Skip to content

“The Bible Backs Me into a Corner”

February 3, 2010

I just saw that Living Hope Ministries is soon to release their new video documentary – The Bible vs. Joseph Smith.  I can’t wait to see it!

From the trailer – interview with an LDS member, Greg.  He states:

“I guess it could be said that the Bible backs me into a corner”

watch the trailer for the upcoming video by Living Hope Ministries here:

http://mormonchallenge.com/index.html

I can relate to what Greg says!  The Bible backs me into a corner too!  All the time!

Advertisements
33 Comments leave one →
  1. February 3, 2010 8:25 pm

    The same with me: although, I bet some of the positions we are backed into are quite different.

    TRD

  2. February 4, 2010 12:32 am

    That’s true. And some of the positions are probably the same.

  3. shematwater permalink
    February 4, 2010 6:55 pm

    I have to say that I am not all that enthusiastic. The Bible does not back me into a corner, nor can it. For any LDS member to say such is truly sad.

  4. Lance permalink
    February 4, 2010 8:20 pm

    I have seen a few of the videos put out by Living Hope. I am looking forward to what they have to say in this one.

    As for the Bible backing us into a corner, I would propose that this is not a bad place be. It is not a compromise in one’s faith to admit that the Bible forces us to reexamine what we may believe. Just because we have entered the realm of the spiritual should we cast out all scientific thought? We could not imagine a reputable scientist that would not test his theories, yet we turn around and are expected to believe in something that affects all of life and eternity without so much as a parting glance? I think Jessica is right; we need to come at Scripture as the Bereans…who tested and tried what they were told. We too should come to the Word open to the possibility that we may need to adjust our views in light of the facts we uncover.

    It will be interesting to see how this online bible study is going to work. I would love to participate if you will have me.

    Lance

  5. February 5, 2010 12:48 am

    Would love to have you join the Bible study, Lance!

    Everyone is welcome to participate!

  6. February 5, 2010 4:39 am

    Just make sure the corner you’ve been “backed into” doesn’t happen to perfectly match all your preconceptions and prejudices.

  7. February 5, 2010 4:48 am

    The wonderful thing about the Word of God is that while it cuts you in one verse, it can build you up in the next. All the cutting, molding, and shaping that comes from the Bible is to make us into what God wants us to be.

    The 8 years that I spent slowly coming out of the Mormon Church were some of the most challenging in my life. I was backed into a corner repeatedly by the Bible and the Spirit of God. Most of the time they were corners I had no desire to be in, for they forced me to make many tough decisions, many at the risk of losing my family.

    Now that I have come out on the other end I can honestly say that those corners were some of the best places to be in. Although tough, they broke me free from the entanglement of false doctrine and brought me into an abiding, living, breathing, and vibrant relationship with my Savior.

    All praise be to Him!

    Darrell

  8. February 5, 2010 8:24 am

    Change of scenery does not automatically mean a changed person.

    Inside or outside the LDS Church, I hear the same tunes from people. They have actually changed nothing but their mailing address.

  9. February 5, 2010 1:00 pm

    Seth,

    You are welcome to your opinion. However, my experience and that of other ex LDS Christians I have met has been vastly different from what you describe. It is most certainly not simply a change of “scenary” or “address”.

    God bless!

    Darrell

  10. February 5, 2010 3:29 pm

    I only know their declarations, arguments, and stated outlook.

    Those are certainly no different.

  11. February 5, 2010 3:46 pm

    Seth,

    Let’s look at a few declarations for a second.

    Mormon: Man can become a god

    Christian: Man and God are separate in nature

    Mormon: God was once a man who progressed to godhood (Mormonism allows for this)

    Christian: God has always been God and there was, is, and will only be one God.

    Mormon: Christ is our elder spirit brother

    Christian: Christ is our God and is thus separate in nature from man

    Mormon: Must go through the Temple to get to heaven

    Christian: Faith alone in Christ gets you to heaven.

    Those look pretty different to me.

    Beliefs matter – both in this life and the next. In this life they can lead one to go as far as flying planes into buildings and in the next life they can and will determine where you spend eternity.

    Darrell

  12. February 5, 2010 4:40 pm

    Those are mere incidentals to what I’m talking about Darrell. What I’m talking about is the core needs, fallacies, and insecurities that afflict people.

    In my experience, those tend to change very little simply because someone changes denominational labels.

    Slap whatever theology you want on it. The same troubled person remains.

  13. February 5, 2010 5:08 pm

    What I’m talking about is the core needs, fallacies, and insecurities that afflict people.

    You will have to expand a little more on what you mean here. You have alluded to your thoughts in this area numerous times in conversation over the past year or so.

    Would you mind sharing some details on your thoughts?

    Darrell

  14. February 5, 2010 5:11 pm

    Those are mere incidentals to what I’m talking about Darrell.

    This statement speaks volumes and it strikes at the heart of the differences between Mormonism and Christianity.

    These items aren’t mere incidentals. They are at the heart of defining one’s faith and the Being(s) they worship.

    Darrell

  15. February 5, 2010 5:41 pm

    I said nothing about whether theological differences are important. I merely stated they are incidental to what I was talking about.

  16. February 5, 2010 6:13 pm

    Seth,

    Saying these beliefs are subordinate to the fact that someone (in your opinion) is troubled by insecurities by definition makes them unimportant. For whether or not someone is insecure matters very little in comparison to the eternal state of their sole.

    As a result, your willingness to relegate these positions as incidentals IMO speaks volumes as to the differences between Mormonism and Christianity.

    Darrell

  17. February 5, 2010 6:16 pm

    In addition, I would like to add that I am still not with you on this segment of people being plaqued by insecurities and fallacies. If you get a chance, share some of the details of your thoughts on this.

    Darrell

  18. February 5, 2010 6:17 pm

    sole…. obviously I mean “soul”… ooops!

    🙂

    Darrell

  19. shematwater permalink
    February 8, 2010 3:29 pm

    I believe what Seth is saying is that the details of the persons belief does not change their basic character.

    It is like in the movie “Friendly Persuassions.” When the quakers are asked to take up arms one of them stands and, with considerable verbal violence, declares he will never take up his arm against his brother. Later, after his barn and smoke house are destroyed, this same man tries to persuade the star to take up a gun and fight. He argues that “War demands a different way of thinking.” Then a non-quaker friend comes up and makes this statement; “Your way of thinking may have changed, but you sure haven’t. What’s right for you has to be right for everyone else.”

    As Seth seems to put it, what ever denominational label you give yourself, the same basic core of the person remains (his fallicies, etc.). For this point the actual doctrinal beliefs, though important, are incidental, or extra unneeded information for the topic of discussion.

    While I do believe it is possible for people to change their core self, it is not as common as some want to believe. I think Seth has a good point. From my experiences I have always believed that people seem to choose the denomination that makes it the easiest to live their life in accordance with their “personal view” and not because it is true, or has more truth than others.

    On a sie note you wrote
    “Mormon: Christ is our elder spirit brother
    Christian: Christ is our God and is thus separate in nature from man
    Mormon: Must go through the Temple to get to heaven
    Christian: Faith alone in Christ gets you to heaven.”

    The rest of this list you give needs no comment, but these two points do, I think.

    First:
    Mormon – “Christ is our eldest spirit brother and thus our Lord and God, who rules over us.
    Christian – Christ is our God and is thus separate in nature from man and thus unknowable to man.

    Mormon – The Atonement of Christ is enough to get us into heaven, but through faith and the Temple we may gain a higher reward in heaven.
    Christian – Faith alone in Christ gets you to heaven, and thus the atonement is only for the faithful.

    I do not claim there is no difference, I just think we need to be more clear as to what that difference is.

  20. February 8, 2010 7:20 pm

    Shem,

    Good to hear from you. It has been a while since we have conversed.

    As Seth seems to put it, what ever denominational label you give yourself, the same basic core of the person remains (his fallicies, etc.).

    I was really looking for Seth to expand upon his thoughts in this area before commenting because I don’t want to mischaracterize him. However, allow me to say this, I wholehearedly disagree with the contention that beliefs can’t/don’t change people. Correct beliefs may not be sufficient for a changed heart, i.e., it is possible to believe the correct things and not allow those beliefs to change you. However, correct beliefs are absolutely necessary for a changed heart, i.e., one cannot come into a true and living relationship with Christ without first knowing who He is.

    While I do believe it is possible for people to change their core self, it is not as common as some want to believe.

    On this point I would have to say I disagree with you. I don’t believe it is at all possible for an individual to change their core self. One cannot change themself, e.g., I can read all the self help books I want, but I will never change who I really am at heart. I may put on a good front for a while, but my heart can never be changed by me.

    I believe that this is only something that God can accomplish, and it can only come through entering into a relationship with Him through Jesus Christ.

    From my experiences I have always believed that people seem to choose the denomination that makes it the easiest to live their life in accordance with their “personal view” and not because it is true, or has more truth than others.

    Certainly, there are people who do this all the time. People who were raised Mormon and simply stayed Mormon. Same could be said for Protestants, Catholics, etc. simply staying in the religion of their youth.

    However, we are not really talking about those people. We are talking specifically about people who left Mormonism for Traditional Christianity (Bible backed them into a corner). To say these people left simply because another faith fit their personal view is nothing more than a false caricature and a severe over generalization. In addition, it begs the question as to whether or not their “personal view” is simply “their personal view” and not the correct view.

    Mormon – “Christ is our eldest spirit brother and thus our Lord and God, who rules over us.

    Good point. This strikes more at the heart of the difference between Mormonism and Christianity. For the Mormon Christ was spirit born of a separate God from Himself (the Father) and then progressed to godhood. In addition, this demonstrates how man and God are of the same nature in Momronism. A vast difference from Christianity.

    Christian – Christ is our God and is thus separate in nature from man and thus unknowable to man.

    Traditional Christianity does not teach that God is unknowable. First, this is a false Platonic view of God. Some Christians may believe this to be the case, but it is theologically incorrect. Second, this is a self-defeating statement. One cannot say something is unknowable without affirming that one does know something about it, namely, that it is unknowable.

    Traditional Christianity teaches that God is knowable in an analogical sense and one can have a full, living, and vibrant relationship with Him. While one may never be able to fully comprehend an infinite God with a finite mind (this is impossible), God Himself has condescended to us through Jesus Christ (God incarnate) and we can know and have a relationship with God through Him. To say otherwise is to paint a false caricature of Traditional Christianity.

    God Bless!

    Darrell

  21. February 8, 2010 7:28 pm

    Beliefs CAN change people.

    My experience is that they often don’t.

  22. February 8, 2010 7:31 pm

    Seth,

    What specific types of changes are you looking for that you don’t often see?

    Darrell

  23. shematwater permalink
    February 8, 2010 8:58 pm

    DARREL

    I will still hold, that from what I have seen and witnessed, most people who change denomonitions do so because they can more easily live the life they want to in that denomination. In general these are the people who claim that it doesn’t matter what denomination you are in. Those who claim that one denominaiton is the only true church are generally the ones who follow a religion because they believe it to be true.
    Now, I do not say this true of all people, but that I have seen and heard enough to conclude it is a fair generalization of the human mind and spirit.

    It is much as is taught in the LDS doctrine, that the personallity we ahve hear will be the same one we have in the resurrection. Going the other direction, what we are now is the same as we were in the pre-mortal life. Thus, if we only sought our own comfort before we will do so now. However, if we sought the will of the Father before, we will do so now.

    Oh, and when I said unknowable, I meant that you cannot actually understand him. In other words, by this doctrine, we cannot truly know the reasons why he does what he does, or how. We cannot understand what motivates him. We can speculate, yes, but we cannot know. Just as an animal cannot understand the motivations that accompany the higher-order of intelligence that is present in humans.

  24. February 8, 2010 9:41 pm

    Hey Shem!

    I will still hold, that from what I have seen and witnessed, most people who change denomonitions do so because they can more easily live the life they want to in that denomination.

    First, I don’t hold that switching from Mormonism to Traditional Christianity a switch of denominations. Rather, it is a change in Faith. Mormonism has staked its claim on the fact that all of Christendom is apostate. As a result, it cannot claim to be a denomination side by side with those who are of the very faith it holds to be apostate. This is wholly contradictory.

    That being said, I am one of the people you are talking about. I switched from Mormonism to Christianity a few years ago. I have met many people who have done the same thing, and I can honestly say that your experience does not hold true.

    In all honesty I find that what you are asserting is typically the result of Mormon indoctrination about what people are like who leave Mormonism, i.e., they left because of sin, can’t handle living the tough Mormon lifestyle, looking for something easier, etc. How many people do you personally know who have left Mormonism for Traditional Christianity? Give me a specific number.

