Francine
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately the Angel Moroni took the thread back to heaven.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Christ According To The Mormons
- Thread starter OverStandIng
- Start date
Unfortunately the Angel Moroni took the thread back to heaven.
Bishka
Veteran Member
Vasilisa Jade
Formerly Saint Tigeress
What is up with all these hateful people??? And I thought I could be a butthead... geeezzz...
I want to start going back to church soon!! Then I can refresh my knowledge and lend a helping hand with the LDS debates!!
I want to start going back to church soon!! Then I can refresh my knowledge and lend a helping hand with the LDS debates!!
FFH
Veteran Member
Cool, another LDS member.What is up with all these hateful people??? And I thought I could be a butthead... geeezzz...
I want to start going back to church soon!! Then I can refresh my knowledge and lend a helping hand with the LDS debates!!
Vasilisa Jade
Formerly Saint Tigeress
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
OK you keep saying we are avoiding the topics. Well I'm not avoiding
it. Here you go. Everyone, please read this whole thing I've got some
GREAT stuff. You wont regret it.
We do not believe that there was spirit child born that was the devil.
Your statement here is false. The reason why it is false is this:
D&C 76:25-27(with my commentary beneath each verse)
25 And this we saw also, and bear record, that an angel of God who
was in authority in the presence of God, who rebelled against the Only
Begotten Son whom the Father loved and who was in the bosom of the
Father, was thrust down from the presence of God and the Son,
Here is is saying that there was one of the spirit children and was in
a position of leadership in the hierarchy of all the spirit children.
This spirit rebelled. God didn't great this spirit evil. God created
with spirit good and he chose to rebel. And as a result of his
rebellion he was cast out of Heaven. Why did he rebel? We will cover
this in a minute.
26 And was called Perdition, for the heavens wept over himhe was
Lucifer, a son of the morning.
This spirit, Lucifer, a name meaining son of the morning, was a great
and noble spirit. He had the potential, as do all our Father's children
to become a great and righteous person. It was a great loss when he
rebelled. It was sad for everyone that he would choose to become evil
and rebel.
27 And we beheld, and lo, he is fallen! is fallen, even a son of the
morning!
The spirit son Lucifer is no longer a noble spirit. He chose to give
up all that was good. He fell and became evil. Again he wasn't created
evil. He was created good but chose to become evil.
I guess I covered this a little already. But you are wrong if you are
saying that Lucifer was a diety or close to becoming a diety. If you
mean that he held a leadership position and was residing in the
presence of a diety the, you are correct.
This is incorrect. The council in a Heaven was convened for God to
present His plan for us. We as spirtit children had all reached a point
where we could no longer progress as spirit children. Afterall as
spirit CHILDREN of our Heavenly Father (aka God), it is our destiny to
become like Him. It is our goal to become like Him. Unfortunatly there
were only certain things we could do in Heaven to let us reach that
goal. One promblem was we didn't have a physical body. God has one so
inorder to become like Him we needed to get one. So long story short,
God presented His plan for the rest of our progression. This Plan is
called the Plan of Salvation. Lucifer had not yet rebelled at this
point. So you are wrong in saying the council was held to decide the
destiny of the devil and his evil.
No you are wrong here, again. A plan was not presented to rebuild the
Earth and send evil spirit children to live and learn good and bad. You
need to remember that there was not devil at this point. There was no
evil. God presented His plan to build the Earth so His spirit children
could go and gain motral bodies and learn those things neccesary to to
progress further.
If you are really interesting in learning what we actually believe
about this then get a Gospel Principles book and go to page 14. There
is a section titled, "Our Heavenly Father Presented a Plan for Us to
Become like Him." It's in the Chapter called, "Our Heavenly Family"
You almost got this one right. Lucifer wanted to be chosen as the
saviour of the world. There was no devil yet. Lucifer had not yet
become the devil.
After we went to Earth God knew that non of us could return to Him
unless we were free from sin. Of course none fo us is perfect and we
all make mistakes thus it is impossible for us to return to our
Heavenly Father because we must all pay the price for our sins.We as
imperfect beings are incapable fo doing this. Of course it gets alot
more complex than this. But basically a hwas the price for sins would
be paid and those of us who do our best and follow the saviour(who had
not been chosen yet) would be allowed to return to our Father.
Lucifer decided to present a different plan. At this moment we began to
rebel against God's will. Basically he said that he would gaurantee
that every single one of God's children would return to Him if we
followed his plan. All that would be needed is to get rid of our
ability to choose. Then there would be no need for a saviour and it
would be impossible for us to ever sin. He then also want, as
'payment', if you will, for ensuring the return of all God children, to
have God give him all His power and authority.
Moses 4:1
1...and he came before me, sayingBehold, here am I, send me, I will be
thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be
lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.
This is similar to what happened but with a few errors. This person who
'stood up' was the first born of all God's spirit Children. He was
Jehovah. He would later become Christ when he gained his physical body.
