Welcome! Sign in to access your account. New user?

Are Mormons Christian?

I think we are misunderstanding eachother

Posted by fableked on 2003-01-03 22:55:58

My post about Revelation was written in reply to your original message that talked about Revelation. I do not argue with you about the fact that Revelation was probably written at around 90AD, but I think the words about the addition or subtraction from the book are applicable only to Revelation. You will find similar words in almost all prophetic writing of the Bible. One example is Daniel which mentions that some of the prophecy found in it is to be sealed and neither added to or taken from.

Sorry if I was not clear in my original post.

Posted by Empath on 2003-01-05 02:00:58

Quote: My post about Revelation was written in reply to your original message that talked about Revelation. I do not argue with you about the fact that Revelation was probably written at around 90AD, but I think the words about the addition or subtraction from the book are applicable only to Revelation.

That doesn't counter my argument, which was quite clear. I will repost the important points in which you seemed to have either missed, disregarded, or forgot about:

"3: Revelations wasn't accepted by most Christians when the canon was decided. It was only added to appease a few who wrongly thought it was written by the apostle John."

In addition,

"4: Some of Revelations was added at a later time from when written originally. Most likely, the editing was done when the canon was sealed, the fourth century ce. One of these passages is that no other books could be added at the time."

Points 3 and 4 completely nullify your counter argument. There is no misunderstanding from my part, as I know your beliefs quite well. However, based upon these historical facts, your beliefs cannot be logically valid. Revelations is hypocritical unto itself; it says no new writings should be added yet not only were additional writing added to that particular book and accepted after the fact but the ENTIRE BOOK shouldn't have even been in the canonized Christian Scripture. The belief that the Apostle John wrote it was the only key reason why the minority won out in the canonizing process in the 4th century ce. Most scholars, even in that day, realized its invalidity and rejected it.

Quote: Sorry if I was not clear in my original post.

You were quite clear; as clear as I was then and am now.

You must come up with a logical counter argument or admit that you are wrong and that all denominations of the Restorative Branch of Christianity, whether they are the Mormon Church, the Community of Christ, etc., are true Christian Churches.

Posted by Empath on 2003-01-05 02:01:00

Quote: My post about Revelation was written in reply to your original message that talked about Revelation. I do not argue with you about the fact that Revelation was probably written at around 90AD, but I think the words about the addition or subtraction from the book are applicable only to Revelation.

That doesn't counter my argument, which was quite clear. I will repost the important points in which you seemed to have either missed, disregarded, or forgot about:

"3: Revelations wasn't accepted by most Christians when the canon was decided. It was only added to appease a few who wrongly thought it was written by the apostle John."

In addition,

"4: Some of Revelations was added at a later time from when written originally. Most likely, the editing was done when the canon was sealed, the fourth century ce. One of these passages is that no other books could be added at the time."

Points 3 and 4 completely nullify your counter argument. There is no misunderstanding from my part, as I know your beliefs quite well. However, based upon these historical facts, your beliefs cannot be logically valid. Revelations is hypocritical unto itself; it says no new writings should be added yet not only were additional writing added to that particular book and accepted after the fact but the ENTIRE BOOK shouldn't have even been in the canonized Christian Scripture. The belief that the Apostle John wrote it was the only key reason why the minority won out in the canonizing process in the 4th century ce. Most scholars, even in that day, realized its invalidity and rejected it.

Quote: Sorry if I was not clear in my original post.

You were quite clear; as clear as I was then and am now.

You must come up with a logical counter argument or admit that you are wrong and that all denominations of the Restorative Branch of Christianity, whether they are the Mormon Church, the Community of Christ, etc., are true Christian Churches.

Posted by Word Man on 2003-02-04 03:04:37

Then how do you see that to prove Mormon's not to be christian?

========== In Reply To ========== My post about Revelation was written in reply to your original message that talked about Revelation. I do not argue with you about the fact that Revelation was probably written at around 90AD, but I think the words about the addition or subtraction from the book are applicable only to Revelation. You will find similar words in almost all prophetic writing of the Bible. One example is Daniel which mentions that some of the prophecy found in it is to be sealed and neither added to or taken from.

Sorry if I was not clear in my original post.

Posted by Word Man on 2003-02-04 03:06:20

Then how do you see that to prove Mormon's not to be christian?

========== In Reply To ========== My post about Revelation was written in reply to your original message that talked about Revelation. I do not argue with you about the fact that Revelation was probably written at around 90AD, but I think the words about the addition or subtraction from the book are applicable only to Revelation. You will find similar words in almost all prophetic writing of the Bible. One example is Daniel which mentions that some of the prophecy found in it is to be sealed and neither added to or taken from.

Sorry if I was not clear in my original post.