But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to desire her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matt 5:28)This doesn't really sound to me like justification that all men are obviously adulterers because they are all gawking at women to have sex with them. Indeed, it is the opposite intention. It is not enough to simply not have sex with women with whom you are not married, but your heart must be true to your spouse, and have no desires to anyone else.
Shawn's justification, and he says it every time the issue of his past sins are brought up, is that everyone lusts after women. It's as natural as breathing. Some have stepped up to Shawn's defense, saying he is just not expressing himself well.
I think that is pure bunk.
Shawn went out of his way last week to indicate that he still is very much an unrepentant sinner. Lest I be accused of inaccurately paraphrasing him, here is a transcript of a portion of his monologue:
Shawn McCraney, the man sitting right in front of you, right now, here, on the stage now, is, not was, is, a selfish alcoholic, he is a prescription drug addict, he is a rabid adulterer, a sexual deviant, and a violent man. If you need to see me in my flesh as anything else, you've got your wires crossed. And if you want me to reassure you of anything otherwise, it's not going to happen. Right now in my body, in my flesh and bone, live all things vile.I have never written anything this harsh about Shawn.
Notice he said that he "is, not was, is" still the same man inside he has always been. This could not be any clearer of a statement of what separates Shawn from both the God of the Bible and the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. The God of the Bible explicitly heals the heart of these motives, and commands all men everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30) that is they must turn their mind, learn to hate the thing they loved, change their motives and stop committing the act.
The good person out of the good treasury of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasury produces evil, for his mouth speaks from what fills his heart. Luke 6:45
3 ¶ Commit thy works unto the LORD, and thy thoughts shall be established. Prov 16:3
Throw away all your sins you have committed and fashion yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! Why should you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I take no delight in the death of anyone, declares the sovereign Lord. Repent and live! Eze 18:31-32This is the Hebrew word "repent", and the idea is to turn away from evil, return again to God.
14 Their eyes, full of adultery, never stop sinning; they entice unstable people. They have trained their hearts for greed, these cursed children!"But", you say, "Shawn is not succumbing to these sins."
18 For by speaking high-sounding but empty words they are able to entice, with fleshly desires and with debauchery, people who have just escaped from those who reside in error.
19 Although these false teachers promise such people freedom, they themselves are enslaved to immorality. For whatever a person succumbs to, to that he is enslaved. 2 Pet 2:14, 18-19
Yes, he is. For a man cannot be committing adultery in his heart, and not be guilty of the sin.
Jesus' way is much different. And I think these interactions over the past while between Shawn and others does illustrate the real reasons Shawn is not LDS: Ravening guilt. The very first step to repenting is recognition of a wrong, followed by a desire to cease from doing it. In drug treatment we called it hitting bottom. You can't make a person change who doesn't want to change. Temptation is that friend who hates us, but whom we love. Until we see sin as our enemy, we are destined to the reward of the sinner:
Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? (Rom 6:16)
Do not lust in your heart after her beauty or let her captivate you with her eyes (Prov 6:25)
So which is it? Does God give us commandments which are impossible to keep, but looks the other way at the sins such commandments create, or, does God provide a means to keep such commandments, and escape to righteousness?
No trial has overtaken you that is not faced by others. And God is faithful: He will not let you be tried beyond what you are able to bear, but with the trial will also provide a way out so that you may be able to endure it.(1Cor 10:13)
Shawn may just be a klutz with words, but I don't think so. Read and watch what he said. There has been no cleansing of his heart, no change of attitude toward sin. None. He said if he were to get going, he is capable of almost any sin even this day.
Such is not the way of Jesus, the teachings of the Bible, the lamp of the Spirit.