He didn't stand up against anybody, exept for Lucifer I guess. I've
nevere heard in any of our doctrine that he said,"Why Not Give Them
Freedom Of Choice As Other Beings."
This is what the scriptures say that Jehovah said:
Moses 4:2
2 But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the
beginning, said unto meFather, thy will be done, and the glory be
thine forever.
Jehovah said that He would do the Father's will and the Glory would be
the Fathers.
Actually now that I reread this it is pretty much correct. Lucifer,
some may argue that he was the devil at this point, rebelled and found
all those other spririt children who would follow his plan.
Revelation 12:7
7 And there was war in heaven:Michael and his angels fought against the
dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
Michael and his angels are all of the Spirit children who followed
God's plan. The dragon here is Lucifer. His angels are those who
followed his plan.
MOses 4:3,4
3 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to
destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and
also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine
Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;
4 And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies,
to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even
as many as would not hearken unto my voice.
We know from other scriptures that Lucifer, now Satan/the devil, took a
large number of God's children with him when he was cast out. These
Spirits that followed Satan Never gained a physical body.
Abraham 3:28
28 ...and kept not his first estate; and, at that day, many followed
after him.
See next post...
it. Here you go. Everyone, please read this whole thing I've got some
GREAT stuff. You wont regret it.
We do not believe that there was spirit child born that was the devil.
Your statement here is false. The reason why it is false is this:
D&C 76:25-27(with my commentary beneath each verse)
25 And this we saw also, and bear record, that an angel of God who
was in authority in the presence of God, who rebelled against the Only
Begotten Son whom the Father loved and who was in the bosom of the
Father, was thrust down from the presence of God and the Son,
Here is is saying that there was one of the spirit children and was in
a position of leadership in the hierarchy of all the spirit children.
This spirit rebelled. God didn't great this spirit evil. God created
with spirit good and he chose to rebel. And as a result of his
rebellion he was cast out of Heaven. Why did he rebel? We will cover
this in a minute.
26 And was called Perdition, for the heavens wept over himhe was
Lucifer, a son of the morning.
This spirit, Lucifer, a name meaining son of the morning, was a great
and noble spirit. He had the potential, as do all our Father's children
to become a great and righteous person. It was a great loss when he
rebelled. It was sad for everyone that he would choose to become evil
and rebel.
27 And we beheld, and lo, he is fallen! is fallen, even a son of the
morning!
The spirit son Lucifer is no longer a noble spirit. He chose to give
up all that was good. He fell and became evil. Again he wasn't created
evil. He was created good but chose to become evil.
I guess I covered this a little already. But you are wrong if you are
saying that Lucifer was a diety or close to becoming a diety. If you
mean that he held a leadership position and was residing in the
presence of a diety the, you are correct.
This is incorrect. The council in a Heaven was convened for God to
present His plan for us. We as spirtit children had all reached a point
where we could no longer progress as spirit children. Afterall as
spirit CHILDREN of our Heavenly Father (aka God), it is our destiny to
become like Him. It is our goal to become like Him. Unfortunatly there
were only certain things we could do in Heaven to let us reach that
goal. One promblem was we didn't have a physical body. God has one so
inorder to become like Him we needed to get one. So long story short,
God presented His plan for the rest of our progression. This Plan is
called the Plan of Salvation. Lucifer had not yet rebelled at this
point. So you are wrong in saying the council was held to decide the
destiny of the devil and his evil.
No you are wrong here, again. A plan was not presented to rebuild the
Earth and send evil spirit children to live and learn good and bad. You
need to remember that there was not devil at this point. There was no
evil. God presented His plan to build the Earth so His spirit children
could go and gain motral bodies and learn those things neccesary to to
progress further.
If you are really interesting in learning what we actually believe
about this then get a Gospel Principles book and go to page 14. There
is a section titled, "Our Heavenly Father Presented a Plan for Us to
Become like Him." It's in the Chapter called, "Our Heavenly Family"
You almost got this one right. Lucifer wanted to be chosen as the
saviour of the world. There was no devil yet. Lucifer had not yet
become the devil.
After we went to Earth God knew that non of us could return to Him
unless we were free from sin. Of course none fo us is perfect and we
all make mistakes thus it is impossible for us to return to our
Heavenly Father because we must all pay the price for our sins.We as
imperfect beings are incapable fo doing this. Of course it gets alot
more complex than this. But basically a hwas the price for sins would
be paid and those of us who do our best and follow the saviour(who had
not been chosen yet) would be allowed to return to our Father.
Lucifer decided to present a different plan. At this moment we began to
rebel against God's will. Basically he said that he would gaurantee
that every single one of God's children would return to Him if we
followed his plan. All that would be needed is to get rid of our
ability to choose. Then there would be no need for a saviour and it
would be impossible for us to ever sin. He then also want, as
'payment', if you will, for ensuring the return of all God children, to
have God give him all His power and authority.
Moses 4:1
1...and he came before me, sayingBehold, here am I, send me, I will be
thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be
lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.
This is similar to what happened but with a few errors. This person who
'stood up' was the first born of all God's spirit Children. He was
Jehovah. He would later become Christ when he gained his physical body.
He didn't stand up against anybody, exept for Lucifer I guess. I've
nevere heard in any of our doctrine that he said,"Why Not Give Them
Freedom Of Choice As Other Beings."
This is what the scriptures say that Jehovah said:
Moses 4:2
2 But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the
beginning, said unto meFather, thy will be done, and the glory be
thine forever.
Jehovah said that He would do the Father's will and the Glory would be
the Fathers.
Actually now that I reread this it is pretty much correct. Lucifer,
some may argue that he was the devil at this point, rebelled and found
all those other spririt children who would follow his plan.
Revelation 12:7
7 And there was war in heaven:Michael and his angels fought against the
dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
Michael and his angels are all of the Spirit children who followed
God's plan. The dragon here is Lucifer. His angels are those who
followed his plan.
MOses 4:3,4
3 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to
destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and
also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine
Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;
4 And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies,
to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even
as many as would not hearken unto my voice.
We know from other scriptures that Lucifer, now Satan/the devil, took a
large number of God's children with him when he was cast out. These
Spirits that followed Satan Never gained a physical body.
Abraham 3:28
28 ...and kept not his first estate; and, at that day, many followed
after him.
See next post...
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
You are wrong again here. I've never heard this before in our Doctrine.
There was nobody who was neutral. It was impossible for there to be.
There was only two choices follow Lucifer or follow Jehovah. THere was
no middle ground.
Besides our degree to which we followed Jehovah does not determine
anything in this life other than our disposition to do good or evil.
But that is another topic.
I would never consider black skin a curse. What about brown skin, or
light brown skin, or native american skin, or inuet skin, or chinese
skin?
If you say that my Fiancee is bad because she has dark skin your gonna
get a fight. I love her dark skin it is a blessing. And nowhere in the
Church do we teach that dark skin is a bad thing.
2 Nephi 15: 20 actually read like this:
20 Wo unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness
for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet
for bitter!
I think you must have gotten your refernces mixed up.
2 Nephi 15:21
21 Wo unto the awise in their own eyes and bprudent in their own
sight!
Hmmm. What version of the Book of Mormon are you using?
2 Nephi 15:22
22 Wo unto the mighty to drink awine, and men of strength to mingle
strong drink;
Perhaps you would like to read 4 Nephi chapter 2?
2 Nephi 15:23
23 Who justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness
of the righteous from him!
Still not matching up.
2 Nephi 15:24
24 Therefore, as the fire devoureth thebstubble, and the flame
consumeth the chaff, their root shall be rottenness, and their blossoms
shall go up as dust; because they have cast away the law of the Lord of
Hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.
:sleep: Wake me up when this is finished.
2 Nephi 15:25
25 Therefore, is the anger of the Lord kindled against his people,
and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten
them; and the hills did tremble, and their carcasses were torn in the
midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but
his hand is stretched out still.
Wha.. What? Are we there yet?
Riiiiiight. Anyway on to the Curse of Canaam. Well I couldn't find any
Canaam anywhere. Prehaps you meant: Canaan?
If so I found this verse:
Moses 7:8
8 For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the
barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness
came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all
people.
Ok I have two responses to this verse. First is it talks of a blackness
that came upon the children of Canaan. No where anywhere does this say
that is was their skin that became black. I don't see it in there. It
doesn't mention skin once in that verse. There are lots of other things
that could be decribed as blackness. Their hope. They could have lost
hope because of the curse. That could be described as black. Maybe they
became cynical because of the curse and ther attitudes became black.
Response two:
If it is refering to their skin it never says that the curse God put
upon them was black skin. No where in there does it say that. iot sayd
God cursed the LAND. He cursed the LAND with much HEAT and barrenness.
Then it says there was a blackness that came upon them. It doesn't say
that God put he blackness on them. Darkness of skin is a natural
reaction to increased sunlight. That's why people from more arid
recgions tend to be darker in color. God curse wasn't darkness of skin
but heat in the land. The darkness of skin came as a natural result of
the increase sunlight.
Here's another scripture that describes this:
The Song of SOlomon 1:5,6
5 I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents
of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.
6 Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked
upon me: my mothers children were angry with me; they made me the
keeper of the vineyards; but mine own vineyard have I not kept.
Sorry, I didn't see any racism in either case. If you could please
point out how large amounts of sunlight coming into contact with the
skin and causing the skin to become darker is racism.
Hmm I don't know any nubians. Perhaps youare refering to this?
Nubia Star Drives, Incorporated - Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki
See next post...
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
You have the date correct but the church was founded by Joseph Smith
Jr.
Correct we are putting commercials on the TV. Incorrect. They are not
to decieve people. They are to try and support good positive attitudes
in people. Maybe somebody might be interested in learning about the
church by them but that's not the point.
I openly admit that the Church isn't an ordinary Christian church. We
are far from ordinary. I don't see any purpose in trying to decieve
people that we are ordinary when everyone one of our members and
leaders will admit that we aren't ordinary.
