. Who gives more, who is better, ect.

Those things should not be in a creed, but in actions that show results.

Hi TBL. No, that's not what I was saying at all. In my explanation I actually used the word "secret". I'm not sure how you interpreted secret giving as boastful giving, except that I get the feeling you may be a little too close to the topic and it's causing you to misread what you normally would not. I've noticed you spend a good deal of time contending with LDS related topics. I've observed within myself that spending too much time on a particular issue causes me to shift into arguing from an agitated perspective without even realizing it.

Anyway, I hope I've not offended you. I look forward to chatting with you on other issues.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I was saying God is not invisible, Job was expecting to see God

"Matt 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God"

Was Jesus lying

Is God talkinig about this life, or after death?

What is this verse saying?

 

[ToBeLoved]

When in the course of worship we, at my church, recite the Apostles' Creed we are affirming our own faith, not just as individuals, but as the people of God. And we aren't being novel or original, rather we are adding our "Amen" to what has been believed and confessed by Christians around the globe for centuries. We are participating in a confessional act that transcends just ourselves as individuals or even as a congregation; we are confessing the universal faith of the Christian Church; we are joining together with the Faithful across time and space to declare immutable truths.

That there is one God, the Father the Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
In His only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary;
Who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried. He descended into the place of the dead.
On the third day He rose from the dead, He ascended into the heavens, and sits at the right hand of the Father.
From there He shall come again, in glory, to judge the living and the dead.
In the Holy Spirit.
In the holy catholic Church.
In the forgiveness of sins.
In the resurrection of the body.
In the life everlasting.
Amen.

-CryptoLutheran

They are just trying to use creeds against Christians. I'm glad you have written out what your church says. Nothing wrong there..

 

[ToBeLoved]

Hi TBL. No, that's not what I was saying at all. In my explanation I actually used the word "secret". I'm not sure how you interpreted secret giving as boastful giving, except that I get the feeling you may be a little too close to the topic and it's causing you to misread what you normally would not. I've noticed you spend a good deal of time contending with LDS related topics. I've observed within myself that spending too much time on a particular issue causes me to shift into arguing from an agitated perspective without even realizing it.

Anyway, I hope I've not offended you. I look forward to chatting with you on other issues.

As always, we walk in peace and love.

 

[DadOfFive]

1) No one holds the Apostles or Nicene Creeds to the level of Biblical Scripture. If anything they're a simple summation of the basics of the New Testament Scripture.

I challenge you to find the doctrines of the Trinity in the New Testament, namely that Jesus Christ and God the Father are of one substance. Also, I had a Baptist friend tell me I was going to hell because I didn't believe in the one substance teaching. It seems to me if creeds are being used to determine salvation vs. damnation that should be defined as scripture.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I challenge you to find the doctrines of the Trinity in the New Testament, namely that Jesus Christ and God the Father are of one substance. Also, I had a Baptist friend tell me I was going to hell because I didn't believe in the one substance teaching. It seems to me if creeds are being used to determine salvation vs. damnation that should be defined as scripture.

I don't know what your friend told you but it doesn't sound like anything I've ever heard doctrinally.

The word Trinity is not in the NT. That is our word.

 

[Jane_Doe]

I don't know what your friend told you but it doesn't sound like anything I've ever heard doctrinally.

The word Trinity is not in the NT. That is our word.

And what about his challenge: "I challenge you to find the doctrines of the Trinity in the New Testament, namely that Jesus Christ and God the Father are of one substance." ?

Are you willing to take that challenge?

 

[ToBeLoved]

And what about his challenge: "I challenge you to find the doctrines of the Trinity in the New Testament, namely that Jesus Christ and God the Father are of one substance." ?

Are you willing to take that challenge?

I think I answered that already

 

[Jane_Doe]

I think I answered that already

Post number?

 

[Hoghead1]

I challenge you to find the doctrines of the Trinity in the New Testament, namely that Jesus Christ and God the Father are of one substance. Also, I had a Baptist friend tell me I was going to hell because I didn't believe in the one substance teaching. It seems to me if creeds are being used to determine salvation vs. damnation that should be defined as scripture.

Good point. The Trinitarian formulations are largely extra-biblical in nature, relying upon Hellenic metaphysics, specifically substance metaphysics. "Ousia" or "substance" is definitely not a biblical concept. Many Christians, and this is especially true of fundamentalists, allow faith to collapse into intellectual ascent to doctrine. It really doesn't matter to God how you live, just what dogmas you believe.