    Your view is a rather simplistic, childlike view typically held so one does not have to take criticisms from those who have left seriously. In addition, it is insulting. Leaving Mormonism was one of the hardest, most painful things my wife and I have ever done. We have lost friends, relationships with family, etc. Our experience is common among those who leave. To say we did it simply because we can “more easily live the life we choose” is simply uninformed and ridiculous.

    I think you may have a misunderstanding of the difference between denomination and faith. Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, etc. are all denominations of the same faith. We all agree on the essentials of Christianity… who God is, how one gets to heaven, etc. As a result, while the Baptist denomination does not teach that it is the only true Church, it does teach that Global Christian Church made up of the Body of Believers in Christ is the only true Church. I did a short post on an example of this from my own Church here.

    http://toughquestionsanswered.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/thoughts-on-this-past-sunday/

    It is much as is taught in the LDS doctrine, that the personallity we ahve hear will be the same one we have in the resurrection. Going the other direction, what we are now is the same as we were in the pre-mortal life.

    We really need to nail down what we are talking about here, for you are now using the word personality. I am not saying that changing religions will change ones basic personality, e.g., extraverted to introverted, etc. I am talking about is the basic teaching of Christianity that coming into a relationship with Christ and having the Spirit live in you will change ones heart. I don’t think you and I are talking about the same thing.

    God Bless!

    Darrell

  25. shematwater permalink
    February 9, 2010 4:17 pm

    DARREL

    In truth, I was speaking more of non-LDS people. The reasons for leaving the LDS church are many, and among them are those that I have stated, as well as those that you have stated.

    What I was refering to (and I ask forgiveness for the confusion) are the people who say “this denomination is right for me, but yours is right for you.” These people, though raised in one denomination, have no problem switching, and many don’t really think that Islam, or even paganism is any worse or better. These are the people who choose the denomination because they don’t want to change anything, and this denominaiton doesn’t make them (or they just don’t join a denomintation, saying that they worship in their own way).

    In my experience most Christians are of this variety, just not to this extreme. Most Christians have told me that it really doesn’t matter what denomination you are, as long as you believe in Christ. Some have given a list of 4-5 basic doctrines that are required, but don’t care about anything else. These people believe in an underlying truth, but are comfortable inchanging the overall picture to fit their lives, instead of changing their lives to fit the overall picture.

    Now, there are a few denominations (and I consider all religions who profess Christ as God and Savior and accept the Bible as devine scripture as Christian) that teach as core doctrine that all others are wrong and they are right. Those people who stick with this basic idea, that there is one truth, and only one, and are trying to mold their lives to it, are the ones who are more willing to change their lives instead of the Big Picture. Even one who excepts a denomination that does not have this core beleif as the only truth is of this kind.

    Now, there are people in all denomintation (including the LDS) that are of each type. I have spoken to LDS members who dislike the missionary effort of the church because it is “imposing their beliefs on others.” These people are of the mind of choicing the denomination that allows them to lie how they want, and not because it is true. I have also men those of many other Christian denominations that hold their church is the only true Church of God, and are thus of the mind that you choose a denomination because it is true, not because it is easier.

    I will say directly, after reading your posts in the past few months that you seem more of the mind that there is an absolute truth that you are trying to follow, and thus are part of the second group. However, you were of this mind while LDS just as you are now. That has not changed. You have just come to the conclusion that the LDS church does not hold the truth you are seeking.
    However, I am not quite sure how far you lean to the other end of the spectrum, for I am not sure how accepting you are of other denominations. I really only have your view in comparing “Mormonism” with general “Christianity.”

  26. February 9, 2010 6:30 pm

    Shem,

    You are talking about post modernism: the idea that truth is relative, e.g., “that might be true for you, but it is not true for me.” This philosophy has infected all portions of society including the Christian Church as well as the LDS Church.

    Bear in mind that post modernism is not a function of what “denomination” or “faith” one belongs to. Rather, it is a philosophical worldview that people hold, generally overarching their religious view.

    Personally, I completely disagree with post modernism. It is incoherent, self-defeating, and completely out of step with the Bible. When I encounter Christians who hold these views, I generally try and talk with them about it. Most are unaware of the philosophical issues with their worldview.

    As for people leaving the LDS Church because of post modernism – perhaps there are some who have done so. However, those who leave Mormonism for theological reasons do not do so because of a post modern philosophy. Rather, they do so because they disagree with the doctrines and teaching of the LDS Church.

    Last, I would really caution you about your use of the word “denomination” for you appear to be using it incorrectly; almost as if you are talking about different Faiths. A denomination is simply a subset of a larger group. They hold to the core beliefs of the larger group, yet donominate themselves by a name due to some of the differences they hold with other members of the larger group. However, these differences are non-essential to their membership in the larger group.

    All Christian Denominations share the same set of core beliefs regarding the essentials of the Christian Faith. Thus, the Methodists do not think they are “the only true church”. Instead, they view themselves as a small part of the only true Church, namely the Global Christian Church.

    Take care and God Bless.

    Darrell

  27. shematwater permalink
    February 9, 2010 7:31 pm

    I understand what a denomination is, and I think that people in general use it wrong, for they exclude those that are denominations in their definition.

    As I said, as far as I am concerned the “Christian Faith” is simply a belief in Jesus as the Christ and Savior of the world, and thus God. Along with this is a belief in the Bible as the written, revealed word of God. All who hold this view are of the Christian Faith.

    There are then three main branches within this Faith, all of which hold firmly to these two core beliefs. They are the Chatholics, the Protestants, and the Latter-Day Saints. Within each branch there are many smaller denominations which hold more doctrines in common with each other then they do with the other branches. However, this does not make any one of these groups any less a denomintation of the Christian Faith, for all except Christ as the Savior and the Bible as his revealed word.

    This is the way I have always viewed the Christian world, and how I will always speak about it. Thus, the way I have used the term denomination, in reference to the Christian Church is accurate. You simple hold the view that because the LDS do not have more than these two simple doctrinal points in common with the other two branches they cannot be considered Christian. This is an opinion, not a statement of fact.

    Now that I have explained why I use the term Denomination, I would like to comment on Post Modernism. It is the idea I was speaking of, but I was speaking of people having verying degrees of this philosophy in their belief system. To me, anyone who accepts a denomination for themselves, but allows others their, having no theological contentions with this, has partaken of this philosophy in part. They have declared that the details of truth do not truly matter, only the most basic concepts, and are thus, in part, post modernists.
    I remember in 1 Corinthians 1: 12-13 where Paul says “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?”

    I think for the modern world I would say “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Luther; and I of Calvin; and I of the Baptist; and I of Christ. Is Christ adivided? was Luther crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Calvin?”

    This is what I am talking about. Now, in the Corinthians quote he was specifically putting down the idea that “I am better because I am of Paul.” However, the concept still holds, I think.

  28. February 9, 2010 8:17 pm

    You simple hold the view that because the LDS do not have more than these two simple doctrinal points in common with the other two branches they cannot be considered Christian. This is an opinion, not a statement of fact.

    Not really. My position is that we are not even in agreement on the 2 points you declare as necessary for being a Christian. Let’s use your definition for a second. Mormons and Christians do not agree upon the belief that “Jesus [is] the Christ and Savior of the world, and thus God.” Our definitions of God, Jesus, and Savior are completely different. The words are the same, but they mean completely different things.

    I do not understand the modern Mormon desire to be declared part of Christianity for it contradicts LDS teachings and the repeated past declarations of LDS leaders. Mormonism declares Christians to be apostate, and LDS leaders have described our beliefs as being “from the pit of Hell.” As a result, to say we both part of the same overarching global church and faith is to contradict not only logic, but past LDS teaching as well.

    Darrell

  29. shematwater permalink
    February 10, 2010 4:47 pm

    DARREL

    The details of definitions do not matter. When I say except him as the saviour and God I mean applying these basic definitions as found at dictionary.com.

    Saviour: a person who saves, rescues, or delivers; In this case he delivers us from Sin and Death.

    God: the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.

    I think that most Christians and most LDS would agree that these definitions apply to Jesus Christ. He came to save, rescue, and deliver us from sin and death. He is also the supreme being and creator and ruler of the Universe.

    As such Mormons and Christians generally agree on these two basic doctrines. This does not concern the nature of God.

    As to what former LDS leaders have said, they were not refering to religious classifications. They were speaking in relation to the truth and authority contained within these denominations. They never once denied they were Christians, only that they were not part of the true church.