No we don't have our own bible by our own self. We use the King James
Version of the Bible. THis is what we believe about the Bible:
Article of Faith 8:
8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is
translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word
of God.
So obviously we believe in using the same bible that everyone else
uses. And you have to admit that having correct translations of the is
a Good thing. Because wrong translations would be deviations from the
word of God.
I searched Mormo on google and I came up with this:
In Greek mythology, Mormo was a goddess who bit bad children, said to
have been a consort of the goddess Hecate.
The name was also used to signify a female vampire-like creature in
stories told to Greek children by their nurses to keep them from
misbehaving.
That plastic tub thing also showed up.
Yes we believe Joseph F. Smith was inpired of God. He was a prophet.
But you are wrong when you say Jesus Christ appeared to him near
Palmyra. The even you are speaking of happened to Joseph Smith Jr.
They didn't tell Josphe F. Smith that. THhey did tell Joseph Smith Jr.
that.
Sorry you are wrong again. This never happened to Joseph F. Smith.
Moroni did appear to Joseph Smith Jr. BUt what the heck is a Nephilian?
I looked up Nephilian on gogle and I just got a bunch of user names.
But it does sound like it would make a cool alien enemy in some scifi
show. Perhaps you are refering to Nephite.
NOpe Joseph F. Smith didn't find any plates. and Joseph F. Smith didn't
translate any plates either. Please get the names of your historical
figures correct before you try and convince people that you are telling
the truth and that they are lying.
I know I have one of those versions somewhere. Its the one with the sky
blue cover with the angel Moroni statue on the cover.
If I understand you correctly you are asking why isin't a picture of
the Gold Plates in that version of the Book of Mormon rather than the
picture of the plate that they show. Firstly there was never a picture
of the Golden Plates. There were given back to Moroni after they were
translated. THe reason that picture is in there is to give a historical
example of gold plates being used as a writing medium.
Again Joseph F. Smith had nothing to do with the translation of the
Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith Jr. translated the Book of Mormon. He
didn't even know how to read the ancient writing on the plates. He has
no clue what they meant. Only when he used the Urim and Thummim could
he see what the translation was.
Why doen't we learn the ancient language? Umm. Probably because nobody
for the past one thousand or so years has ever spoken it. Even Joseph
Smith Jr. couldn't read it.
I don't think I have this book so I can't really say anything about it.
THe only thing I can use is the quote you provided. Of course I doubt
that it is the exact quote because Douglas V. Pond probably spoke
better English that how this quote is written.
So you are using this quote as evidence that the LDS Church doesn't
believe in the Bible. Hmmm. Lets see.
"The Book Of Mormon Is Not The Mormon Bible As Is Sometimes Supposed."
No problems there. It is saying what we have all been saying. The Book
of Mormon is not the Bible. THe bible is a different book. They have
two different titles.
"It Is One Of The Complimetary Works That The Mormons Accept As
Scriptures."
Still nothing wrong. It is saying that the LDs Church believes that the
Book of Mormon compliments the Bible. If the Book of Mormon is
complimenting the Bible then it must mean that we believe in the Bible
as well.
"The Mormons Does Not Believe That The Revelations Of God Were Confused
To Ancient Israel."
Ok this is wree I get a little lost. Is this a quote or your version of
it. In any case it is saying, from what I can tell, that the things
written in the bBook of Mormon were translated only once by Joseph
Smith Jr. Unlike the Bible which has gone through hundreds of
translations and rewrites. Thus the writings in the Boook of Mormon are
noy as confused as those in the Bible(i.e. all the contradictions in
the Bible).
"He Does Not Believe That The Loving Father Would Restrict His
Communications To One Part Of His Family To One Time Of History Or To
One Land."
Who is 'He'? Where does this come in? But anyway, what this is saying
is that we beleive God gave revelation and called prophets in the
Ancient Americas. Since the people in the Americas had no way of
getting word of Christ's visit to the earth (Remember there weren't any
cellphones or internet back then) God revealed His word to them because
He loves them just as much as he Loves his children in Jerusalem.
SO the quote you used completely disproved the statement you were trying
to prove with it.
See next post...
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
Restricts his grace to one race? Hmmm. Did I miss something? Firstly
the Jews aren't caucasians. The Nephites and Lamanites, who decended
from the Jews were also not caucasian. And what the heck does
'restricting his grace' mean?
We are all God's children, which is why we are sending missionaries all
around the world. So that everybody can have a chance to learn about
their Heavenly Father who loves them. I served in the Philippines. And
I never taught a caucasian once. I only taught darkskinned people. Not
that I wouldn't teach a caucasian, just that caucasians are few and far
between in the Philippines.
Does this even have any relevence? Ofcourse we use these terms because
they are the word in our English languages. In the Phlippines we used
Simbahan - Church
Cristo - Christ
Cristiano - Christian
Diyos - God
Is it possible to steal a name? I thought names were public domain.
You're not serious. Matthew 15:25 read:
25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
YEAH he got one right!!!!!! Matthew 10:5,6
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not
into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter
ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
All this is saying is that CHrist didn't want the twelve to preach in
those certain locations. He had other places that were more expedient
for the gospel to be taught. I noticed he is just telling this to his
apolstles and not toi all people in the chruch.
Who is he? Who goes against the laws and commandments of Jesus? I
don't. I follow the commandments to the best that I can. I believe in
the commandments that Christ gave. Unless you are implying that
something he gave as an order to those original twelve apostle should
be taken as a commandment for all people?
What point are you trying to make here? I seriously can't figure it
out. Unless you are simply making a statement that has no relevence.
I can't believe I wasted nearly three hours of my day typing this. I
dare you say that I'm sidestepping the issue or not answering you
questions. Calling me a liar? How many things did you lie about in
your opening post? You lied about what we believe. You lied about
scripture references. You lied about historical people. So please next
time try and get your facts straight before you try and make a
convincing argument.
I'm done.
Vasilisa Jade
Formerly Saint Tigeress
There isn't too much that can complement such outstanding posts. But I wanted to add a lil somethin somethin here just to make sure someone doesn't run in the wrong direction here: !
The reason why other christians don't see our church as ordinary, and why other christian churches sometimes teach that we are not "christian" is due to the fact that we are neiher catholic nor protestant. Because of this we seem to become the "black sheep" of the "christian" family or clique, so to speak. The LDS church is considered an "independant" denomonation. Because of our seperation from the catholic roots that other christian denominations have, people seem to think that we have our own bible and such... our own God... our own savior... all of which is independant of the other denominations. This of course is a misunderstanding. The LDS church being independant IMHO is what I believe to be the root of the misunderstandings.
The best analogy I've ever heard is this:
The Bible is like a single nail in a board agianst a wall. It sticks at first, but after being tampered and pulled and pushed over time, the board swings back and forth. The Book of Mormon is the second nail at the other end of the board. It works with the other, and holds the board straight and strong.
Our roots are still in the KJV of the bible, but we have no roots in the catholic church... which is why we are not "ordinary." We have a book to clarify and correctly reiterate the bible instead of men with varying translations. We are special! 
Frubals n fur balls to you Sola'lor!
You blew me away with your knowledge.
i just meant to complement what you wrote,
not interject.
!The reason why other christians don't see our church as ordinary, and why other christian churches sometimes teach that we are not "christian" is due to the fact that we are neiher catholic nor protestant. Because of this we seem to become the "black sheep" of the "christian" family or clique, so to speak. The LDS church is considered an "independant" denomonation. Because of our seperation from the catholic roots that other christian denominations have, people seem to think that we have our own bible and such... our own God... our own savior... all of which is independant of the other denominations. This of course is a misunderstanding. The LDS church being independant IMHO is what I believe to be the root of the misunderstandings.
The best analogy I've ever heard is this:
The Bible is like a single nail in a board agianst a wall. It sticks at first, but after being tampered and pulled and pushed over time, the board swings back and forth. The Book of Mormon is the second nail at the other end of the board. It works with the other, and holds the board straight and strong.
Our roots are still in the KJV of the bible, but we have no roots in the catholic church... which is why we are not "ordinary." We have a book to clarify and correctly reiterate the bible instead of men with varying translations.
We are special! Frubals n fur balls to you Sola'lor! You blew me away with your knowledge.
i just meant to complement what you wrote,
not interject.
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
You blew me away with your knowledge.
i just meant to complement what you wrote,
not interject.
Hehehe. Thanks. I never meant for it to be four posts long. He just keep saying that he wanted people to address his topics and provide scriptural backup. So I figured what the heck, I'll take on the challenge. I just wish I could get back the three hours it took me to write it.
Maybe it is the hairsplitting we are having a problem with. But we both know the results of policy and practice were undeniable racism. Can you understand how someone reading this could conclude the policy and practice were doctrinal??
Bruce R. McConkie wrote in his 1966 edition of Mormon Doctrine:
Of the two-thirds who followed Christ, however, some were more valiant than others....Those who were less valiant in pre-existence and who thereby had certain spiritual restrictions imposed upon them during mortality are known to us as the negroes. Such spirits are sent to earth through the lineage of Cain, the mark put upon him for his rebellion against God and his murder of Abel being a black skin (Moses 5:16-41; 12:22). Noah's son Ham married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain, thus preserving the negro lineage through the flood (Abraham 1:20-27). Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. (Abra. 1:20-27.) The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them (Moses 7:8, 12, 22), although sometimes negroes search out the truth, join the Church, and become by righteous living heirs of the celestial kingdom of heaven. President Brigham Young and others have taught that in the future eternity worthy and qualified negroes will receive the priesthood and every gospel blessing available to any man. The present status of the negro rests purely and simply on the foundation of pre-existence. Along with all races and peoples he is receiving here what he merits as a result of the long pre-mortal probation in the presence of the Lord....The negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow therefrom, but this inequality is not of man's origin. It is the Lord's doing.
