James is famous for saying that faith without works is DEAD. If you have dead faith, what have you? If you really do not have faith, will you still be saved by grace?
Always remember that Mormonism does not fit the normal Christianity saved theology of today. Mormonism is, however, able to reconcile all salvation scriptures in the NT. Christians today can not reconcile at least 1/2 of the salvation scriptures in the NT. I have tried with you and you come up with some glib explanation that makes no sense and just pass by what the Savior says. You do not even acknowledge what the Savior says because you are so blinded by what Paul says about grace.
Jesus never used the word grace once in all of his sayings. Jesus was works bound. Jesus was endure to the end bound. Jesus was, be perfect like your Father in heaven is perfect bound. Jesus was, you will be judged according to your works bound. Jesus was, if you love me keep my commandments bound. These concepts are almost repugnant to you, all because Paul says it is by grace that we are saved, not of works, lest we boast. You tear everything else out of the NT except what Paul says about grace. Nice going. Everything is grace and nothing else matters, even if Jesus said it. Grace is a part of salvation, but not the part you think it plays.
That's why I ask the question: if Jesus (not Paul) said to do A and B in order to be saved, would you do it? Guess what your answer was? Silence. Do you revere the words of Paul over the words of Jesus?
It is such a simple concept that I'm surprised you haven't answered.
So, what is it?
I'm not asking this question to argue with you whether faith alone or faith plus works is right or wrong. I'm asking---
why did JS accept something within "abominable" and/or "apostate" Christianity as the basis for mormon salvation? He accused Christianity of both, but never proved either.
No, mormonism does not fit orthodox Christianity's version of salvation, not even by those Christians who accept faith plus works. Mormonism's Jesus is an afterthought, the final salute to "after all you can do". There is no such thing within the faith plus works Christian doctrine version! Even within the faith plus works doctrine, Jesus is critically essential from the start. (Who gets the HS before first accepting Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord? Mormons.) Even within the faith plus works doctrine, no one can "work" without first being saved by Jesus,
then the HS is given. Mormonism saves long afterwards (despite church membership? Another questionable practice.) Mormons are famous for openly rejecting the "born-again" status of accepting Jesus as their Savior and Lord after the point of repentance. They are saved "gradually", it being necessary to fulfill a long laundry list of tasks first. Yet their church membership automatically puts them within a second heaven. Good grief.
Really, Peter? Where and when did you hear that we cannot reconcile all salvation scriptures in the NT, let alone the OT where its mentioned all over the place, btw? I think your defenses are nothing more than intent to divert the subject away from JS's foundational lie. Because Paul and Jesus agree perfectly on salvation. Won't work with me.
Jesus never used the word Mormon or a "restored belief in His church" either. Does that make Him any less true? (You think He would have when speaking about the latter days, being so "essential", but nowhere is either concept found throughout the entire bible. In fact, it pointedly and specifically warns of alternative false gospels coming along, offered by.... an angel of false light. That it does mention, along with false prophets and christs.) But that is besides the point here. (Remember, you were the one who ventured into that territory, not me. Don't go blaming me for it.)
Now you are putting words in my mouth when falsely accusing me of believing anything Jesus said is "repugnant". Is that an emotional defense response talking? Regardless, not very kind or honest of you. Its also overreaching, a clear indication of a weak position where I come from.
You still haven't answered why JOSEPH SMITH accepted something within an "apostate" belief that he, MEANWHILE, is also claiming is "abominable" before God. He cannot have it both ways, and neither can you. Being "close enough" isn't an answer. And my answer was not "silence". I told you
and you agreed, answer the question I asked
first and then I will answer yours. You haven't answered with any satisfaction yet. I've already informed you that what you gave was basically a "non-answer". It doesn't address the heart of the matter by any means. I'm sorry, but you simply cannot skip out on it with such a glib response.
