LDS and Grace

[skylark1]

Thanks, Skylark, for your post. I have not reversed my position. My position is that in regard to salvation God has chosen His elect from the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4,5). That means the He chose us long before we could have had any agency or free will to choose Him. We are dead in our transgressions and sins (Ephesians 2) so that it is by his grace through faith that He saves us. Dead people do you have agency or free will.

That said, we do exercise our will to serve God and to do good works. When we are regenerated by God and come to faith we are capable of producing good works. Prior to that time all of our good works are as filty rags in God's sight (Isaiah 64:6). We are not the author and perfecter of our faith; Jesus Christ is (Hebrews 12:2).

Thank you for explaining.

Previously you wrote:

It comes down to whether I believe the Bible to be true or LDS scriptures and theology. It really is an either/or decision. As you said, it is not complicated. Either many has "agency" or he does not. If he does then LDS theology is reasonable. If he does not, biblical theology is reasonable.​

After reading your latest post, I would like to ask you to clarify what you meant this earlier post. Were you indicating that agency or free will prior to regeneration does not represent biblical theology? I understand your own beliefs about this, but would like to understand if you considered both LDS and beliefs that differ from yours to be opposed to bibical theology, or just LDS beliefs. Do you consider beliefs that differ from Calvinism concerning free will to be opposed to biblical theology?

Thanks.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Thank you for explaining.

Previously you wrote:

It comes down to whether I believe the Bible to be true or LDS scriptures and theology. It really is an either/or decision. As you said, it is not complicated. Either many has "agency" or he does not. If he does then LDS theology is reasonable. If he does not, biblical theology is reasonable.
​

After reading your latest post, I would like to ask you to clarify what you meant this earlier post. Were you indicating that agency or free will prior to regeneration does not represent biblical theology? I understand your own beliefs about this, but would like to understand if you considered both LDS and beliefs that differ from yours to be opposed to bibical theology, or just LDS beliefs. Do you consider beliefs that differ from Calvinism concerning free will to be opposed to biblical theology?

Thanks.

What I wrote was based upon the concept of LDS "agency" as I understood it. The concept that was presented to me by various LDS missionaries was that God has given man "agency" and it is entirely up to man to exercise his agency to effect his salvation (exaltation). God does not interfere in the execise of man's "agency".

I find this concept to be in contradiction with the Bible which shows an active God, not a passive God, especially in the area of salvation.

That said, it seems that I was misinformed by the missionaries and that "agency" in LDS theology is not as dominant as I was told. I am now trying to understand the intersection between grace and "agency" in LDS theology.

The same can be said concerning free will and election in Christian theology. There are many Christians who hold various views concerning the exercise of free will in salvation, but all recognize some level of divine intervention in the process. At one of of the spectrum are Arminians and at the other are Calvinists. I tend toward to the latter end, as you know, but I certainly recognize that Arminian theology is valid even though I might not agree with it.

If LDS theology is a variant of Arminian theology in its soteriology then I would not see a sharp contradiction between it and biblical theology. However, the various citations provided by Phoebe Ann, in conjunction with my convservations with various LDS missionaries have led me to believe that there is a contradiction and that LDS "agency" does differ from the Arminian understanding of both prevenient grace and of free will.

 

[skylark1]

What I wrote was based upon the concept of LDS "agency" as I understood it. The concept that was presented to me by various LDS missionaries was that God has given man "agency" and it is entirely up to man to exercise his agency to effect his salvation (exaltation). God does not interfere in the execise of man's "agency".

I find this concept to be in contradiction with the Bible which shows an active God, not a passive God, especially in the area of salvation.

That said, it seems that I was misinformed by the missionaries and that "agency" in LDS theology is not as dominant as I was told. I am now trying to understand the intersection between grace and "agency" in LDS theology.

The same can be said concerning free will and election in Christian theology. There are many Christians who hold various views concerning the exercise of free will in salvation, but all recognize some level of divine intervention in the process. At one of of the spectrum are Arminians and at the other are Calvinists. I tend toward to the latter end, as you know, but I certainly recognize that Arminian theology is valid even though I might not agree with it.

If LDS theology is a variant of Arminian theology in its soteriology then I would not see a sharp contradiction between it and biblical theology. However, the various citations provided by Phoebe Ann, in conjunction with my convservations with various LDS missionaries have led me to believe that there is a contradiction and that LDS "agency" does differ from the Arminian understanding of both prevenient grace and of free will.

Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to clearly explain and clarify your thoughts about this.

 

[HenryPorter]

You believe it to be an unbiblical concept? Well, if so, then why should I bother to explain it?


