Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Contention? Is it of the devil?

LDS Members are always saying 3 Nephi 11:29, 'He that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil. First off, I would like to say, this is not taught anywhere in the Bible. So for those who believe that the BoM is another gospel and basically a work of the devil, then we believe the Devil would teach this.

He is going to want you to believe this because then people will avoid answering hard questions that simply question their faith. The Idea of Contention being of the devil, if this were true, then I see a lot of problems in the Bible. Jesus and the apostles plus prophets in the OT did and said things that easily could be viewed as Contention.

John the baptist said

Mat 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?


Jesus said

Mat 12:34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.


Notice here in these verses, the People were offended because of him.

Mat 13:56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this [man] all these things?

Mat 13:57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.


Granted Jesus is both Perfect and Speaking the truth, they were offended by the Truth, but still People who claim they are Offended or I am being Contentions means nothing, It in my mind is simply a way to avoid the truth, by claiming it is not true but of the devil.

Here is two more things Jesus said, that Could be taken as a spirit of Contention.

Mat 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Mat 15:15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.

Mat 15:16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?


Jesus calls the leaders Blind, and says to His Disciples, Are ye also yet without understanding?
In today's words, Jesus would be saying, Are you also Stupid?

Something Else Jesus said to his Disciples,
Luk 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken


He called his Disciples, Fools and slow of heart.

Can you believe Jesus did this!
Jhn 2:15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables


He whipped the people and overturned their stuff, if that is not mean and a form of Contention I don't know what is.

Now lets look at this verse,
Col 4:6 Let your speech [be] alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.


Notice in this verse the word SALT. I have been in the restaurant business for around 20 years. We use salt to draw blood out of meat, and it draws impurities out of food, it helps slow the growth of yeast in bread, and in the Scripture the use of yeast always refers to Sin and false Doctrine. We use the salt, (Truth) to slow down or kill doctrinal error, and when salt is poured and your hand has a cut on it, it hurts.

We read in Scripture
Galatians 4:16 puts it, "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
I could say that, because I share the truth with you and you get mad, you feel it is Contention.

Paul says in
2Ti 2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;

2Ti 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.


Paul points out these two people as teaching false Doctrine and says it is a canker. Paul even goes so far as to name names. This could also be taken as Contention.

The Bible tells us in 2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. We are told to REBUKE, REPROVE, EXHORT. These things can all be taken as forms of Contention.

Now lets look at what the LDS prophets and Scripture teach.

Read
D and C 66:7 68:1,9 go into the church's public or private to discuss this stuff. D and C 6:9-11 says convince us of our error if we have any.
Why do I get accused of being contentious for doing what the scriptures teach. Now let me add this, would you agree it is good to listen to the mormon prophets? If so then I am. Read
pg 188 of doct of salvation vol 1 I quote. "CHURCH STANDS OR FALLS WITH JOSEPH SMITH. MORMONISM, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. their is no middle ground. If Joseph Smith was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead the people, then he should be exposed: his claims should be refuted, and his doctrines shown to be false".



Why if your president and prophet said to do this and I believe it, I am in the wrong?. Did your Prophet not read that verse about contention? Let me also add what the apostle Orson Pratt said.
The Seer pg 15. I quote " if we cannot convince you by reason nor by the word of God that YOUR religion is wrong we will not persecute you".


Notice he is speaking to people of others faiths. And he states he is trying to show they are wrong through talks, but says if we cannot convince you. Well I don't feel I have persecuted anyone if they disagree. Let me add what else he said.

I quote Orson pratt still pg 15.
"we ask from you the same generosity--protect us in the exercise of our religious rights--CONVINCE US of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds".


I am just trying to look at mormonism in a logical way and point out what I believe are problems. I find it interesting that mormons of old were willing to tell others they were wrong or be open to talks, But it does not appear to be that way today. Then even after what Orson Pratt said, he does and feels should be done with the LDS I am still accused of being Contentious for sharing.


Ok this is stuff your Prophets have said about Christians. And if this is true, how can you say your a christian. If it is false, then your prophets were wrong, so could they be wrong about other stuff? Also regardless of whether it is true or not, could this be taken as a form of contention?


Here is what some of the former LDS Prophets and presidents have said about christians and I Quote:
"B Young: "with a regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called christian world" (Journal of Discourses 8:199). I quote 3rd president John Taylor (Brigham Young quotes Mr. Taylor) "Brother Taylor has just said that the religions of the day were hatched in hell, the eggs were laid in hell, hatched on its borders, and kicked onto the earth" (J.O.D 6:176). I quote Heber C. Kimball "Christians-those poor, miserable priests Brother Brigham was speaking about-some of them are the biggest whoremasters there are on the earth" (J.O.D 5:89)." then we can add the first vision by Joseph Smith. If God really did speak to him then he said all the christian creeds are an abomination in his sight.


I would think the Prophets who said that, had the Devil's Spirit of Contention. Rick b

9 comments:

Spidey4Christ said...

OK, for those of you catching up, or for those of you short on details, I'm listing out the progression of this issue, and my take on them, feel free to respond. I'm honestly looking forward to this horrible debate ending suddenly.

It will be posted on Rick's blog at mormonismreviewed.blogspot.com and my own blog at the-roaming-gnome.blogspot.com.

1. A person took on Rick's persona and said things contradictory to Rick's beliefs.

2. It was said that Ed came to help Rick by rebuking the same person. Further, it was stated that Ed was the Good Samaritan as in the Parable of the Good Samaritan in doing this deed.

3. In Rick challenging the statement, Ed posted a breakdown of the parable and his perception of how he fit it.

Now, here's my take on the whole fiasco.

1. I think it was improper for the person to do what he/she did. This issue has been resolved with that person.

2. I think that a lot of things were blown out of proportion. It was said that Rick and his wife were ungrateful for Ed to show his generosity. On that I think that Ed should have kept quiet and been content for the righteous (and I use "righteous" loosely) thing that he had done. I think it was arrogant of him to continue on the topic. I say this because if he really was being righteous for the Kingdom, God knows what he did and saw it, and would have received praise for it later (much more satisfying than receiving praise from any man). About Rick's abusive nature (as Ed's perception puts it), I don't believe Rick to be abusive. There is a difference between blunt and abusive, problem is the world can't tell the difference. I myself find it to be a bad thing to be called "nice". It implies that I'm lying to your face, and I don't do that. You will not find me to be "nice", but kind. My own mother can attest to me not being nice.

I have not even begun to touch all the things said on this topic across the two blogs. 1. It would be impossible. Some of the posts have been deleted, some e-mails have been thrown around, and I can't read people's minds. 2. I'm not going to. It wouldn't be fruitful, and would take up too much time.

Now, here's my challenge to the both Rick and Ed. I have an idea of what Rick would say, but for validity's sake, it would be better to post it outright. Answer these questions for me and everybody else out there:

What purpose is served in this discussion?

What good has this done anybody?

How much closer to God are you through this discussion?

Also, please answer it on all blogs!

rick b said...

Roaming Gnome asked these questions.
What purpose is served in this discussion?

What good has this done anybody?

How much closer to God are you through this discussion?


RG, You said also I have an idea of what Rick would say, After I answer these questions, Tell me, was I close to what you thought I would say?

Question 1. What purpose is served in this discussion?

My reply(s) 1st. I was accused of both lying and stealing anothers work. the Purposes from my point of view are these, I was showing I am not a liar and did not steal anothers work. Then they or he/she, Accused me out in the open so they needed to be rebuked in the open, just doing as the Pastor of my Church teaches. You make it public the reply becomes public.

Question 2. What good has this done anybody? It clearly proved I am not a liar or a thief.

Question 3. How much closer to God are you through this discussion?

I am closer to God by the fact I did not lie, and did as His word teaches.

2Cr 13:1 This [is] the third [time] I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.


2Cr 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?


2Cr 13:7 Now I pray to God that ye do no evil; not that we should appear approved, but that ye should do that which is honest, though we be as reprobates.
Rick b

Timothy J. Bortner said...

Hey Rick,

Good to hear from you Brother. yes, when people just want to endelessly debate, this is not the Lord that they do that.

Also, I believe that Satan can use people who endlessly debate, without acknowledging the truth, to then tie us up and cause us to waste a lot of time that could be used for much better purposes.

On the other hand though, there are those who will accuse us who defend the truth of the Gospel, as being debaters and contentious etc., this they do most often to escape being confronted and exposed.
Reasonable questions demand reasonable answers, if a reasonable answer cannot be given according to the Scriptures then one has a problem with the Scriptures not with the questioner.

I suppose when all is said and done concerning this issue of being contentious and such that the bottom line is that it takes discernment. One must be able to discern between who is being merely argumentative and has no real desire to learn and the one who has a desire for the truth and is asking a lot of questions or perhaps has already been infected with a cultic view of some sort but is seeking for the truth nonetheless.

Above all, we are to speak the truth in love. Those who reject it are not targets for our anger but for our compassion and prayer in the Lord. Amen.

A Christian,
Timothy J. Bortner

Anonymous said...

The 'spirit of contention' is of the devil, for he stirreth up the hearts of the children of men to contend one with another. Look at the context. Being offended by a strong statement of truth is not contention. Arguing with the apostle Paul could be contentious on the one side, those arguing against him, but not neccissarily on Paul's side ie declaring truth. Basically in part this means that when we lose control with anger and hatred replaces love and concern toward one another the spirit of Love, the spirit of God leaves us and we are 'left to kick against the pricks'. If we act on these hate-filled feelings to contend with others this is of the devil and as such not of God. This is in part what I have heard these Mormons say it means. Just because the Lord says that all the religions of the day are false - he declares this because he can, his word is truth and fulfilled. He is not contending he is teaching the truth, or more particularly declaring it because he Loves us. Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

The 'spirit of contention' is of the devil, for he stirreth up the hearts of the children of men to contend one with another. Look at the context. Being offended by a strong statement of truth is not contention. Arguing with the apostle Paul could be contentious on the one side, those arguing against him, but not neccissarily on Paul's side ie declaring truth. Basically in part this means that when we lose control with anger and hatred replaces love and concern toward one another the spirit of Love, the spirit of God leaves us and we are 'left to kick against the pricks'. If we act on these hate-filled feelings to contend with others this is of the devil and as such not of God. This is in part what I have heard these Mormons say it means. Just because the Lord says that all the religions of the day are false - he declares this because he can, his word is truth and fulfilled. He is not contending he is teaching the truth, or more particularly declaring it because he Loves us. Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

Just like with the bible, your analogy comes down to how you interpreted the scripture.

"Spirit" of contention and not contention itself. It isn't saying contention is of the devil but a contentious spirit is. People who look to START problems, or in other words, have a contentious spirit are of the devil. Everything you pointed out proves this to be true. Christ wasn't LOOKING to cause harm that day. He saw what was going on and was LIVID at what supposed holy men were allowing in His Father's house. The Pharisees and Sadducees were not confronted out of a spirit of contention, they were confronted with a spirit of love for God and his word. Your misinterpretation is nothing more than a feeble attempt to subvert and cast doubt on someone elses religion? Why? Well I would say it is because you are living with that very "spirit of contention" which this scripture warns of. So who is REALLY in the right here? Not you. "for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." Indeed. I challenge you to change the things in your heart that would have you speak ill of others. I challenge you to quell your spirit of contention.

rick b said...

Anon,
Please dont waste my time any more, If you refuse to read my topic I wont post your stuff. You cry, BOO-HOO. Ricks being Mean because he is doing what my Prophets challenged him to do.

Anon Said Your misinterpretation is nothing more than a feeble attempt to subvert and cast doubt on someone elses religion?

This tells me you either did not read what I wrote, Or you did, but ignored much of it.

Your prophets said, Tell us if we are wrong, show us were and how we are wrong. If JS is a liar he needs to be espoused as such.

The Bible talks much about false prophets and wolves in sheeps clothing. I do what your prophets say, and you cry BOO-HOO, ricks picking on me.

Grow a spine and defend your religion, if you cant, then leave.

Your false prophets JS and false BoM claim what I believe is an ABOMINATION in the site of God and I am of the church of the devil.

You dont see me running to Mormons crying, why do you attack my religion?

I could easily say this about Mormons,
Your misinterpretation is nothing more than a feeble attempt to subvert and cast doubt on someone elses religion?

Instead I defend what I believe with Facts, reason and scripture. In Return You ignore what your prophets say and cry. So either reply with facts and evidence or dont waste my time.

Truth Revealed said...

You do not understand the gospel of jesus christ if you think that contention is of God. I think the issue lies in that you have difficulty in distinguishing between contention and rebuke.

Example of Contention:

When a spouses scream at each other because they were angry about the other spouse not serving them in the manner in which they feel they should be served. Fighting to get gain while full of pride and disrespect



Example of Rebuke:

Husband is concerned about his wife because she is not spending enough time with the family. So with an attitude of concern and for a desire of helping them, not thinking of himself, the husband tells her that she needs to put her priorities in to perspective and put her family first, give of her time.

Preferably, a spouse will confront in a loving manner with soft words and show love. Love breaks the spell of sin, while harshness even though there may be good intent, hardens the sinner even further down the road of no return.

rick b said...

Hello "Truth revealed" You said I think the issue lies in that you have difficulty in distinguishing between contention and rebuke.

I really dont have a problem telling the difference.

The Problem I have is all the cover up's and lies from Mormons who claim they have the truth, but when asked a question about something they believe then all of a sudden I get the persecution card thrown in the game, or the I feel a spirit of contention thrown in. How can we talk and have questions answered if all I get is that?

I currently post on a regular basis on this site, www.answeringlds.org

Their are two mormons who also post their, they go by "Fred" and "Clyde"

Those two dodge questions and avoid questions so often, every single person has asked them over and over to answer questions, they have been asked why they are even their.

They have even had another Mormon poster named TJAYT ask them why they are their. They have been told they are embarrassing the church with their ways. People have even posted that the Mods should kick them off. You should go their. I find it typical of Mormons to act as these two do, and I also find it typical of Mormons to do as you do.

Set up an account, post one reply on a random topic that is buried way down, try and sound smart then never come back and tackle the serious questions. Thats what I notice.