But as for the seed that landed on good soil, these are the ones who, after hearing the word, cling to it with an honest and good heart, and bear fruit with steadfast endurance. (Luke 8:15)
Now that you have purified your souls by your obedience to the truth so that you have genuine mutual love, love one another deeply from the heart.(1Pet 1:22)Let's close with this truth, so obvious it is found in Proverbs, or those sayings so true they are considered obvious:
The one who has a perverse heart does not find good, and the one who is deceitful in speech falls into trouble.It is not possible to be unrepentant, unconverted in heart, and be saved.
Therefore, remember from what high state you have fallen and repent! Do the deeds you did at the first; if not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place – that is, if you do not repent.(Rev 2:5)Notice this verse teaches a fully LDS and Biblical concept: Do what is right, change your heart so to hate sin, or suffer condemnation and loss of salvation.
19 comments:
Why are you posting another blog that pretty much says the exact same thing as the previous one?
Seriously, Bob is still missing the point.
Anyone reading this with an eye and heart for truth should go and read the comments in the previous blog.
Once again, the point Shawn was making completely soared over Bob's head. Watch the episode for yourself. It's the episode on Reed Smoot, and I believe it's episode 190. Go to HOTM.TV
These last two blogs just reek of ad-hominem. Why are you so obsessed with Shawn's sins? Because it's the only way you can reconcile your beliefs in the face of the inundation of truth that shoots apart your precious religion? It's even sadder how you continue to attack him when you're not even coming close to comprehending what he's saying. So you're missing the point and writing hundreds of words attacking what you do not understand, making Shawn's position weaker than it is. Oh wait, that sounds an awful a lot like Strawman...
I find it humorous that you say LDS suffer condemnation and loss of salvation. When everyone is 'saved' in Mormon theology. Just how perfect does a Mormon have to be to be worthy of salvation Bob? Perfect Temple attendance? No sin in their heart? Perfect home teaching? Just have to be trying? Or does just having done the rights and ordinances of the Mormon Gospel enough? Does your term of salvation mean living with God or not?
I've met and know many people that believe in Mormonism that do not even come close to what you're saying is required for 'salvation'. So what happens to them? Some I have known have actually committed adultery, and not just in their hearts. They say they're saved, and at worst they'll be in the middle kingdom. That still qualifies as saved in Mormonism, doesn't it? So how do they lose salvation Bob? Again, I think you're grossly misrepresenting your religion to make it look better than it actually is. I've never met a perfect Mormon, and I sure have known many Mormons that are as 'bad of sinners' as Shawn. I've known Mormons that are addicted to prescription meds, they try to do better, try to repent, but they can easily fall back into it. Do they lose their salvation? What if they have a moment of weakness, like they have before, and die from an overdose. Where are they going? Do they actually lose their salvation like you're saying?
What I see is that you have this double standard for people outside your religion and those inside it. People inside Mormonism who have failings but are trying will be fine, right? But if a Christian says their a sinner saved by Grace, and they try and fail, they lose their salvation? It makes a whole lot of sense...
That being said, since leaving Mormonism and becoming a Christian, I am a significantly better person than I ever was as a Mormon, and I was a good Mormon. Yet the things that I could never really overcome as a Mormon started coming very easily to me after I was born again. It wasn't me improving, it was God's spirit in me improving me. Changing me so fundamentally that I could never do it on my own. The glory is his and his alone for any good that comes from me. Yet I still stumble, never as bad as I would as a Mormon, but I repent and ask for more help from God in certain areas, but I'm still just a sinner saved by Grace.
You know Bob, the truth is that you will attack Shawn McCraney with anything you can think of, or get your hands on, because he is publicly revealing the truth about the Mormon church and its history and you can't handle that. The reason why Mormons have a hard time with the truth about their church is because they don't want to face the fact that they have been living a lie their entire lives. They also don't want to give up the (wrongful) idea that they have the only truth and that they are the elite, above everyone else because it feeds the ego. It's garbage!
Anonymous,
First of all, I have not been a lifetime Mormon, so don't try to put some decision-by-birth guilt trip on me. Nothing could be further from the truth. I made a very, very serious decision and commitment after examining both the physical and spiritual evidence.
Secondly, you are the one who keeps missing the point on Shawn. He claims that the fruit of being born again is an accurate understanding through enlightenment of the Spirit, and for him that is the proof of the truthfulness of his decision. So notice my "attack" is not on Shawn personally, it is all about his misrepresentation about Biblical doctrine.
And candidly, no one is capable of doing ad hominem on Shawn ever again after his own personal remarks about himself. The proof of the false nature of his doctrinal standpoint is HIS position that he can continue to be a gross and unrepentant sinner in his heart while also being saved. I am the first to acknowledge that I continue to sin. But it is not in my heart to sin, it is the natural man who plagues me. At the same time, however, I could never return to the man I was before I met God through the Spirit, and changed my life. My heart is not lusting after other women, nor do I seek to party like a rock star. I find peace with God, and my heart, as the scriptures teach, has been changed.
Shawn specifically said that has not happened to him. That makes his doctrine false, and just a self-justification for allowing sin to remain unrepented of in his life. I am not saying don't believe it because Shawn is a raging sinner. I am saying that his doctrine, which he illustrated with his life, is false and not worthy of acceptation. Do you know the definition of ad hominem, because you seem to be missing the point. Sorry,
Bob
Hey Bob,
I always enjoy your post. You know what's really funny? I e-mailed Shawn when he first started his little show. I e-mailed him roughly 45-50 times since and all I get from him is one sentence responses which have nothing to do with my responses to his claims.
Shawn claims he went to "ministry school" But he really isn't a theologian at all. Shawn is just miserable and try's to build himself up while tearing others down.
In closing some people who watch Shawn are really gullible if they believe everything that Shawn says about the Mormons.
Shawn mixes everything. He speaks probably 10 percent truth and 90 percent lies just like all the other anti-mormons who claim they are former members. I also like when people say they were good mormons when they decided to leave the LDS Church.
Take care Bob.
"And candidly, no one is capable of doing ad hominem on Shawn ever again after his own personal remarks about himself."
That's not how ad hominem works... What you are attempting to do against Shawn is still ad hominem. No matter what, end of story, period. Even if he was a convicted murderer and has physically stepped out on his wife multiple times, that doesn't make the facts he shares on HOTM about Mormonism less true or unreliable.
That being said, I just remembered how his wife and daughters talked about how Shawn had changed after his Born-Again experience. They were saying that he is a much better father and husband since coming to Christ than he ever was as a Mormon. So, there is another aspect you're missing.
So how can Shawn be as bad a person as he was before, but the loved ones around him say he's a better, more loving husband and father? Maybe something is going on, maybe the Sprit of God's Grace is doing something within Shawn that makes him better man? Yet if he didn't have that, he would be in his flesh and be as bad as ever. That's all he's saying. It's the spirit of Grace that keeps him doing good. He's giving the glory to God, and humbling himself.
This isn't rocket science, I'm failing to see why it's so hard for you to grasp.
Anon,
Everyone can get smarter with time, especially self-destructive people who pull back from the edge. Literally nothing magical here, especially since Shawn acknowledges that his deepest, most horrible moments, including contemplation of suicide and the adultery against his wife, took place AFTER he was born again. People do change with time, but being born again, when compared against Shawn's own timeline, had nothing to do with Shawn changing.
No, you keep confusing the issues here. I am certain you cannot find a single instance where I bring Shawn's character into play as a substitute for facts concerning the speciousness of his doctrinal leanings. I do believe Shawn teaches what he does out of a need for self-justification because of his inner unchanged carnality. However, my attacks have been on the doctrinal failings of Shawn's position and their lack of Biblical support.