This is so far out of sync with the Bible. Lucifer is referred to here as
1. An angel
2. A spirit child - just like us
3. A child of God - just like Jesus.
The Bible classifies angels as a distinctly different type of being, and several different types of angels are mentioned (archangels, cherubim, seraphim etc) as comprising the heavenly host. Nowhere are they referred to as spirit children. They are created to serve at God's command, but are not begotten. That Lucifer was one of God's most splendid creations and fell due to disobedient pride, taking a third of the heavenly host with him, is Biblical.
This is totally anti scriptural as well. God the Creator has no body. And the idea that Christ was elected is a radical departure from the bible and affects our view of God, humanity and salvation. If such things are true, why would it be withheld from the body of Christ which he gave his life for and cherishes above all things? The Bible teaches the sovereignty of God, LDS is a total departure from the Biblical description of Him.
In one breath you say it is our goal, then you say it is destiny, to progress from a state of "spirit children" to gods. What is destiny? Do you mean God's will? If it is our "destiny" to become like God, how can there be a God? Or free will for that matter? We could no longer progress, why not? Was God's creation lacking? Why create spirit if body is the goal? If we were already in heaven, why go through the body/rebellion/life/death then back to heaven route? Why torture and kill God's son, if it was his own creation plan that was at fault? What was the need for such a waste, if our destiny is to become God?
Can you give an example of what spirit children learn to progress further?
"Every person who was ever born on earth was our spirit brother or sister in heaven. The first spirit born to our heavenly parents was Jesus Christ so he is literally our elder brother."
If this is correct it means the Virgin Mary actually gave birth to her elder brother, after having sexual intercourse with her Heavenly Father, are you sure this is LDS doctrine? If so, it is a massive anti biblical heresy.
"Because we are the spiritual children of our heavenly parents, we have inherited the potential to develop their divine qualities. If we choose to do so, we can become perfect, just as they are."
So Jesus nailed to a tree was just... unnecessary.
Just to double check, is this book official LDS doctrine?
Just for the record, putting Lucifer (an angelic created being) and humans (mortal created beings) in the same category as Jesus Christ (immortal deity, the only begotten Son of God) is an extreme heresy, and one of the main reasons why Christians are offended by LDS doctrine.
Why, when it is simply a matter of will power and choice? "If we choose to do so, we can become perfect, just as they are"
At what point did we switch from perfect to imperfect? Was it a choice, was it destiny, was it God's plan?
And yet the Bible teaches that the Christ, the Alpha and Omega, the Lamb of God, the Son of the Father existed as a ransom for many before all worlds, that the plan was created by a sovereign creator God, before the existence of the universe.
More anti Biblical heresy out of thin air. A note about Jehovah:
Jehovah was NEVER used in the Hebrew OT to refer to any other than God the Father, so to mix it up and use the name of God the Father to refer to God the Son is contradictory to Judeo Christian teachings.
So basically what the bible teaches is wrong, which is that satan was cast down with a third of the heavenly host (other angels like him), and they became demons (like the ones Jesus cast out among other miracles). And John's Revelation is not a prophecy but a review of history that already occurred. According to you, the only difference between angels and humans is a physical body.
Interestingly, Lucifer was able to make those good over evil choices in heaven, and he was just like us. Why is that do you suppose?
And if we were so happy there, why did our parents toss us into the land of suffering, poverty, toil, pain and death? It makes no sense.
It is obvious the Mormons believe God and his wife were created beings.
Why can't one just skip the middle man and worship whoever it was that created THEM?
A note on the disreputable book of Abraham:
I thought Abraham was the book translated from the notorious Egyptian papyri (which was actually an excerpt from the ancient pagan Book of the Dead funereal instructions, and had nothing at all to do with Abraham - which would have been thousands of years out of sync if it were). The Egyptian papyri is just another bit of factual evidence that the Joseph Smith writings were Joseph Smith machinations.
It looks to me like LDS must reject the Bible entirely to believe in their own doctrine. None of this is biblical doctrine, and in effect serves the Tower of Babel syndrome: to elevate man to godlike status, and chip away at the sovereign majesty of God.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Galatians 1:6-8 "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."
False prophets are "like those who administer a deadly drug in sweet wine, which he who is ignorant of does greedily take, with a fatal pleasure leading to his own death." Ignatius of Antioch
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.
Differences ought not to keep us from carrying the truth to everyone. Ravi Zacharias
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
Can somebody else please reply to Fluffy. I'm still recovering from my last big post. Fluffy if you are willing to wait three or four days I'll probably have recovered by then.
I do have one question. Why do you say that I don't believe what the bible says? I read from the bible in my own time and I teach from the bible at church. Why would I do this if I don't believe what the bible says?
I do have one question. Why do you say that I don't believe what the bible says? I read from the bible in my own time and I teach from the bible at church. Why would I do this if I don't believe what the bible says?
Scott C.
