Mormon Dilemma 4

27 May

Mormon Dilemma 4 – Power to Save

Matthew 1:21 says an angel of the Lord told Joseph and Mary she would bring forth a Son, and to call Him Jesus,

“For He shall save His people from their sins”. 

Mormon theology tells us that members of the Church are the saviors of men.  D&C 103:9 says;

“For they were set to be a light unto the world, and to be the saviors of men.”

Who’s telling the truth here?  Both of these statements can’t possibly be right!  This poses a huge dilemma – who holds the power to save?

Do the Mormons hold the power to save through their priesthood or through the times they stand in as proxy to be baptized for dead people?  Or is it as God tells us in the Bible?  Only God Himself has the power to save His people?

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

5 Responses to “Mormon Dilemma 4”

  1. shematwater June 1, 2011 at 3:54 pm #

    Again, this is no dilemma, for both of these can be true, when you understand them.

    Christ is the great savior of the world, and it is only through him that eternal salvation can be gained.

    However, men are saviors when they spread the gospel, bringing the knowledge of Christ’s great atonement to those in darkness.

    A missionary is the savior of those whom he teaches and brings to a knowledge of Christ. A parent is a savior of their children when they teach them of Christ and raise them in faith. No, they have not done anything personally to remove the persons sins, but they did bring the person to the point where their sins could be removed if they so desired.

    • Melissa June 3, 2011 at 1:09 am #

      Yes shem, but we’re not looking at it in terms of how you understand it are we? What matters is what God has said and how God understands it.

      If we can be “saviors of men” why did Jesus have to come in the first place? Once again Mormonism shows how they really feel about the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, it just isn’t enough when you’re working toward your godhood, is it?

  2. shematwater June 3, 2011 at 3:05 pm #


    If you care about what God said you would familiarize yourself better with his word instead of spending your time attacking other’s faith.

    Obediah 1: 21
    “And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the Lord’s.”

    Notice the plurality here. It speaks of saviors, not Savior. Thus, through the words of God we know that there are many saviors of men, and they will judge the people.

    So, when we talk about men being saviors we speak in the same manner as this prophecy; that men will bring the gospel to the world, and through their testimony the world will either accept Christ or reject him, and thus their testimony will act as a judge over them.

    Now, you ask a question.
    “If we can be “saviors of men” why did Jesus have to come in the first place?”

    You have no understanding if you do not already know the answer. But for the benefit of the readers I will answer.
    Christ’s atonement washes sin for all those who come unto him and believe; but how can a person come and believe if they have never heard of him?
    Christ is the only one who can cleanse sin, but it is us who must make sure that all men have the knowledge required to choose that cleansing.

    • lifeafterministry June 3, 2011 at 4:45 pm #

      Let me interject here on this Shem.

      If you’re looking to relentlessly argue with someone you need to find another blog to take out your pent up frustrations with. You’re an angry, malcontent, irritated person that feels the need to put others down by telling them they don’t understand when in fact it is you that doesn’t get it. Up and until you’re ready to hear the truth or even be open to the idea you could learn something from anyone other than the cult leaders you’re following you won’t ever learn. Since you seem to think you’re the repository for all earthly knowledge it doesn’t make sense that you’d want to keep harassing those of us who have chosen not to partake of the mind controlling lies put forth from the Church.
      My heart breaks for those caught in the snares of the Church and the traditions, heritage, et al, have kept them from knowing the Jesus they so desperately love and want to know. For those caught in Mormonism and choose to be arrogant and rude to those who’ve not accepted the Church I really have no heartache for except to pray for the release of the anger inside of you that so obviously rules your world.
      Know that we’ll be praying for you. Hopefully you’ll take a good look in the mirror to find out why it is you’re always needing to be rude – somehow that’s helped you feel more in control.
      As for attacking other faiths. Smith did that by calling the body of Christ a whore. The body of Christ is now pointing out and warning other Christians why Smith was a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

    • shematwater June 4, 2011 at 4:12 pm #

      I am not arrogant, nor am I a malcontent or frustrated. Angry I might agree with.

      Now, as to arguing, I really have no intent for that, though I do enjoy it. I realize that these blogs you post are not intended to start any real kind of discussion or debate. My purpose is simply to give a voice to the other side so that readers, if they are not already blinded and prejudiced against the “accursed mormons” can see what is actually taught in the LDS faith rather than what you here represent as being taught.

      Now, I have never claimed to have all earthly knowledge. I never said that I learn only from my church leaders. I have never even made the assumption that I know more than you in general.
      What I have said is that my understanding of the LDS church is greater than yours, and it is. To say I am arrogant for this is like telling a doctor he is arrogant for correcting others in matters of medicine.

      Now, let us considering attacking others faith for a few moments. First, Joseph Smith never called “the body of Christ” a whore. What he did do was call an institution that was set up by Satan a whore, but he made no comment concern the members of that institution. In truth he had great heartache for those who were deceived by that institution.
      However, even with this he never once attacked anyone elses faith, he simply disagreed with it. He was one that would help any religion in any way, as long as it did not force him to disobey God. Yeah, he would try to convince you that he was right, but he would never deny assistance.
      On a final note, while he did believe all others were wrong, he never gave a sermon or published a paper or book that was dedicated to systematic destruction of a particular faith. On occassion he would say “this doctrine is wrong, and I will tell you what is right,” but he did not single out any religion for direct ridicule.

      Let us compare this: You have made direct attacks on the character of individual leaders (and now me) of the LDS church. You have gone way beyond the simple statement that an institution is corrupt to the point of attempting to personally judge individuals.
      Now, I will take a wild guess here, but I don’t think you would be too eager to help any LDS build or rebuild our buildings. I doubt you would be too eager to let us use your buildings for any LDS event. IN fact, I would be very surprised if you were to assist in any way (accept to individuals so as to distance yourself from association as much as possible.
      You promote books, blogs, and otehr media whose only purpose is the systematic assualt on the doctrine, faith, and character of the LDS church and its members. Your entire website here is a dedicated assault. You use deception (like your false use of the term prophecy in many of your blogs) and misdirection.

      When I speak of an attack on a faith I am not talking about a honest disagreement concerning faith, or even a declaration that another faith is wrong and false. I am talking about a systematic and laborous assault not designed to teach truth, but to destroy another faith.

      Melissa said “Yes shem, but we’re not looking at it in terms of how you understand it are we? What matters is what God has said and how God understands it.”

      But if you do not understand LDS doctrine how can you claim to know it is not in harmony with how God understands things. This is a classic example of deception and misdirection.
      “Don’t bother with what the actual LDS doctrine is, just show enough of it so that it appear to contradict what we believe in.”

Leave a Reply