I get that Shawn is saying it is the Spirit of Grace keeping his carnality in check. You don't seem to get, (and I deduce that from your total lack of scriptural support for Shawn's position) that the Bible doesn't teach only people with the Spirit are the only good people in the world with good hearts and intentions. You can't support that position. Instead the Bible commands us to change our hearts, repent, and yes, accept the new heart the Spirit gives us. But that new heart is not there solely because of the Spirit imposing it upon us. It is there because we respond to the call to change, and let the Spirit work in us. We can reject that call and Spirit, as Jesus lamented often of the Jews.
I think Shawn is nothing more or less than Shawn. But his doctrine is confused, unBiblical and leads people to hell. So I don't think you should follow Shawn. But not because he is a bad or good guy, but because he teaches false doctrine.
You are so off base... I don't even know where to start.
Follow Shawn? I don't follow Shawn... That is ridiculous. That is one of the most idiotic things I have ever read from you, and I've read a lot of them.
Scriptural support was given in your last blogs comments.
It leads people to hell? There isn't a hell in Mormonism genius. If you are right, the worst thing that could happen is we are in the middle kingdom. Which is still considered heaven...
You're reading comprehension is so sorely lacking it's pointless having a 'conversation' with you. He's not teaching false doctrines, you're just not understanding what he meant. Big difference there.
Genius? You've been peeking into my medical file again, haven't you?
D&C 76:103 These are they who are liars, and sorcerers, and adulterers, and whoremongers, and whosoever loves and makes a lie.
104 These are they who suffer the wrath of God on earth.
105 These are they who suffer the vengeance of eternal fire.
106 These are they who are cast down to hell and suffer the wrath of Almighty God, until the fulness of times, when Christ shall have subdued all enemies under his feet, and shall have perfected his work;
Well, I probably won't accuse you of being a genius for missing such an obvious statement in LDS scripture. Doesn't really sound like a nice, mild place either. And it is not the "middle kingdom" either. But then, you as a former Mormon are disclosing just how little about the Church you knew as you made your informed consent out of the Church.
Please, on scriptural support you cite MOSIAH and one verse in 1 Cor 15:10 with no context to the conversation. But let's look at the Mosiah verses. In vs.2 King Benjamin notes: "O have mercy, and apply the atoning blood of Christ that we may receive forgiveness of our sins, and our hearts may be purified;"
What does Mosiah says happens to one's heart when the atonement is applied and men repent?
1 Cor 15:10 has nothing to do with a discussion of ongoing carnality of human beings. He is saying that but for Grace, he would have been lost, and therefore it is the result of that grace which was the belief of the hearers, as verse 11 notes, it did not matter who preached, they believed.
Please produce something comparable from the Bible refuting the explicit verses I produced. I mean seriously, what do you think you demonstrated? Context dude! Your verse says nothing about the state of one's heart, has no extended context from the passage. It is simply a cherry pick on your part with you imputing a ton of your theological perspective in the passage. It's called eisegesis on your part. I cite the parable of the sower, multiple verses long, exactly on topic. I cited multiple proverbs, again exactly on topic. Likewise the passages from Ezekiel, 2 Peter and Romans are all directly talking about the source of people's motives.
Oh well, I enjoy your spunk. "You've got spunk. I hate spunk." (Lou Grant, Mary Tyler Moore show).
Stay spunky.
Here are additional verses which support the concept that not all people are "evil" in heart, at least not in any kind of absolute sense especially when considering the conversion one is to experience as part of coming to God, when our hearts are purified and can become a well of goodness.
This is the heart of the matter of my disagreement with Shawn's "I'm a sinner only kept in check by Grace" philosophy. You are not kept in "Check", you are purified and changed. When you sin, and everyone will, we have a chance to repent and seek forgiveness through the atonement of Christ, our Advocate with the Father. Shawn is comfortable giving credit to God for him not actively engaging in the desires of his heart. But that IS the proof that he has a false Gospel and a false theology. If he were converted, those desires in his heart, which he emphasized are still there, would be gone, and the desire for sinning would be the exception, not the standing rule.
Prov 16:29
29 ¶ A violent man enticeth his neighbour, and leadeth him into the way that is not good.
Prov 12:2
2 ¶ A good man obtaineth favour of the LORD: but a man of wicked devices will he condemn.
Rom 2:10
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
Acts 10:22
22 And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.
Matt 13:15
15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
John 12:40
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
Acts 28:27
27 For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
Anonymous, Shawn and everyone else, return to the Church of Jesus Christ and be healed. This is a false doctrine that you must live with a monster trying to destroy you constantly. A healed heart finds peace in God, and does not constantly contemplate evil.
You have so severely missed the point I am hesitant to even continue going on with this. Your whole concept and attack is wrong. You've set up a straw-man and are bludgeoning it with all you have. Shawn isn't celebrating sin, he isn't unrepentant, he isn't going against the verses you use. And that's even if you have correctly applied them, which I doubt you have. The whole point is mute, because you're attacking what isn't based in reality.
"D&C 76:103 These are they who are liars, and sorcerers, and adulterers, and whoremongers, and whosoever loves and makes a lie."
Not applicable to Christians, see verses 75-79. And the verse right above the ones you used, verse 101 says "But received not the gospel, neither the testimony of Jesus, neither the prophets, neither the everlasting covenant. Christians at the very least received the testimony of Jesus and ancient prophets. And they are surely not liars, sorcerers, adulterers, or whoremongers. Now that I think about it though, sounds like Joseph Smith and many other early church leaders could very well be going there though.
"What does Mosiah says happens to one's heart when the atonement is applied and men repent?"
Are you implying that once they atonement is applied and they repent that you no longer remain humble and give God the glory for what he has done and will do with and within you? That it's okay to become prideful and become delusional of our sinful nature?
"1 Cor 15:10 has nothing to do with a discussion of ongoing carnality of human beings."
Once again, missed the point. It's an example showing how God's spirit of Grace works within believers. That we give the glory to God for the good we do. That's what Paul is saying there. Clearly... It says "but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me." It's pretty easy to see what is being said there... Paul is saying he didn't labour, but the grace of God did. Giving Him all the credit for everything. Besides, there were other good examples of scriptures given by others. But you probably missed the point with them too...
This whole thing is going beyond ridiculous. Again, your whole premise is faulty. You're completely misrepresenting what Shawn said on the show, and not even taking into account what he has said previously on his beliefs and life. From this faulty premise you're declaring things that are not even relevant, so why should I waste time going into all these red herrings?
Continued below:
For example, you said: "Does Shawn really think he can study his way into a manifestation of the Spirit and Jesus, and that he can study his way into having the Spirit dwell in us?"
Shawn doesn't say that as Christians we don't have a spiritual confirmations similar to a burning in the bosom, but just that we can't rely on that solely as a measure of truth, like Mormons do. That is all he is saying. Yes, Christians can have a 'burning in the bosom' but if the 'feeling' or 'spiritual confirmation' flies in the face of scripture and reality, we don't follow it. We test the feeling because "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jer 17:9. We take into account many aspects when confirming truth above and beyond just a strong and emotional feeling. So once again, you're misrepresenting what he is saying and making it appear weaker than it actually is. It's so incredibly deceitful what you do. You're writing is littered with stuff like this and is full misinformation and misrepresentation.
"But then, you as a former Mormon are disclosing just how little about the Church you knew as you made your informed consent out of the Church."
Does that make you feel better about your choice to support and defend a false gospel? Do you have a seer stone and can see my whole life and why I left the church now? How else could you see how much or how little I know? Your application of D&C 76 is no where official, as I have shown above there is quite a bit of interpretation available there. And so many people do not fall into that category that is pointless as a Mormon to threaten hell and loss of salvation to others. Especially those who would typically read your blog. But what makes you judge, jury, and executioner now? Everyone that disagrees with you is going to hell now? That Christians are going to hell? I was taught D&C 76 by men I highly respected, and I would lean towards their interpretation before I would ever consider yours. And what they taught is what I am representing. They would never say someone like me would be going to any sort of hell. It would be the middle kingdom if anything, and that goes for the majority of Christians.
Thank you though, you constantly reaffirm that I did the right thing leaving Mormonism. Because with all the many flaws in your writing with the poor scholarship, lack of comprehension, and faulty logic, I realize just how grateful I am for having turned away from all this mess of a religion and coming into a relationship with the real Christ Jesus who feeds with salvation and peace unrealizable in Mormonism. I'm so glad to be free of the bondage of a man made church that leads to damnation.
Okay... you want more scriptures. This section of Romans 7:7-25 perfectly illustrates struggling with sin. Paul even goes so far to say "O wretched man that I am!" in verse 24. In 18 he says "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing. This is an apostle of God saying this. I don't see how much clearer it can get.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this attitude. And the fact you mock it so, perfectly reflects how un-Christian Mormonism truly is and how far off based you are in this attack against Shawn.
7What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
Anon wrote:
"Shawn doesn't say that as Christians we don't have a spiritual confirmations similar to a burning in the bosom, but just that we can't rely on that solely as a measure of truth, like Mormons do."
Actually, when asked how he knew the Bible was true, he explicitly said there is no burning in the bosom:
[caller Jessie]"How do you know the Bible is true?
[Shawn] "Well, one, the Bible is supported by evidence; and the evidence is profound. Not only external evidence, Jessie, but internal evidence. Prophecies fulfilled; continuity between the books, between authors who didn't know each other; So I read and study the Bible which I believe is God's word. What I find in those books testifies to me by the holy Spirit that what is being said is true. Now it's not a feeling, it's just a testifying through the evidence placed before me in the word of God that it is right and true. Then we test the word, and see if what the word says is right. So by those means I know what I am talking about is truth. However, there are differences of opinion within the body of Christ...those are not on the core issues...When it comes to knowing without question something, the only thing you can know without question is the Lord Jesus Christ, because he is truth, without shadow, without variance, 100%. He said 'I am truth', capital 'T'...
[Jessie] "Through the fruits of the spirit, you can know the Bible is true?"
[Shawn]"The fruits of the Spirit, that would help, yes, but it's a combination of all those things...Never in scripture does God ask you to test his word to see if its true...Feelings are not trustworthy Jessie, not trustworthy my friend"
Is this one of those minor variations Shawn is referencing? I mean, you were directly contradicted by Shawn on 11-3-09. He explicitly states such feelings are not part of the testimony given by the Spirit. Of course, without feelings it is impossible to have a sure knowledge of Jesus. Everything Shawn espouses is intellectual, subject to deception. Spirit to spirit testimony, as described in BoM and the Bible is the only reliable way to truth.
Lest the critical line got missed, here:
[Shawn]"So I read and study the Bible which I believe is God's word. What I find in those books testifies to me by the holy Spirit that what is being said is true. Now it's not a feeling, it's just a testifying through the evidence placed before me in the word of God that it is right and true."
"Now, it is not a feeling..." seems pretty clear. It is the evidence God puts in front of you. How special! The celestial lottery continues! If you are reading and no evidence falls into your lap at that time, I guess we can believe there is no truth in the Bible, according to Shawn's criteria.
This is literally absurd.
"Prove all things, hold fast that which is good." Seems like a command to recognize scripture as truth. "Did not our hearts burn within us...", as a testimony of scripture.
Good thing the Spirit is something you have to figure out. As a simple Mormon, such effort seems ineffective at best, and easily deceived at worst.
Ouy!
"Is this one of those minor variations Shawn is referencing? I mean, you were directly contradicted by Shawn on 11-3-09."
Missed the point...
I said test the feelings with the Bible. Not use feelings for the Bible's authorship, accuracy, or that it's true.
For example if I got a really strong warm fuzzy feeling do something like steal, kill, have adultery, and that doing so is okay, then I would test the feeling against what the Bible says, and of course it says to not do those things. That's all I was meaning.
I've 'felt the spirit' reading the Bible, listening to sermons, and listening to music, and that does play a part in my testimony. I've heard Shawn say something similar to that also. Couldn't find a quote though. It's just that if I have feelings as my ONLY sole source of truth, then we can run into problems. As Christians, we base it on more than just feelings. That's all I'm saying.
Anon,
You can't keep saying "Missed the Point" when you get it wrong. One of the reasons I put transcripts up is because it allows one to see exactly what Shawn, or anyone for that matter, is talking about. Shawn is not talking about scholarship. Where do you get that? Shawn specifically says there are no such thing as spiritual confirmation about the truth of the Bible. And the Bible never teaches to test your feelings against its text. The exact opposite occurred for the two disciples on the road to Emmaus.
Luke 24:32
32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
Why did their heart burn, or why did they have feelings? Not because they were testing those feelings against scripture, but because their feelings were confirming what was being explain from scripture was in fact true.
Shawn asserts such a confirmation is impossible. God puts physical proof in front of you as you study is how the spirit confirms things. He said it, and I transcribed it word for word. So whether your point was slightly nuanced from Shawn or not, it doesn't matter since it is unBiblical. It also misses the point of what was being asked. Jessie asked how does he know the Bible is TRUE. Same question to you: How do you know it is true? When you remove the testimony of the burning bosom which is only experienced, as on the road to Emmaus, when confirming truth, then you have no means of discerning truth.
Most anti's error by not understanding the context of Moroni 10:3-5 or D&C 9. They don't say "just pray, trust your feelings". They say to study it out. In fact, you will receive no answer unless you do so, and then only after you have wrestled through the issue. I agree that sometimes we look to scripture to confirm our feelings, and that is appropriate. That is not the context of Jessie's question: How do you know it is true?
I am going to write an article on this "heart is wicked" issue, because this verse is so thoroughly abused, primarily by anti-Mormons who think it speaks of things other Christians don't see when they examine the rest of scripture.
Asserting that feelings are our only source of truth is a preposterous as asserting, as Shawn did, that feelings cannot testify of truth.
But we still have you and Shawn unable to explain how one can obtain a knowledge that the Bible is true, unless you take the circular reasoning route and assert, 'because it says it is'.
Spunk you later.
Let's address Anon's Romans and D&C 76 interpretation.
First, Anon asserts non-LDS "Christians" are going to the Terrestrial kingdom of LDS theology. This is not true, or at the very least not necessarily true. Since he references D&C 76:75-79. They are as follows:
75 These are they who are honorable men of the earth, who were blinded by the craftiness of men.
76 These are they who receive of his glory, but not of his fulness.
77 These are they who receive of the presence of the Son, but not of the fulness of the Father.
78 Wherefore, they are bodies terrestrial, and not bodies celestial, and differ in glory as the moon differs from the sun.
79 These are they who are not valiant in the testimony of Jesus; wherefore, they obtain not the crown over the kingdom of our God.
So let's see which one fits non-LDS Christians: 75, honorable men blinded by the craftiness of men. Maybe. This seems to apply to personal conduct regardless of religious beliefs, so it would depend. A "once saved, always saved" murderer or their probably does not fall into this category, if we are to believe Paul's teachings in Romans or John's in Revelation about who goes to hell. But a Christian who practices what he preaches, yeah, I believe that. But that is not the Shawn McCraney crowd. Anyone who attacks other faiths rather than promoting their own is inconsistent with the teachings of Paul and Peter, and therefore is not in this category.
76-78 are about the state of people in the Terrestrial kingdom, so don't apply to the discussion.
79 is about those who are not valiant in their testimony of Jesus. Based on Shawn's description of how he "knows" the Bible is true or Jesus is true, and which Anon seems to agree with, these are not testimonies. They don't "know" anything. The people this is directed at, I believe, are the back sliding LDS or others who receive a testimony, a witness via the Spirit, and don't follow it because of either fear or laziness, but are otherwise good people. So verse 79 does not apply to virtually ALL anti-Mormons I have met (Shawn included, as he states he NEVER had a testimony while LDS or even a spiritually based testimony now), and probably many of the "Christian by tradition" crowd who never do come to know Jesus via the Spirit.
1 Cor 12:3
3 "...no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."
To say that testimony of the Holy Ghost is had by encountering man derived "proofs" as Shawn asserted it means, means the Holy Ghost is constrained by circumstances. As noted, such a position is absurd in the context of the disciples on the road to Emmaus, or
John 14:26
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Unless, of course, Anon and Shawn think such a promise was just for the Apostles, which contextually seems unlikely.
(Continued below)
As for Romans 7, Anon confuses the temptations that assault the body with the intents and motives of the heart, or will, of the person. Note for example:
19For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
Anon, Shawn, what is it that Paul "would do"? Good. But in verse 18, immediately preceding this verse and actually part of the same long sentence by Paul, he carefully distinguishes between his body and his own will:
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind,
His point is that he in fact wants to do good, but his physical body entices him to sin. Unlike what Shawn and you have asserted, Paul HATES the evil he does, and we don't see Paul saying "I am an adulterer" or anything similar to what Shawn said of himself, which he asserted by implication is how all people are, and which he said is Biblical doctrine vs. what the LDS Church teaches about sin. Such an assertion, even from your citation, is unsupportable.
Paul asserts his body is subject to temptation, but he wants to do otherwise. Shawn asserted he is still all of the things he ever was, and is unchanged other than be restrained by the Spirit. Paul never asserts the Spirit is preventing his sinning, rather that he personally lapses from the things he wants to do. Huge differences.
And by the way, my interpretation is consistent with many non-LDS commentators. For example, of Romans 7:18 we read in Jamieson, Faucett and Brown:
"(It is hardly necessary to say that the apostle means not to disown the blame of yielding to his corruptions, by saying, "it is not he that does it, but sin that dwelleth in him." Early heretics thus abused his language; but the whole strain of the passage shows that his sole object in thus expressing himself was to bring more vividly before his readers the conflict of two opposite principles, and how entirely, as a new man—honoring from his inmost soul the law of God—he condemned and renounced his corrupt nature, with its affections and lusts, its stirrings and its outgoings, root and branch)."
This is available online, is a respective Evangelical commentary, and really shows how false your position and that of Shawn's is. The new man kills and renounces those desires. The unrepentant simply sets them aside and does not act on them. Worldly sorrow vs. Godly sorrow unto repentance.
Anon also wrote:
"Does that make you feel better about your choice to support and defend a false gospel? Do you have a seer stone and can see my whole life and why I left the church now?" Well, if I was supporting a false Gospel, I guess it would. But that is really not the point. You keep asserting things about both Christian and LDS doctrine, and about Shawn, which is false. I don't need the gift of prophecy to see you making erroneous statement after statement. Be defensive if you must. But when you write things such as there is no hell in Mormonism, or that I am a universalist, or that there is lots of room for interpretation when such interpretation conflicts with LDS doctrine, then I do need to point it out. I don't know who you are (as you seem afraid to disclose yourself based on the false statements you made about your mother's ward's conduct of the testimony meeting), and you make it clear you feel justified in speaking harshly about Mormons and Mormonism. I have no problem dishing it back in defense of Mormonism and especially when the attackers make logically and factually flawed statements. So get off the persecution complex, your "poor-me" life history or your defense of not being well studied before making life changing philosophical decisions. I feel no need to apologize for pointing out your errors or inconsistencies. If you feel personally offended, then I am sorry for that. But I just figure that folks who feel inspired to tell other people their religious beliefs are false are prepared to defend such a position and not be personally offended.
Post a Comment