This is an understandable set of criticisms to come from a more secular perspective. I sometimes wonder how all this must look from outside the LDS and Christian world as it were. Have you ever been in either of those camps? Or are you still?

Anyway needless to say I do not see these things the way you do at all, hence the fact that this site carries on. I am not going to go through all of your comments for the sake of time and its likely you will have had these discussions before, however there were a couple of things you said that got my attention. I will put those in italics and comment.

As for the whole Jesus and saved by Grace or Works nonsense. It’s both since one without the other is meaningless. Grace is the gift from God, but to accept it you don’t just recognise Jesus as the saviour (Even Satan knows that as did the legion cast into the pigs and they’re not saved).

This I would massively challenge. What you tend to find is that the groups that claim that you must carry out some kind of works before you are “saved” in the sight of God is that they say you must do it in our church following our rules. There tends to be a constant dissatisfaction amongst the membership of their own performance only fuled by the leadership. This type of thing is a large reason why I do what I do. As if you believe that you are saved totally by grace and that works then follow there is then no standard to meet and therefore no heavy shepherding that can follow from a church leadership of any kind. It may seem like simple wording but the difference is massive.

Also you said

Whilst the fragments of Christianity attack and undermine each others doctrines and people like Stephen lose their faith in God (however he conceived of him it was sincere and a caring God would see that) Satan laughs. You’re doing his work for him.

Ah so you do believe in Satan, not as secular as I thought I guess.

Ok you finished with

If you think your way is better I think the rule should be to show what is better about your faith not what is wrong or worse about theirs. What yours adds not what you need to take away from theirs to make yours an acceptable fallback position.

Ok so this is a common one, stop saying whats wrong with the LDS Church and just say what is right about yours. The problem here is when speaking with LDS members they have the worldview that all other churches are in this state of apostasy, or lacking in the fulness of truth and authority, so a lot of what I share about my faith will be seen through this filter. Therefore its necessary at times to challenge that worldview in order to show that what I have is not merely a watered down version of Christianity but actually authentic Christianity. However if you look through my articles you will find most also have a lot of Christian theology in there as well. This website has much more to say than simply the Mormons have it wrong.

While I respect Steve Bloor a lot for who he is and all that he has been through, needless to say his letter here does not reflect my viewpoint. Please fee free to have a look over the many articles on this blog that do and leave a comment and I would be happy to dialogue with you on any of them.

If you feel I have missed anything here you specfically wanted a response too, let me know I have not responded to them all simply as there was a lot of points and I do not have the time right now to give a very long response.

thanks a lot for your comment and I hope to hear more from you.

Bobby

In this instance, Stephens concerns about evolution would be a problem to all faiths. Most Christian denominations do not accept evolution and openly challenge the body of knowledge that has been accumulated that appears to support this theory. However, they are usually unable to oppose the theory in a reasoned manner.

In terms of LDS history, it has as many problems as most religions Islam, Christianity etc, all have foundational accounts, yet upon investigation they normally turn out to be a lot more complicated than the polished version followers are initially told.

For example, Paul’s conversion, of the two accounts there is a clear conflict in what happened. Further, there is no external corroboration of this event, it is one mans claim. Subjected to the same tests placed against Joseph Smith the account would be judge equally doubtful. The only disadvantage Smith has is more historical information is available on him that on the other early Christians. On Christ himself there is very little evidence at all other than the NT and a few lines in Josephus that he actually existed, and even if he did, nothing in the bible or outside it provides any evidence that what he said is what he actually said, or that it is true. Jewish history is stock full of messiahs that died gruesome deaths. Many of the scriptures drawn from the old testament used as evidence of Jesus as the messiah don’t actually relate to Jesus at all, Isaiah with the virgin shall conceive being one that comes to mind.

