Anything Goes LDS Thread (Everyone Welcome)

[Scott C.]

But if I were to bring up all the teachings of the past with what you practice or don't practice now, what would we see and how do you defend that.

If you give me the doctrine that changed, one at a time, I will do my best to respond one at a time.

 

[roli]

There's a third option: "God" gave us everything we needed, and THEN we failed.

YouTube - Moses Ten Commandments - Mel Brooks (go to :55).

I agree, we have failed in many ways ,but that is the excellence of being found in Christ not having our own righteousness, but we stil fall short of his glory.

 

[roli]

If you give me the doctrine that changed, one at a time, I will do my best to respond one at a time.

Explain to me ,Was God once man and married Mary?

 

[Sola'lor]

He hear's from God, and God can't lie, right..!!! and so your saying none of the prophets after Smith ever contradicted him, or even added or removed new doctrinal revelations and prophecies as they took control.
But is'nt it true that some of the teachings, doctrines ,writings of the original founders have changed today and throughout the years with each different new prophet.
I undersatnd men die out but is there not alot of contradiction within your own prophet circle.
Why have the prophets of Mormonism not arrived at the truth by now ,you would think that you would have arrived.

But if I were to bring up all the teachings of the past with what you practice or don't practice now, what would we see and how do you defend that.

Because prophets reveal what is relevent for us right now. The world is different now than it was 200 years ago. God reveals things that are relevent to our situation right now. He's not changing the gospel, the gospel is the same as when christ taught it. Technically the only thing that really matters is what the prophet teaches us today. Because that is what God wants it to know today.

Sorry if these seems like a silly question, but I do wonder, if it is possible to receive and accept the gospel after death (if you have been baptized by proxy), then why worry so much about converting people in this life? 85 years of mortal life doesn't seem like much of a head start.

Why put off for tomorrow what you can do today? Besides, God wants us to be happy and recieve blessings right now.

You don't pray to Jesus Christ? But you follow his words. And you try to follow what the Holy Spirit guides you to do. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that sounds like service to me.

"Thou shalt not serve any other gods before me."

My point is, if you don't believe in the Trinity, then you shouldn't treat other parts of the Godhead like they are God (like other Christian denominations do). Maybe you DO treat them differently. If so, how?

And Bishka, please, you're singling me out, which is why I feel unwelcome. Maybe you haven't noticed, but I'm not the only one disagreeing with LDS doctrine. I've only posted, like, four times on this thread.

I don't pray to Jesus Christ. I pray through Jesus Christ. Is some aspects I do treat the others like God as they should be. But in other aspects I don't treat them like God(the Father).

 

[Sola'lor]

Explain to me ,Was God once man and married Mary?

Do I get to respond to any of these or is it just mainly between you and scott?

 

[Bishka]

Explain to me ,Was God once man and married Mary?

God was never married to Mary. Where in the heck did you get that bizzare idea?

 

[Sola'lor]

God was never married to Mary. Where in the heck did you get that bizzare idea?

I could understand confusion by saying God was married to Mary. But what sends it over the top is saying God was once a man and God as a man was married to Mary.

No offence intended to roli. It's just I've never hear this strange of a concern before.

 

[Scott C.]

Explain to me ,Was God once man and married Mary?

I'm at work. I will give you a thoughtful answer later...but I am anxious to tackle the question the best I can...talk to you later. (If another LDS answers in the meantime, I will still come back with my thoughts on your question).

 

[Francine]

God was never married to Mary. Where in the heck did you get that bizzare idea?

"The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated in the capacity of husband and wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Savior unlawfully... Apostle Orson Pratt, "The Seer," Oct. 1853, p. 158).

 

[FFH]

s2a, so you're just messing around too then I see...

Was giving you the benefit of the doubt, just in case you were serious, and really wanted some answers, which I still think you do, but it seems as if you just have a quirky curiousity, or are possibly looking for material to add to your next college lecture. Didn't you say you were a college professor of some sort, physics possibly, if I remember right, with a possible religious backround/degree to boot possibly ???

Like I said to Francine, I enjoy a good game. It's all good, we take our religion extremely seriously though, it's not a game to us, but a reality, an eternal reality.

God is a man like you and I, only he's an immortal and exalted being, who cannot lie.

 

[Francine]

Like I said to Francine, I enjoy a good game. It's all good, we take our religion extremely seriously though, there's no disuading us.

Ah yes, but when a question is answered by "Joseph Smith said it, I believe it, that's final," that question will roll around and around in your own head, and in the end, you must either answer the question posed by yourself, or you will be dissuaded by yourself.

 

[Bishka]

"The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated in the capacity of husband and wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Savior unlawfully... Apostle Orson Pratt, "The Seer," Oct. 1853, p. 158).

So?

That's not doctrine, that's the opinion of one man. Do we really have to tell you something you already know? Our doctrine is found in the Bible (both Old and New Testament), the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price.

Orson Pratt's statement is just that, a statement. Not binding, nor canonical or even doctrine.

Nice try, but next time if you are going to claim something, please make sure it is our doctrine and not the opinion of one man.

 

[FFH]

"The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated in the capacity of husband and wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Savior unlawfully... Apostle Orson Pratt, "The Seer," Oct. 1853, p. 158).

Wow, nice digging, but this is not LDS church doctrine, just some comments by a former apostle, off the record. This statement has no doctrinal binding with the LDS church, just a book sold for profit.

No LDS church doctrine is sold for profit. This book is just one man's false opinion, sold to make a buck.

Mary naver had any physical relations with God the Father. She was truly a virgin, in every mortal aspect of the word, when she conceived Christ.

 

[Francine]

Nice try, but next time if you are going to claim something, please make sure it is our doctrine and not the opinion of one man.

Question: If something is not official doctrine, does that make the negation true? In other words, if it is not official LDS doctrine that the Heavenly Father was married to Mary, then is it official LDS doctrine that the Heavenly Father was NOT married to Mary? Because a dialogue cannot proceed until both parties agree on basic principles.

 

[FFH]

Ah yes, but when a question is answered by "Joseph Smith said it, I believe it, that's final," that question will roll around and around in your own head, and in the end, you must either answer the question posed by yourself, or you will be dissuaded by yourself.

There's nothing Joseph Smith has taught I disagree with, only you disagree with it, and then try to convince others of your personal beliefs.

It's all good, I've been told to my face, by a practicing member of the biggest nondenominational church in Utah, that I'm going to hell, just because I'm a Mormon. We just smiled at each other, we're friends, no hard feelings, because I know the truth, I know the end, I know the full aspects of eternity, at least the ones I need to know now.

God is not one that he should lie. Scriptures do not lie, unless they've been altered by man, which they have, that's why we need modern day prophets to restore what's been lost over the years.

This isn't a joke to us, it may be to you, but not to us.

 

[Francine]

Wow, nice digging, but this is not LDS church doctrine, just some comments by a former apostle off the record. This statement has no doctrinal binding with the LDS church, just a book sold for profit.

Okay. But then again, your statement that she didn't have sex with the Father is also the comments of one person, who isn't even an apostle. I'm looking for an official Church statement about this topic.

Mary naver had any physical relations with God the Father. She was truly a virgin, in every aspect of the mortal sense of the word, when she conceived Christ.

I am very sensitive to being rebuked. Before I discuss the relationship between the Father and Mary any further on this board, I will require a citation or link from official Mormon doctrine, one way or another. This will also apply to all subsequent discussions about other topics. I am not interested in debating the "comments of one person", I want to tackle the actual doctrine.

 

[FFH]

Question: If something is not official doctrine, does that make the negation true? In other words, if it is not official LDS doctrine that the Heavenly Father was married to Mary, then is it official LDS doctrine that the Heavenly Father was NOT married to Mary? Because a dialogue cannot proceed until both parties agree on basic principles.

I'm going to stand back and watch this play out as other LDS members make an attempt to go with this scenario/question ultimately being created here.

 

[Bishka]

Because a dialogue cannot proceed until both parties agree on basic principles.

Actually, it's only you. We know our doctrine.

 

[roli]

God was never married to Mary. Where in the heck did you get that bizzare idea?

Ok, one step at a time ,was God once man as we are.

 

[roli]

Do I get to respond to any of these or is it just mainly between you and scott?

Go for it, Was God married to Mary or any women to produce the offspring of Jesus and Lucifer.