  30. February 10, 2010 5:06 pm

    Shem,

    The nature of the being whomwe both claim to worship is absolutely central to defining who He is. Thus, the defintions do matter. Let me give an example.

    Let’s say that I claim to worship Bob as my Savior. I tell you that I have met Bob, and that I have witnessed him perform miracles, raise the dead, etc. I invite you to meet Bob. When I introduce you to him, you discover that he is a dog. Would this matter?

    Now, you are probably thinking this is an outlandish example, but it proves my point. The nature of the being we claim to worship – in this case a dog – matters.

    As a result, the nature of the beings Mormons claim to worship does matter. Mormons worship a being who is of the same nature as man; is a separate God from God the Father; was spirit born and consequently, is not eternally God, i.e., has not always existed as God; is our elder brother; and is brother’s with satan.

    In addition, there are inherent problems with the LDS view of God the Father as well.

    These definitions are so far removed from the Christian (and I submit biblical) position on who Jesus Christ is as to make the position that we worship the same being completely incoherent.

    God Bless!

    Darrell

  31. February 10, 2010 5:19 pm

    I think that most Christians and most LDS would agree that these definitions apply to Jesus Christ.

    But who IS Jesus Christ. I can say that I worship Jesus all day long, but unless I define who He is I cannot be sure I am really following Him. Is He the ONLY God? Is He one of many Gods?

    He Himself made this point.

    “Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

    Doing wonderful works in Jesus’s name is not enough to ensure that you are following Him. You have to define who you are talking about.

    As to what former LDS leaders have said, they were not refering to religious classifications.

    This is kind of funny. So you are saying it is okay to be worhsipping a being different in nature from what you believe to be correct, and it is okay to declare the other person’s doctrines to “from the pit of hell”, but don’t dare tell them they aren’t Christian??? Their doctrines are from Hell, but they can still be following Christ? To me, that seems absurd. I think it is pretty obvious what past LDS Leaders meant. I will have to dig up some of their quotes for you.

    Shem, how long have you been a member of the LDS Church?

    God Bless!

    Darrell

  32. February 10, 2010 5:33 pm

    I think both Mormon and Evangelical definitions of Jesus are more than adequate to establish a fixed and common object of worship.

    Anything further than the commonalities is just nit-picking around about theological technicalities that have no inherent saving power – in and of themselves.

    Which is not to say they are not important. I find Calvin’s ideas incredibly damaging to both human attitudes and to opinions of God. You can really screw up your life on certain brands of Calvinism. Others may say the same thing about certain brands of Mormonism. But neither is decisive on the question of being saved or not. Christ is not some sort of SAT proctor holding a theological test to see if you score above 80% or something.

    Beliefs do matter. They do have harmful and helpful effects on a person’s life. But I don’t think they save.

    However, that said, they certainly factor into exaltation and what your place in the heavens will be. But not salvation.

  33. February 10, 2010 9:43 pm

    Anything further than the commonalities is just nit-picking around about theological technicalities that have no inherent saving power – in and of themselves.

    The techinicalities have no inherent saving power in and of themselves, but the fact that they may mean that one is worshipping Christ versus a figment of imagination.

    Let’s say I buy an alarm system. I tell the representative that I want the system to have a live voice response system, and he says, “No problem. I’ll make sure it does.” A few days later someone breaks in my house and the alarm goes off. I wait and wait for the speaker to come on and ask me if everything is okay, but nothing happens. In the meantime, the criminal beats the tar out of me and my family and takes off with a bunch of my stuff. The next day I follow up with the alarm company and ask them about the live voice response system and they tell me it has one. After further inquiry, I find out that that what I meant by live voice response (a speaker that connects you with the alarm company) is not what they meant. They thought I was talking about a system to connect in case of a power outage.

    Here is the thing… in this example the technicalities of specifically what a live voice response system is mattered, for it affected the difference between me being connected to the alarm company and me not being connected. The terms and their definitions had no saving power, but what they applied to – the ACTUAL live voice response – did.

    To this point, the differences between teaching God to be of the same nature as man – in some cases even an exalted man – and God being separate in nature from man may not in and of themselves have saving power. But the fact that they may mean worshipping Christ vs. a fake being does matter.

    Darrell

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: