Author: Pilgrim

by

You might be a Calvinist . . .

The following is from the Disciple Man blog:

You Might Just Be A Calvinist If….

If you have a Martin Luther Jell-O mold… you just might be a Calvinist.

If your DVR has over 25 episodes of Wretched With Todd Friel recorded on it… you just might be a Calvinist.

If your child’s first word was “Westminster”… you just might be a Calvinist.

If your 4 year old can explain what the word “propitiation” means… you might just be a Calvinist.

If you send your mother tulips on Mother’s Day… you might be a Calvinist.

If your passion for evangelism blows away your Arminian friends… you might just be a (true) Calvinist.

If you hate rap music BUT you listen to Lecrea, The Cross Movement, Flame or D.A. T.R.U.T.H. because of the lyrics and theology… you might be a Calvinist.

If quotes from Pink, Spurgeon, Luther, Piper, and McArthur make up 90% of your Facebook statuses…you might be a Calvinist.

Continue reading →

by

Nephi or Moroni?

The following is an interesting article from an unlikely source.


What most LDS have been taught in church and believe as truth.

The name of the angel that visited Joseph Smith three times on the night of Sept. 21, 1823 was named Moroni.  The name of the angel is mentioned several times in many LDS publications and he has always been referred to as Moroni.

Significant details & problems that most LDS are not aware of.

This angel is the one who told Joseph Smith where the gold plates were buried and can be seen on top of most LDS temples.  However, a close examination of early church history tells a different story.  Some early LDS sources which say that the angel’s name was actually Nephi are as follows:

Keep reading here.


by

Sermon of the week: “The Carnal Christian Doctrine” by Albert N. Martin.

Albert Martin delivers a riveting message putting to rest the false doctrine of Carnal Christianity so rampant in evangelicalism. This message is as important and as timely today as it was when he preached it 47 years ago.

The Carnal Christian Doctrine (Part 1)

The Carnal Christian Doctrine (Part 2)

by

Mormonism’s Bigfoot.

I recently published an article on one of Mormonism’s wild claims about big, black, hairy Cain still roaming the earth in the post Mormon Prophet Lends Credibility to a Wild Claim. And, of course, the first response that post received from a Mormon apologist was:

The real shame is that it is simply a waste of time as no self-respecting person would really care enough to take the time to right [sic] about such meaningless prattle. Such a pity.

This was an interesting response considering the fact that it was important enough to Mormon President Spencer W. Kimball to write about it in his book The Miracle of Forgiveness. Evidently it’s only prattle when a non-Mormon discusses the matter.

And apparently one Mormon didn’t get the memo because he’s still talking (and writing) about the Cain/Bigfoot (and racism) matter. Blogger Doug Gibson has risked not being self-respecting because he’s been wasting his time by writing about such prattle when he recently published the post Awareness of Racism Eased Mormon Folk Tales Regarding Cain, Bigfoot. According to Gibson’s article, President Kimball wasn’t the only one in Mormon history to report claims of Cain/Bigfoot sightings.

Although some Mormon apologists would have you ignore such “prattle,” I highly encourage you to read Gibson’s article. And be sure to read all the enlightening comments afterward, like this sample from a commenter named Mikeasell:

Here is the deal: the church likes to teach what they call unchanged, revealed doctrine. When said doctrine becomes unpopular and threatens the church financially, the doctrine gets downgraded quickly to a “teaching” or a “guideline”, then a further downgrade to a “practice”, it is then removed from manuals and books (hence why people of different generations heard or did not hear the stories). Then the practice can simply be “discontinued”. They begin with the Lord has said X because Y is a true principle, live by it or go to hell, then they begin saying well we have been taught in the past that X=Y, then they begin with the “we don’t understand, but we are sure there is a mysterious purpose as to X is somewhat related to Y, but it is not for us to question the Lord”, then the blatant downgrade: we no longer “practice X, X practice has been discontinued, it is not really tied with Y”.