The Bible itself would fall foul of such challenges – For instance, how does an all knowing and all powerful God decide to build a garden of eden that he wants to remain perfect, and then create two being and put them in their, and tells them to look after his garden and then not know about the serpent and their eating the forbidden fruit? This creates an incredible challenge: If God is Omnipotent and Omniscient then he would know in advance of building the garden and the people exactly what the outcome was going to be. Being Omnipotent I have to ask is he therefore capable of building a garden and two people who do not fall? Or perhaps of keeping the serpent out? Either way, the result is God’s plan seems to go awry – in effect a perfect all powerful, all knowing God fails to achieve what he wants as an outcome and then is forced down this route of a convoluted plan to save humanity from sin. Since he is the only judge, why does he need any sacrifice to offer forgiveness? What laws bind God, since creator is greater than created and God must pre-exist his own laws, for if he were bound by then he would cease to be Omnipotent as the laws would be omnipotent. A similar version of this is argued by Plato in Euthyphro where Socrates asks did Good pre-exist God or did God invent God? Oddly, Mormonism addresses this issue where broader Christianity doesn’t.

My point here isn’t to bash its to place the comments by the ex-Mormon bishop in context. Some posts on here appear to argue that because the LDS church lost its case in the battle for Stephen, that somehow the rest of Christianity has won – but that isn’t the case, Stephen is now a secular humanist – he no longer believes in God.

I think we need to be rational here. The threats posed to the LDS church are the same threats posed to all faiths. Unlike in the case with Stephen, the outcome isn’t that most people become secular humanists seeing to create a better world with a set of values, rather, the outcome is too many people think life has no meaning and simply engage in a hedonist lifestyle, doing what they think suits their self interest regardless of how damaging it is to them or others. So neither Christianity nor society benefits.

As for this divide between Mormonism and other branches of Christianity, guys get over it. It is a false dichotomy. People are straining at gnats and swallowing camels. People say that Mormons don’t accept Christ, or that they worship another God. Really? There is no definitive guide that explains what God is. Over the centuries various scholars have had a pop at it but all we end up with is opinion, the bible does no consistently nor clearly declare anything on the matter. From the new and Old testament you can evidence God does and does not have a body, is present everywhere yet lives in a fixed place in a body, died, but remained alive the whole time, spoke to himself, prayed to himself, changes the old testament rules to the new but doesn’t change them simply fulfils them after which worship and practice are entirely different resulting in Christianity rather than Judaism but hey, nothing has changed right?

The simply fact is, Mormons believe in a being called God. Knowing whether he has brown hair, green hair, feet, no hair, is a gas, timeless, a holograph doesn’t seem to be stated as a prerequisite for salvation – and since God doesn’t declare it clearly, I don’t think he really cares. Oh, you conceived of me incorrectly I have six fingers not five – eternity in hell for you!

As for the whole Jesus and saved by Grace or Works nonsense. It’s both since one without the other is meaningless. Grace is the gift from God, but to accept it you don’t just recognise Jesus as the saviour (Even Satan knows that as did the legion cast into the pigs and they’re not saved). The instruction is exhibit faith through following. If we believe and have faith we live in accordance with his teaching and accept his power to save us. However if I declare Jesus is lord then walk our and begin mugging and killing people am I saved? Why not – because my works are no consistent with the teachings of Christ, no matter how much I believe he can save me. Therefore works and living in accordance with Christ is a pre-requisite for salvation. The challenge seems to be the view that you don’t need Christ, that through works alone you can be perfect but I don’t know any religion that says that, the Mormons certainly don’t neither do the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Whilst the fragments of Christianity attack and undermine each others doctrines and people like Stephen lose their faith in God (however he conceived of him it was sincere and a caring God would see that) Satan laughs. You’re doing his work for him.

If you think your way is better I think the rule should be to show what is better about your faith not what is wrong or worse about theirs. What yours adds not what you need to take away from theirs to make yours an acceptable fallback position.

Sent from my iPhone

I have edited out some of your choice language however your comments are very welcome.

The truth will set you free and truth is a certain point of view, yours, his and mine. So up yours hater!

BTW, I have no idea if the church is true. I’m NOT going to say it is or isn’t Who the **** knows!