Just one guy
Yes, it's reasonable to conclude it was doctrine when you read it in a book called Mormon Doctrine written by an LDS Apostle. Nevertheless, the book Mormon Doctrine is not necessarily doctrine. It was a personal work and not commissioned by the church. Bruce R. McConkie would have been the first to tell you that it was his work and his work alone. And, I will not criticize Elder McConkie, as I have tremendous respect for the leadership and witness of Christ he gave the church during his life.
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Of course I can. McConkie has never been a favorite of mine and that statement just rankles me. Nevertheless, McConkie never was in a position to either define doctrine or to speak authoritatively on behalf of the Church as a whole. Statements on docrine always come from the First Presidency of the Church and the entire Quorum of the Twelve, not by individual members of the Quorum. McConkie was stating his own opinion, giving his own interpretation of doctrine, but from the perspective of someone on the outside, it would obviously be interpreted exactly as you have interpreted it. I don't know whether you realize it or not, though, but he did later retract the statement and admit that he was wrong.
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Okay, !Fluffy!, I'll have a go at responding to your question. I don't know why; my machochistic streak must be dominating today.
Incidentally, we do not believe that Lucifer was "a child of God - just like Jesus." We believe that God is the Father of all of our spirits, but that Jesus Christ was God's Only Begotten Son. He is and was divine from the beginning. Lucifer was never divine; he was never a child of God in the same respect that Jesus was.
The command Be ye perfect is not idealistic gas. Nor is it a command to do the impossible. He is going to make us into creatures that can obey that command. He said (in the Bible) that we were gods and He is going to make good His words. If we let Him for we can prevent Him, if we choose He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or goddess, dazzling, radiant, immortal creature, pulsating all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects back to God perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and delight and goodness. The process will be long and in parts very painful; but that is what we are in for. Nothing less. He meant what He said."
"Every person who was ever born on earth was our spirit brother or sister in heaven. The first spirit born to our heavenly parents was Jesus Christ so he is literally our elder brother."
If this is correct it means the Virgin Mary actually gave birth to her elder brother, after having sexual intercourse with her Heavenly Father, are you sure this is LDS doctrine? If so, it is a massive anti biblical heresy.[/quote]Wow! That's creative logic for you. Jesus Christ is described in the Bible as being "the firstborn of many brethren (see Romans 8:29). He obviously was the the first individual to come to earth, so His status of "firstborn" must be interpreted differently. We believe He was His Father's firstborn in the spirit. He was also the Father's "Only Begotten Son," meaning that God the Father is literally the Father of Jesus Christ -- body and spirit. In a sense, Mary did give birth to her Elder Brother, but only in that God was the Father of both of their spirits. Mary was not Jesus' mortal sister, as she had a different set of mortal parents than He did.
Incidentally, we do not believe that the Virgin Mary had sexual intercourse with her Heavenly Father. Had she done so, she would hardly have remained a virgin. I'm surprised you wouldn't have realized that. So the bit about this being a "massive anti-biblical heresy" is a moot point. We believe that Jesus' conception took place exactly as described in the Bible.
Where does the Bible classify angels as a "distinctly different type of being"? Whenever angels are described in the Bible as having visited the earth, they are said to have a human appearance. Of course there is a difference between angels and mortals, but as far as their being different types of beings entirely, the burden is on you to show that this is, in fact, what the Bible teaches.
Incidentally, we do not believe that Lucifer was "a child of God - just like Jesus." We believe that God is the Father of all of our spirits, but that Jesus Christ was God's Only Begotten Son. He is and was divine from the beginning. Lucifer was never divine; he was never a child of God in the same respect that Jesus was.
They may not be referred to as "spirit children," but God is referred to as the "Father of spirits" (see Hebrews 12:9) and they are referred to as "His offspring" (see Acts 17:28). If God is the Father of the spirits of His offspring, I don't understand why you would take issue with calling them His spirit children.
I agree. None of us has ever said that we are begotten of God. We are begotten of our own parents. There is only One who was begotten of God, and that is Jesus Christ.
I agree.
No, it's just a different interpretation of scripture than you have.
I disagree. There are a number of places in the Bible that support our belief that He does. I would be happy to show you a few of them, but as this post is going to be pretty long as it is, I'll hold off for the time being.
Did one of us say He was "elected"? He was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. He was chosen by His Father from before the world ever existed to be the Savior of all mankind.
It wasn't withheld. I'm guessing you believe the Bible to be a complete record of everything God has ever said or done. It's not. A number of teachings known by Christians of the first and second centuries were lost over time.
How so? The Book of Mormon also teaches the sovereignty of God.
I can't recall seeing any of us use the word, "destiny" either. We have been given the potential to become "perfect, even as [our] Father which is in Heaven is perfect." It's not our destiny, but we were commanded by Jesus Christ to do so.
Destiny implies lack of choice. I believe it is God's will that we become like Him. It's our decision whether or not to submit to His will. Again, this could be the subject of a thread all by itself. I couldn't possibly begin to explain our doctrine adequately in this post. For now, let me just quote C.S. Lewis, whose belief was almost identical to ours:
The command Be ye perfect is not idealistic gas. Nor is it a command to do the impossible. He is going to make us into creatures that can obey that command. He said (in the Bible) that we were gods and He is going to make good His words. If we let Him for we can prevent Him, if we choose He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or goddess, dazzling, radiant, immortal creature, pulsating all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects back to God perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and delight and goodness. The process will be long and in parts very painful; but that is what we are in for. Nothing less. He meant what He said."
Sure. One of the main purposes of our life on earth is to learn to distinguish between good and evil and to choose good. We are also here to learn to walk in faith. It would not have required faith of us to do what God expected of us as long as we were in His presence. The true test of our faith comes when we are here on Earth and must believe in that which we cannot see.
"Every person who was ever born on earth was our spirit brother or sister in heaven. The first spirit born to our heavenly parents was Jesus Christ so he is literally our elder brother."
If this is correct it means the Virgin Mary actually gave birth to her elder brother, after having sexual intercourse with her Heavenly Father, are you sure this is LDS doctrine? If so, it is a massive anti biblical heresy.[/quote]Wow! That's creative logic for you. Jesus Christ is described in the Bible as being "the firstborn of many brethren (see Romans 8:29). He obviously was the the first individual to come to earth, so His status of "firstborn" must be interpreted differently. We believe He was His Father's firstborn in the spirit. He was also the Father's "Only Begotten Son," meaning that God the Father is literally the Father of Jesus Christ -- body and spirit. In a sense, Mary did give birth to her Elder Brother, but only in that God was the Father of both of their spirits. Mary was not Jesus' mortal sister, as she had a different set of mortal parents than He did.
Incidentally, we do not believe that the Virgin Mary had sexual intercourse with her Heavenly Father. Had she done so, she would hardly have remained a virgin. I'm surprised you wouldn't have realized that. So the bit about this being a "massive anti-biblical heresy" is a moot point. We believe that Jesus' conception took place exactly as described in the Bible.
I'm sorry you think so. We believe His Atonement was the only means by which we might have the opportunity to be forgiven of our sins and reconciled to God. But, to each his own.
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Well, as hard as I tried to be brief, I went over the 10,000 character limit. Here is the remainder of my response:
No. The only sources of official LDS doctrine are "The Holy Bible" (we use the KJV), "The Book of Mormon," "The Doctrine and Covenants," and "The Pearl of Great Price."
Would "Christians" be less offended if they realized that we don't believe that we're in the same category as Jesus Christ, or would they just find some other item of contention?
We never said that, and further more, we don't believe that. Being faithful servants is a matter of will power and choice. Becoming perfect is something we could never hope to attain without the grace of God and His blessing. Why do you believe Jesus commanded us to be perfect anyway, if He and His Father did not want us to obey His commandment? And why do you believe that God would want us to become anything less than He has given us the potential to become? What father wouldn't want his children to become all that they possibly could be?
When we first sinned. Actually, we never were perfect, if "perfect" is understood to mean "complete," but we were both pure and without sin. We began to sin when we reached an age where we could understand the difference between right and wrong and chose to do wrong.
It was a choice in that we were given the right to make our own decisions. We could obey God or disobey Him. It was destiny that we sin only to the extent that we are all descended from Adam and Eve and therefore inherited their inclination to do wrong from time to time. It was not God's plan that we sin, but it was God's plan that we learn right from wrong, and sometimes that involves making wrong choices and then repenting.
It certainly does, and we believe it to be the truth.
I'm not sure how it can be heresy when the Bible does not address the issue one way or the other.
Again, this could be the topic of an entirely separate thread. There is a great deal of evidence, however, that you are wrong, and most of it is found within the Bible itself.
No, basically what the Bible teaches is right. It just contains less detail that latter-day revelation does.
No, it's partly a review of history and partly a prophecy.
No, angels are merely God's creations who are at a different stage of progression than humans. We can explore this further if you want. I'm just starting to worry that when I press "enter," I'm going to get a message saying I'm over the limit on the length of my response.
You lost me, I'm afraid. Lucifer was arrogant and rebellious. He did not want his Father's plan to succeed. The rest of us (those who were not cast out of Heaven along with him) were very much in favor of the Plan.
Sure it makes sense. I don't know whether you're a parent or not, but if you are, would you deny your children the opportunity for experiences that would provide growth and progress. Life isn't always easy, but for those who are obedient to their Heavenly Father, it will be worth it.
You're awfully sure of yourself, aren't you? It may be obvious to you, but it's not what we believe at all.
Because we've been told that He alone is our God.
Once again, this is a subject of another thread.
I'm sorry you see it that way. I see it quite differently myself.
Thanks for your input. Unfortunately, you do not understand our doctrine well enough to make a valid judgment on the matter. I don't expect my attempt to address your concerns will change a thing where you are concerned. Maybe someone else will learn from it, though.
Great scripture. It's one of my favorites.