The reality is that the LDS church had inclusion criteria based on race. When it became apparent that the NCAA would allow teams like Stanford to avoid playing BYU and therefore the Church was having their non-profit status reviewed by the IRS, then suddenly (within a month) God changed his mind. Same with polygamy, it went from we will die before we give it up, we will break the law cuz God is a higher law, to sending ppl to Mexico to practice it to eventually pretending it really did not happen for that long or that it was because it was just a trial, there were too many men, etc. . . . .It is amazing to me, shocking really, that people are gullible enough to believe that a never changing restored gospel needs changing all the time, and surprisingly to accommodate cultural pressures. I cannot believe that people that believe in prophets can also believe that those prophets can not agree on basic doctrine, to the point that Joseph Smith, if he were to come back, would be excommunicated from the church he founded because of his beliefs and practices.

by

Quotes (902)

The average American family devotes one-fourth of its spendable income to outside debts. Since 1945, consumer debt in the United States has multiplied thirty-one times. The IRS calculates that the average filer spends ten times more paying off interest on debts than he gives to charitable causes. If all evangelical Christians were out of debt, hundreds of millions of dollars would be freed up for God’s kingdom. Our families would be stronger, because financial pressures caused by indebtedness are major factors in more than half of divorces.

– Randy Alcorn

by

If Mormonism were true.

An article from Mormon Coffee offers the following six things you’d expect to see if Mormonism were true. You can read the entire article here.

____________________________________

If Mormonism were true…

1. … Joseph Smith would have been able to consistently, accurately, remember his visit from two separate supernatural beings, God the Father and Jesus the Son. We now know that is not the case (for more info, see here, here, and here).

2. …the LDS “truth” that there are at least two gods, our Heavenly (spirit) Father, whose name is Elohim, and Jesus (Elohim’s son), whose spirit-name is Jehovah, would have been consistent since Mormonism’s beginnings. Instead, the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith’s first work, preaches that there is only one (modal) God (see Alma 11:26-31, 2 Nephi 31:21, Mosiah 15:1-5 for example). Joseph Smith originally taught that Jesus’ father’s name was Jehovah, and Brigham Young, Mormonism’s second prophet, taught that Heavenly Father was actually Adam, the first man on earth. Joseph also originally taught that of the three members of the “Godhead,” only Jesus had a body. That of course is no longer Mormon belief.

3. …the Book of Mormon, a book that is supposed to contain the “fulness of the gospel,” would teach on the plurality of gods, man’s potential for godhood, eternal marriage in Mormon temples, baptism for the dead, three degrees of heaven, and the other beliefs that separate Mormonism from orthodox Christianity. Not only does the Book of Mormon not teach these things, it and the other LDS scriptures frequently contradict current Mormon truths, and each other.

4. …there would be evidence of a large battle on or around the Hill Cumorah in New York, and other archeological evidence to support the notion of Book of Mormon life on this continent. Instead, LDS apologists are still struggling to locate and identify possible Book of Mormon geography sites (see also here and here).

5. …the Book of Mormon would not contain Greek and French words like “adieu” and “Jesus” and “Alpha” and “Omega.” It would not speak of things that had not yet been invented. It would not contain quotes from the KJV Bible, including KJV mistakes. It would not abuse the phrase “it came to pass” in all of its books but two. It would not contain country-boy vernacular. But it does.

6. …when portions of the papyri used to create the Book of Abraham were recovered and translated, the text would be very similar to what Joseph had written. Instead, just as you would expect if Joseph Smith had bought merely a couple of random mummies that had been found in an ordinary catacomb from a man with many mummies and scraps to sell, the papyri has been discovered to be common Egyptian funerary documents.

by

Falling off yet another slippery slope.

Those who warn others about impending issues, problems, doom, or calamities are often chided and ridiculed for being alarmists, and are often told that mentioning the “slippery slope” is nothing more than a scare tactic. It seems that to some, mentioning the “slippery slope” is a debate-killer much like when someone uses “Hitler” or “Nazis” as a comparative in their argument.

But don’t be fooled. Current facts, observable trends in a particular direction, and historical precedent are all valid indicators and can be properly used as predictors of what is likely to come.

It’s for this same reason that people can conclude that there’s a fire based on the presence and smell of smoke, and others surmise that a storm is coming based on dark clouds and the smell of rain in the air. But for some reason when the warnings are of a concern like the advent of socialism in a currently capitalistic nation or the falling away from truth in once well-grounded preachers (Ravi Zacharias and John Piper come to mind), then all of a sudden the facts, observable trends, and historical precedent are ignored and the “slippery slope” is considered a knee-jerk rant of an overzealous alarmist.

Remember those “crazy” pro-lifers from years ago that warned if abortion is made legal it would result in the death of millions of children as the barbaric act would become a form of birth control? “Nah,” retorted the abortion proponents, “It will only be done in the rare case of rape or incest, or if the mother’s life is at risk.” And remember how the pro-lifers with foresight argued that it was a “slippery slope” but were subsequently ridiculed by pro-abortionists for being extremists?

Forty million dismembered corpses later, the truth is obvious: We fell long and hard from that “slippery slope.”

And remember how Christians argued that granting special rights to those who practice a homosexual lifestyle was wrong, were labeled crazy and close minded because homosexuals only wanted to be protected from persecution and discrimination? And remember when Christians who claimed that normalizing homosexuality was a “slippery slope” toward normalizing other deviant behaviors like incest and pedophilia, were called oppressive bigots by vitriolic pro-homosexual activists?

Behold the first steps of legitimizing pedophilia:

Academic Conference Seeks to Normalize Pedophilia

Do not be shocked. We will continue to witness the downward spiral of the Evolution of Sin while we continue down the Roman Road to Wrath because we truly are in the Days of Noah. And don’t be discouraged because as the dark gets darker, the light of the Gospel shines brighter.

Look up, for our redemption draws near.

by

Sermonof the week: “Preaching the Gospel Message” by John MacArthur

John MacArthur Your sermon of the week is Preaching the Gospel Message by John MacArthur. This sermon delivered at the 2007 Resolved conference outlines how God sovereignly uses weak and foolish messengers to employ the foolish means of preaching about the foolishness of the cross all to accomplish God’s sovereign will in His plan of salvation.

by

Evangelism, Facebook, and modesty.

What does evangelism, Facebook, and modesty have in common? More than you may think.

Thanks to Trish Ramos for daring to touch this taboo issue affecting the church. I wish more women like Trish would take a stand with the few men who have already dared to address this problem. Together we’d still comprise only a minuscule minority, but that should not discourage us from encouraging the church to let the gospel revolutionize this area of our lives. We’ve been quietly stumbling over this elephant in the room for far too long.


Source: Fish With Trish

No doubt our Facebook pages can be a witnessing tool for the Gospel and with the advancement of modern technology and all the various social media venues, we don’t even have to leave the house to be a witness for the Lord. In fact, why else have a Facebook, but to tell of the Lord’s wondrous deeds and call others to turn from their sins and trust in the Savior, Jesus Christ. I’m sure there are many other reasons why we have Facebook pages but in the midst of it all, proclaiming the gospel should be the chief aim for any follower of Christ.

To show this more clearly, when you accept a friend on Facebook, typically the very first thing they do is view your pictures. In fact, sometimes that’s all they may do. They quickly skim through them to see how you look and what you’ve been up to for the past decade or two and then off they go, onto the next person’s page. It reminds me of the ol’ adage, “a picture is worth a thousand words.” This saying refers to the idea that a picture communicates something. Sometimes it communicates too much. So with that in mind, when was the last time you went through your Facebook pictures and asked yourself, “Is this modest?” or “What am I communicating to my ‘friends’?” and “Would I want my brothers and sisters in Christ looking at theses pictures?”

Ladies, this is especially for us. If you are a professing Christian and if you haven’t done this already, here’s something practical that you can do: Go through every picture on your Facebook (This may take time depending upon how many pictures you have, but it will be worth it since on Judgment Day you will give an account to the Lord for all of these things) and if you are dressed in an immodest manner, hit ‘Delete!’

If you need help with deciphering what is modest and what is immodest, ask a modest sister in your local church for help, or a godly older women who can give you wise counsel, or ask your husband (assuming that he has biblical standards for modesty). And if all else fails and you have no one else to go to, well then, there’s always me and I’ll be quick to toot my modesty horn.

For starters, here’s a few specific areas that might help you out, let’s begin with cleavage. Ladies, if you are showing cleavage, hit ‘Delete’ as fast as you can! I don’t care how “cute” you look or if someone else posts to pic of you or if it was way back in your BC (before Christ) days. This is not acceptable in any circumstances for a woman who professes to follow Christ. Simply delete the picture or ‘Un-tag’ yourself.

If you have photos of you or your friends in bikinis, hit ‘Delete’ as quickly as you can and don’t look back. Or if your mid (midriff) section is showing hit ‘Delete’ please. And short shorts are a no no, so you know what to do with that, ‘Delete, delete, delete’. And then check your heart and ask yourself, “What is it within me that desires to present myself in this manner?” and “What does this speak of the condition of my heart?”

“In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel…” 1 Timothy 2.9a

For more great resources on this subject, please go to these past two posts to download the following  sermons:

Validating the Gospel in Modesty by Albert N. Martin

The Soul of Modesty by C. J. Mahaney

I also recommend the following reads:

The Disrobing of Society and the Church by DefCon contributor Brother Michael

Modesty, Morality, and Miss America by DefCon contributor Coram Deo

by

Quotes (900)

You may speak of religion in a general way, of preachers, of churches, of missions, of societies, for doing good, and still be popular; but speak of the Lord Himself, of His precious blood, of the full assurance of salvation, of oneness with Him in heaven, of separation from the world, and you will greatly reduce the number of your friends.

– Andrew Miller

1810 – 1883

by

Nope. Never.

You hear Mormons say it all the time whenever you challenge any of their doctrines: “We never attack other faiths.” Or, “We never disparage other religions.” Or, “We’re too busy sharing the gospel to be negative about other people’s beliefs.”

For those who know better, these words are usually uttered out of either a profound ignorance of their own religion or a desperate attempt to get you off topic and put you on the defensive.

It is a fact that Mormonism has attacked, disparaged, ridiculed, and spoken negatively about the Christian faith (anyone who knows Mormon history knows this; it’s not even debatable).

The very Mormon organization is founded on a preemptive attack of Christianity. Mormonism’s founder, Joseph Smith, claimed that all of Christianity was apostate. Without his assault on the Christian faith, the impetus for Joseph Smith’s religion is removed and there would be no need for Mormonism.

Simply put, Mormonism’s very existence is predicated on the lie that Christianity is apostate, the Bible is mistranslated, Christ’s sacrifice was insufficient, and “The Christian God is the Mormon’s Devil.”

And other early Mormon leaders were not shy with divulging their disdain for our faith. See this article to read some of the mean, nasty and downright hateful things uttered about Christians by Mormon prophets, leaders, and apologists.

And inevitably there will be Mormons who claim, “We don’t teach that anymore” as if truth one day is a non-truth the next (and notice that they rarely ever say, “We don’t BELIEVE that anymore“). If they were honest they’d say, “We’re just more subtle about it now.”

The below video from the June 2011 Manti Pageant reveals that the well-hidden derogatory sentiment against Christians by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (and some not so hidden) is still alive and well. 

Thanks to  Mormon Coffee for posting the video and astutely observing:

In this short clip, the Mormon Church pageant makes fun of the Christian doctrines pertaining to the nature of God and eternal punishment, portrays Christian pastors as being unwilling or unable to answer the most basic of life’s questions, and misrepresents the “fervor of religious revival” with “the exhortations of contending preachers, each proclaiming his own church the only avenue of escape from the horrors of a burning hell.” The narrator jeers, “Amen, Hallelujah”; one of three pontificating preachers drones, “It is only here that you will find salvation. Only here,” while churchgoers dismiss the play’s sincere truth-seekers, Mary and Robert, with an annoyed sweep of their arms.

by

Edging closer to Revelation 13?

Revelation 13:16-18

And he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, and he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name.  Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six.

From Breitbart:

A hair-thin electronic patch that adheres to the skin like a temporary tattoo could transform medical sensing, computer gaming and even spy operations, according to a US study published Thursday.

The micro-electronics technology, called an epidermal electronic system (EES), was developed by an international team of researchers from the United States, China and Singapore, and is described in the journal Science.

“It’s a technology that blurs the distinction between electronics and biology,” said co-author John Rogers, a professor in materials science and engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

“Our goal was to develop an electronic technology that could integrate with the skin in a way that is mechanically and physiologically invisible to the user.”

The patch could be used instead of bulky electrodes to monitor brain, heart and muscle tissue activity and when placed on the throat it allowed users to operate a voice-activated video game with better than 90 percent accuracy.

“This type of device might provide utility for those who suffer from certain diseases of the larynx,” said Rogers. “It could also form the basis of a sub-vocal communication capability, suitable for covert or other uses.”

The wireless device is nearly weightless and requires so little power it can fuel itself with miniature solar collectors or by picking up stray or transmitted electromagnetic radiation, the study said.

Less than 50-microns thick — slightly thinner than a human hair — the devices are able to adhere to the skin without glue or sticky material.

“Forces called van der Waals interactions dominate the adhesion at the molecular level, so the electronic tattoos adhere to the skin without any glues and stay in place for hours,” said the study.

Northwestern University engineer Yonggang Huang said the patch was “as soft as the human skin.”

Rogers and Huang have been working together on the technology for the past six years. They have already designed flexible electronics for hemispherical camera sensors and are now focused on adding battery power and other energy options.

The devices might find future uses in patients with sleep apnea, babies who need neonatal care and for making electronic bandages to help skin heal from wounds and burns.

by

Sermon of the week: “The Great White Throne Judgment” by Steve Lawson

Wow. Your sermon of the week, The Great White Throne Judgment by Steve Lawson, is a riveting reminder of what’s to come for the unrepentant, and why it’s so imperative that we never tire of sharing the gospel with the unsaved, because it will be an incredibly terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God (Hebrews 10:31).

by

Happy birthday DefCon.

Defending Contending turns four years old today.

This blog began on August 10, 2007 as Reformation Nation. It then had a name change a year later on August 15, 2008 and officially became Defending Contenting. It was at this time that DefCon also welcomed contributing writers.

In honor of the event I’ve changed the current banner to one of the original DefCon banners (long time readers will remember it). I also wanted to say thank you to our contributors for all their sacrifices and hard work over the years, as well as a big thank you to our faithful readers.

Here are some stats that you may be interested in.

As of today we have . . .

3,620 Posts

20,257 Comments

1,723,000 Views (hits)

Again, thank you to all of you for your contributions to the discussions and your faithful readership over the past four years.

by

A shocking realization if a Mormon becomes president of the United States.

“Will you love your brothers or sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood?”

– Brigham Young as recorded in Journal of Discourses Volume 4 Page 219

“If you want to know what to do with a thief that you may find stealing, I say kill him on the spot, and never suffer him to commit another iniquity.”

– Brigham Young as recorded in Journal of Discourses Volume 1 Page 108

“Men, who have been warned and forewarned, but who will associate with the wicked and take a course to commit whoredom, and will strive to lead our daughters and our wives into the society of poor, wicked curses, with a view to gratify their cursed passions; we will take them and slay them before this people.”

– Heber C. Kimball as recorded in Journal of Discourses, Volume 4, Page 173

As the debate among Christians continues on whether or not they would (or should) vote for a Mormon for president, and whether or not a Mormon president would be a good thing for our nation, there is a concern that has gone virtually unmentioned that I’d like to bring to your attention.

During the early years of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), a doctrine was taught (and practiced) that essentially gave Mormons the divine right to take another man’s life, believing not only that it was sanctioned by God, but that by doing so they were doing the victim a favor.

“There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world. I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is a strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not destroy them.”

 – Brigham Young as recorded in Journal of Discourses Volume 4 Page 53

This Mormon doctrine, known as Blood Atonement, calls for the murder of those who commit sins that the blood of the Mormon Jesus can’t cleanse.

“It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit.”

– Brigham Young as recorded in Journal of Discourses Volume 4 Page 54

Mormons actually believed that they were doing what Christ could not do; namely, saving a sinner’s soul. In this upside down world of Mormon atonement—which is completely antithetical to God’s plan of redemption as revealed in the Bible—even King David was unable to be fully forgiven by God for his sins and had to pay for his own sins in Hell.

According to Mormonism, even the sin of adultery could not be atoned for by God’s Son, and was cause for men and women needing their own blood shed:

“Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would atone for their sins and be received into the kingdom of God. I would at once do so in such a case; and under such circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands. . . . There is not a man or woman who violates the covenants made with their God, that will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it.”

 – Brigham Young as recorded in Journal of Discourses Volume 3 Page 247

Not surprisingly, like many early Mormon teachings that later Mormon leaders felt were politically expedient to downplay, deny, or reverse (like racism, Adam was God, polygamy, the Mormon god’s sexual encounter with Mary, spiritual vegetables, people living on the moon, people living on the sun, etc.), their doctrine of Blood Atonement eventually just went away.

So, what bearing does this have on whether or not a Mormon is elected president? And how is the doctrine of Blood Atonement that’s no longer practiced (at least by the mainstream denomination of Mormonism) germane to American politics? And why should we be concerned about it now?

The answer lies in the reason they don’t practice it.

Mormon apologists claim they no longer practice Blood Atonement because it can only be practiced when the power of the government and the power of the church are in the same hands:

“This doctrine can only be practiced in its fulness in a day when the civil and ecclesiastical laws are administered in the same hands. It was, for instance, practiced in the days of Moses, but it was not and could not be practiced in this dispensation . . . .”

– Bruce R. McConkie as recorded on page 93 of his book Mormon Doctrine (1966 edition)

If either Mormon presidential candidate Romney or Jon Huntsman is elected president of the United States, then the civil and ecclesiastical laws will be in the same hands of the LDS organization, thus, there would be nothing preventing them from lifting their moratorium on shedding the blood of sinners. And, after all, they would be doing a great service to those caught up in sins that the Mormon Jesus simply can’t redeem them from.

But there is one thing that will stop them from following through with the words of their own prophets concerning Blood Atonement: Their insatiable appetite to protect the façade that they’re actually Christians.

Should a Mormon be elected president, the largest obstacle to their reinstitution of Blood Atonement would be that it would gravely hurt their proselytizing efforts. And as anyone who’s studied Mormon history knows, modern mainstream Mormonism will sacrifice their former principles and doctrines anytime it becomes politically expedient to do so. When times change, so does the mind of Mormonism’s god.

Modern Mormons have worked too hard to distance themselves from the uncomfortable teachings of their past prophets, while simultaneously (and ironically I might add) tirelessly working to reinvent themselves to appear to the unsuspecting and undiscerning as Christians, (the very Christians—and Christian faith—they consider apostate).

If the LDS organization loses converts it loses money. I don’t believe that the current LDS propaganda machine would do anything to jeopardize their new mainstream image, but with the “civil and ecclesiastical laws” being “administered in the same hands” the ban from practicing Blood Atonement would be gone, and that is a more frightening prospect than a promised tax hike.

To learn more about Blood Atonement, see:

The Mormon doctrine of Blood Atonement as taught by Brigham Young 

The Doctrine of Blood Atonement as taught by the Mormon organization

“The wickedness and ignorance of the nations forbid this principle’s [sic] being in full force, but the time will come when the law of God will be in full force. This is loving your neighbour [sic] as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it. Any of you who understand the principles of eternity, if you have sinned a sin requiring the shedding of blood, except the sin unto death, would not be satisfied nor rest until your blood should be spilled, that you might gain that salvation you desire. This is the way to love mankind.”

– Brigham Young as recorded in Journal of Discourses Volume 4 Page 220

by

Quotes (899)

  What happened to the God-centered method of evangelism that calls sinners to repent and believe the Gospel? For the last 100 years people have been told to repeat a prayer, come forward, sign a card or get baptized to be saved. Many of them have lived with a false hope because none of these methods are found in God’s Word. . . . Well-meaning Christians who use a man-centered approach to evangelism by manipulating people to make a decision are helping the devil plant tares. They promote easy believism with no call to repentance or discipleship because it produces quick results that people can measure. The unanticipated results of their actions are devastating: God is not glorified, the sinner is not saved, the church is not sanctified and the devil is thrilled and delighted. . . . We must quit seeking quick results and instead glorify God by making disciples and faithfully proclaiming His Word until the sinner asks, “What must I do to be saved?”

– Mike Gendron

by

Sermon of the week: “The Gospel Revolution in Love” by Akash Sant Singh.

DefCon is delighted to bring to you this week’s sermon, The Gospel Revolution in Love by Pastor Akash Sant Singh. This two-part sermon is wonderfully encouraging, yet deeply convicting. The text for this message comes from 1 Thessalonians 4:9-10 and will prove to challenge you.

The Gospel Revolution in Love (Part 1)

The Gospel Revolution in Love (Part 2)

by

A restored priesthood?

4Mormon.org provides the following quick-reference chart and asks the question: “If Mormonism has ‘restored’ the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods, why is its version different from the Biblical version?“


Mormon Priesthood
Biblical Priesthood
All LDS males are ordained to the Aaronic Priesthood
Must be of the Lineage of Aaron (Num. 3:6, 10; Heb. 7:5, 11-14)
Deacons are 12 year old boys
Deacons are husbands (I Tim. 3:8)
Males with Defects are Accepted (Joseph Smith had a leg defect)
Must Be Physically Blameless (Leviticus 21:1-23)
Priests do not perform blood sacrifices, nor follow biblical rites
Priests perform blood sacrifice and special rites (Leviticus 8)
Many “High Priest” Bishops
One legal “High Priest” at a time
Many LDS Males receive the Melchizedek Priesthood
Only Jesus qualified for office of Melchizedek (Heb. 7:1-4, 23-28)
LDS Males transfer to others the Melchizedek Priesthood
Melchizedek Priesthood is non- transferable (Hebrews 7:23-24)