Share This Episode
Viewpoint on Mormonism Bill McKeever  Logo

On Being Contentious — Part 1

Viewpoint on Mormonism / Bill McKeever
The Truth Network Radio
December 26, 2019 5:30 am

On Being Contentious — Part 1

Viewpoint on Mormonism / Bill McKeever

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 662 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Encouraging Word
Don Wilton
Sound of Faith
Sharon Hardy Knotts and R. G. Hardy
Fellowship in the Word
Bil Gebhardt
Cross Reference Radio
Pastor Rick Gaston
Connect with Skip Heitzig
Skip Heitzig
Running to Win
Erwin Lutzer

Point is, the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints viewpoint when Mormonism is sponsored by Mormonism research ministry since 1979 Mormonism research ministry has been dedicated to equipping the body of Christ with answers regarding the Christian faith in a manner that expresses gentleness and respect. And now, your host for today's viewpoint on Mormonism welcome to this additional viewpoint on Mormonism on your host, Bill McKeever, founder and director Mormonism research ministry with me today is Eric Johnson, my colleague, M. R. M. In the April 2017 edition of & magazine Elder Larry or Lawrence, who was a 70 in the Mormon church wrote an article called the war goes on. It begins on page 33 in & and he lists several strategies that he attributes to Satan. He calls them Satan's strategies to be looking at one of those strategies that he believes is from Satan, and that is contention is contention, always wrong not to listen to Mr. Lawrence. You would assume it probably is always wrong to be contentious, but does the Bible support that type of a conclusion, I would say no. According to Jude. Three. What is it said Eric that were supposed to earnestly contend for the faith. Are we not right and in fact in the English standard version.

It says 11. Although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. Notice how he says I found it necessary because there are times where you have to bring up issues that were going to disagree on. And there's can have to be some contention and that's basically what contention is this the coming together of two different ideas.

Now there's a way to express that contention. And certainly we as Christians were not supposed to be in my opinion, having conversations where the veins in our necks are popping out or things like that were not to be angry at the individual that we may disagree with the position that they hold.

Mr. Lorch is going to address this, but I think he goes way too far in trying to say that contention in all areas is absolutely wrong and not of God. What is he say on page 37 of the April 2017 & under this section of contention number three. Satan is the father contention. The Savior teaches quote he stirs up the hearts of men to contend with anger one with another."

And that's from third Nephi 1129 that he's quoting from the book of Mormon and this is one of those areas where I probably wouldn't have a disagreement in principle with what the book of Mormon is saying here because in context. What is being discussed it well. It says he stirs up the heart of man to contend with anger that Jesus certainly had anger at times, but he was sinless so we have to assume his anger was a righteous anger and I know many times Christians like to excuse their behavior by saying it's a righteous anger could we say for a surety that's always the way it is. It's often very difficult to get angry without having some amount of flesh in you that's coming out so again folks. Let's look at the context here.

This is talking about contending with anger. Then he goes on, the devil has learned from centuries of experience that where there is contention, the spirit of the Lord will depart, let me stop you there because he is saying where there is contention, the spirit of the Lord will depart.

We just cited Jude 3 where he said that we should earnestly contend for the faith. Now, based on what Mr. Lawrence has said so far are we to assume that Jude was giving advice that did not have the spirit of the Lord behind. Let me give you a citation from fourth Pres. Wilford Woodruff in the January 2006 & magazine on page 20 and this is an article that is titled Wilford Woodruff contending for the faith.

This is what he says my friends, will you tell me why you don't contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. We you tell me why you don't contend for that gospel that Jesus Christ taught and that his apostles taught. So it certainly okay to contend for the faith which is what G3 was and what was being said in the reference that you just gave so obviously all types of contention or wrong. It's really more and how you contend. I would assume, rather than the contending itself.

Because remember, folks, we cannot ignore the fact that contention, in and of itself usually comes about when you have two individuals with diverse opinions.

That's what life is all about but yet were going to see in this article that we can't really even disagree with leaders in the Mormon church or doctrines in the Mormon church or anything without being accused by a guy like Mr. Lawrence of being erroneously contentious and I just don't agree with that conclusion and I find it to be disingenuous when you say that there should not be contention by telling people that you should not contend in telling us that we shouldn't contend, isn't that kinda self-defeating, because in a sense, you're making a contention for your faith. He goes on and says Satan loves a spread contention in the church.

That's C church so it's gotta be the Mormon church that is referring to. He specializes in pointing out the faults of church leaders. Joseph Smith warned the saints at the beginning step to apostasy is to lose confidence in the leaders of the church. So let me ask you based on what he just said there was the apostle Paul being used by Satan when he confronted the apostle Peter of Peter's hypocrisy with the Gentiles, found in Galatians 211.

Based on what Mr. Lawrence is saying here we could draw that conclusion that Paul was somehow wrong in doing so, let's read that passage because I think it's a good passage based on what were talking about Galatians 211 through 14 says, but when Cephas or Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he stood condemned for before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles, but when they came, he drew back and separated himself during the circumcision party and the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel. I said to Peter before the mall quote. If you though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews that we know that Paul was absolutely in the right in doing so, and we have no evidence whatsoever to show that somebody left the church because of what Paul said about Peter or that it even affected Peter's walk with the Lord.

Obviously, Peter got over it. But here's the point were trying to make. It's not absolutely incorrect to bring out faults even in leaders if it's accurate, then shouldn't it be brought up or should it be ignored as it seems that Mr. Lawrence is employing here and Peter could've had a chip on his shoulder and said I don't want to listen to you, young guy who has just been Johnny-come-lately when I was with Jesus from the very beginning, but we see in acts chapter 15 when they have the Council in Jerusalem that there was a reconciliation. And Peter went along with it and then in his second Peter epistle in chapter 3 he writes this, verse 15 count the patience of our Lord is salvation just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you, according to the wisdom given him as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist of their own destruction as they do the other Scriptures. Here you have Peter saying Paul knew what he was talking about and actually like and what he had written as Scripture. Will this article goes on to say that almost all anti-Mormon literature is based on lies about the character of Joseph Smith. Interesting how he uses the word almost so my question would be, will what percentage of that information that is found in what he calls anti-Mormon and really, what is that even mean are you really implying Mr. Lawrence that because we say things critical of the Mormon church or of written things that are critical of the Mormon church that were really against Mormons is that what you really implying that were against Mormons because we do that because that would certainly be an unfair accusation that we would readily admit that we are against Mormonism because we believe that its principal tenets are false, erroneous, and leading people away from biblical truth. But what he says almost all anti-Mormon literature is based on lies about the character of Joseph Smith. I wish he would've been more precise and explain to us what he thought was anti-Mormon that was a lie about the character of Joseph Smith know there's no doubt a lot of things circulating out there about Joseph Smith that you would probably have some difficulty proving but if a person is getting their information from a Mormon source about Joseph Smith. Would that be considered anti-Mormon that you and I earlier before we started recording were looking at some of the things that were written in the book Joseph Smith.

Rough Stone rolling in Richard Hill bushman, who was a faithful latter-day St. was very honest and some of the things that he said about Joseph Smith that would probably offend a lot of faithful


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime