MRM.tv

Mr. Ron Rhodes what makes you think that you have the right interpretation of what it means to be a Christian? Do you agree with the Jehova's Witnesses, the Baptist, the Anglicans, the Catholics or do you have your own interpretation of the bible and try to convince people to believe your so called "knowledge" about Christianity. If you notice this religions have different beliefs about Christianity that is why they don't agree to establish one faith, they are separated from each other. What makes you think that you define Christianity perfectly and that they don't. Now please tell me why you think you know the truth or have you created this video because you want to put some praise on your name. What makes you think that you know the truth and others don't? Do you even realize why there are so many religions today. One reason is because someone stood up for what he thought is the right explanation of the gospel and that's what you are trying to do because if you agree with them you belong to one of those religions. Trying to tell the world that you are right and others are wrong... Who could be right? Every person can and will receive the truth from the Lord directly through prayer and faith. That's the right of every person and not because someone said so. Communicate with the Lord through prayer and He will let you know THE TRUTH and that's the fact.

Ron Rhodes isnt saying he is right and others are wrong. He is saying the bible is right and the BofM is wrong. The bible dictates what a christian is. The reason different faiths have different versions of Christianity is because they don't follow the bible. It isn't a matter of interpretation, it's a matter of choice to follow the bible and Jesus or to not. Watch the video, no where does Ron say, I'm right and other's are wrong. He uses the bible, in context, and directly compares it to what mainstream Mormonism. Jesus clearly gives Christian's all authority to call out liars and expose false prophets. If you truly believe in God, seek the truth without fear that your faith could be wrong.

Mormonism is Christianity without the paradoxes.

Wouldn't you rather have paradoxes than contradictions?

A paradox is a contradiction.. And the logical paradoxes that exist in traditional Christianity cut right to the core of the fundamentals and is why notable Christian scholars and Evangelicals like Charles Templeton, Bart Ehrman left the faith and became agnostic.

The term "paradox" is often used to refer to something that seems like a contradiction, but isn't.

Mormonism just outright contradicts the Bible. For example, Mormonism leaves open the issue of whether God the Father was once a horrific sinner (before he became a God) who needed an atonement from another savior.

A paradox is always a contradiction. Those who believe in Traditional Christianity like to redefine paradox as to try to suggest that their doctrines may seem contradictory but really aren't. It's just a classic denial of reality.

Mormonism doesn't contradict the Bible at all. It may however contradict YOUR interpretation of the Bible. If you interpret the Bible according traditional Christian dogma, your interpretation is plagued with logical paradoxes.

So again, Mormonism is Biblically consistent and Christian without the paradoxes.

Do you think it is mere non-Biblical "dogma" that God the Father never was a wretched sinner who needed the atonement of another redeemer?

I think you are criticizing a bit of un-authoritative speculative theology of some as to what God may or may not have been doing before the beginning. In that your statement is not official LDS teachings, it really is an irrelevant diatribe and your use of it to promulgate anti-Mormonism is fallacious.

Mormonism doesn't generally theologically tolerate speculation on whether Jesus Christ was once perhaps a wretched sinner, so why should Christianity theologically tolerate speculation on whether God the Father was once perhaps a wretched sinner? That Mormonism puts the matter in the realm of "speculation" is part of the very problem. That Mormonism doesn't have an official position on the issue doesn't effectively dismiss the issue, but rather exasperates it.

For more on the issue of whether the elusive concept of "officiality" defines the scope of what should be engaged, see my article here.

Anyways, you didn't answer my question: Do you think it is mere non-Biblical "dogma" that God the Father never was a wretched sinner who needed the atonement of another redeemer?