Perhaps you do actually believe this to be a "Biblical Concept". If this is what you believe, I would like to learn more about it. I would like to see if it is truely a "Biblical Concept"

I have been known to be wrong from time to time.
I have been known to learn somthing new from time to time.

Pass.

"Pass"?
Is that like the current American President voteing "Present" 130 times as a State Senator?

Perhaps it is easier to "pass" than to actually describe your theory of "orginial context and composite context"

 

[HenryPorter]

Actually, i do not have your answer yet

i have re-posted the question for your convience




Please elaborate on the non-biblical concept of "orginial and composite context" you introduced this notion to the thread, please clairify what you mean...


...Oh, and please, dont forget to elaborate on this "orginial and composite context" theory you have

Pass.

Of course they do, when used properly in both their immediate context and within the context of the composite that is the gospel.

Perhaps we are not communicating clearly.
You have posted that you will "pass" on clairifying your comments about
"orginial context and composite context".
Despite this, you continue to use a concept that you state you have chose to "pass" on describing.

Would you please help us understand you purpose and intent here

In other words, 1+1=1, whereas 1+0=0.

Your reasoning here could be described as the sum being less than the whole of its parts.
The last time I checked, 1+1=2, and 1+0=1

 

[Johan Henze]

LOL, you can't be serious! Can't you see how blind you are to your own prejudices? Look at what you just said! You are supposedly starting this thread so that we LDS—we who are active, true, current members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints—can "explain what grace and salvation mean to [us]." ... We get to explain OUR teachings... seems like a dream come true, right?

Explain: Make (an idea, situation, or problem) clear to someone by describing it in more detail or revealing relevant facts or ideas.
​

...we are going to make clear what it is we believe... we are going to engage in an expository exercise... a non-confrontational, non-proselytizing, zero-intent-to-convert, no-strings-attached, just-plain-explain what grace and salvation mean to us exposition, so that non-LDS can understand what LDS teachings mean to LDS...

And before we can even get in one single word in explanation you come right out and tell us that you are going to disagree with our teachings!?! Why would you plan on disagreeing with our teachings if we are merely going to explain them? That is preposterous! We already know that you disagree with them! And on top of that—as if that isn't outrageous enough—you couldn't even allow us to start with a clean slate—you pre-empted everything with your own quotes! You put up your favorite props before we even got on stage! And on top of all that you actually have the nerve right from the start to tell us—in this, our very own gifted thread!—that that which you've already concluded about our beliefs (that works factor into salvation or the reception of grace at all) is wrong! This is your idea of letting us explain our beliefs how we see them??? We're supposed to believe that this thread is for US to explain what WE believe? What an absolute JOKE!

I'm sorry, but I have no confidence at this point that this thread will be any different than any other thread you've started, or in which you've posted that had anything to do with the LDS religion. You've already shown and told us that it won't be any different!

---

I'm sorry that this is so loaded with emotion. I know that that is way taboo around here. But this is just over the top as far as I'm concerned. It's just too much... way too much... unbelievable even...

>>Ive learned through the years of witnessing to Jehovah,s Witnesses and Mormons :

>>In Mormonism one becomes righteous as they follow the laws and ordinances of the Mormon gospel .Many that I know personally believe they are righteous as long as they keep and receive their temple recommends.

For true Christians like us who know how impossible it is for us to become righteous , we rejoice in Christ Jesus for we have been given his righteousness

Therefore a righteous man who contains 1% of sin can never be righteous !
But hey the good news is that God send his son that you to can be found righteous through Jesus Christ !

That is true grace in action , not on what I did but what he did for you and me!

 

[TasteForTruth]

>>Ive learned through the years of witnessing to Jehovah,s Witnesses and Mormons :

>>In Mormonism one becomes righteous as they follow the laws and ordinances of the Mormon gospel .Many that I know personally believe they are righteous as long as they keep and receive their temple recommends.

For true Christians like us who know how impossible it is for us to become righteous , we rejoice in Christ Jesus for we have been given his righteousness

Therefore a righteous man who contains 1% of sin can never be righteous !
But hey the good news is that God send his son that you to can be found righteous through Jesus Christ !

That is true grace in action , not on what I did but what he did for you and me!

You have 0% understanding of grace in Mormon theology. Par for the course around here, so don't feel bad.

 

[BadWolf123]

...For true Christians like us who know how impossible it is for us to become righteous , we rejoice in Christ Jesus for we have been given his righteousness

Therefore a righteous man who contains 1% of sin can never be righteous !
But hey the good news is that God send his son that you to can be found righteous through Jesus Christ !

That is true grace in action , not on what I did but what he did for you and me!