 

[Hoghead1]

And what about his challenge: "I challenge you to find the doctrines of the Trinity in the New Testament, namely that Jesus Christ and God the Father are of one substance." ?

Are you willing to take that challenge?

No, of course not. "Ousia" or "substance" is not a biblical concept. It comes from Hellenic substance metaphysics.

 

[ToBeLoved]

? I don't think I've ever seen a creed which includes something like, "We believe in working against greed and materialism, helping orphans/widows, and praying, fasting, and giving charity in secret", but those are fairly important practical teachings from Jesus.

But Jesus commands us to do these things, so we all do them.

Jesus words do not be in a creed. We all follow the words of Jesus.

There are statistics of different denominations and the amount they give (overall per denomination).

Must range from 25% to 45%. The rest is usually to pay bills and mortgages on the church buildings.

So they are doing that. Not because it is not in a creed, but because it is the command of Jesus.

 

[Endtime Survivors]

But Jesus commands us to do these things, so we all do them.

This does not appear to be the same experience Jesus had. He said, "Why do you call me Lord, but do not obey me"? (Luke 6:46). In the parable at the end of matthew 7, both the wise and the foolish men heard the sayings of Jesus, but only the wise man acted on those sayings (which is why he's classified as wise).

There's lots of instances like this so it seems to me that Jesus had plenty of experience with people not doing his commands.

So they are doing that. Not because it is not in a creed, but because it is the command of Jesus.

It's interesting that you seem to be suggesting the purpose of creeds is to exclude the specifics of what Jesus told us to do in favor of highlighting more theological issues like various rituals (e.g. water baptism), miracles (e.g. the virgin birth), and the apostleship of this or that etc...

 

[Endtime Survivors]

I thought our conversation was about feeding the poor, taking care of widows, orphans?

Insofar as those things are deliberately left out of the various creeds of the Christian church, yeah that's what we were talking about. That was my point from earlier; why leave those things out? You suggested that it was because they are so obvious and Christians already do it anyway, but that hasn't been my experience, and I posted evidence from Jesus that it wasn't his experience either.

Christians don't automatically do what they're supposed to do just because they assume the name "Christian". And while church attendees perform their various tithes, that's hardly what Jesus taught. He criticized the religious people of his day for giving out of their abundance. Giving becomes just another one of the many rituals they perform week after week.

I'm sure there are sincere Christians out there giving sincerely, but there's also A LOT of Christians out there giving simply because that's what they're required to do as part of their religion, or because they like the respectability which comes from being a generous giver.

It is proven fact that Christian denominations support these things through giving and charity. Approx. 25-40 % of all monies taken in.

That may be true for some denominations but surely I'd like to see the church that gives nearly half of it's money to the poor. Also, you say it's a fact that "Christian denominations" give this amount. You don't say "some" or specify which ones; you imply that all Christian denominations fit within this category of fact, which to me is an indication that you're trying a little too hard to shore up your argument by relying on exaggeration.

But, ok, let's assume that your statistics are accurate as you've portrayed them, aren't these denominations still giving out of their abundance? Even if they were giving 90%, wouldn't that still leave 10% being held back from serving God?

It is also a proven fact that Mormonism gives LESS THAN 1 % of their mandatory tithes and offerings to any charity that is not Mormon and does not support Mormons. As a matter of fact, they hoard food, supplies and resources for themselves, besides being less than 1% charitable.

We all struggle with greed to some extent. Every human alive. Why should it matter if they don't give as much to "non-Mormon" charities? Why should it matter whether the charity is Mormon based or not? Is the money going to charity? That's the question isn't it? Or, are you suggesting the Mormon charities are not actually helping the poor, or only helping the Mormon-poor?

How much do you know about what these various Mormon charities do with the money they receive. It comes across as rather sneaky that you say they are "less than 1% charitable" as though that is the whole truth while keeping quite about the charity they give through their Mormon charities. I've very curious now as to what the percentage is which they give to Mormon based charities.

Perhaps they give so much to Mormon charities because they trust the money will be more wisely spent in those charities? You suggest they are wrong for not giving to charities which do not support the Mormon religion (part of which I made bold in your quote), but are you willing to apply that same standard to yourself? Will you donate to Mormon charities though you do not support their ways?

I originally had the impression that you were here to convince Mormons to see the error of their ways, which is fine since that is basically the goal for any human on earth; we're all supposed to be helping one another to learn and grow. But, if you use double standards (like expecting Mormons to give to charities which are anti-Mormon while those churches are not expected to donate to Mormon charities) then how can you expect them to believe that you genuinely care about them?