• 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!

"I said," ye are gods? Christians Only, Please!

Actually some Christians do -- and they're not all Mormons. I seem to recall having posted this before for you, but maybe it was for someone else on another thread. Here's what C.S. Lewis had to say on the subject:

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."

That sounds almost identical to the Mormon belief.
Katzpur: Yes, you have posted to me before about C.S. Lewis and I read what you said. I actually have that book back home but the problem is I'm in Indonesia. I want to read the whole chapter myself. I don't think his books are available to read for free online though. A quote is always taken from part of an argument and I need to read the whole argument that he was making to see what he was talking about. I need to read the quote in it's context. I do like C.S. Lewis. I read all his novels. Do the Mormon folk on this site know each other outside of this forum?.......eg. Do you attend the same church? (said in a friendly manner).
 

Johnlove

Active Member
I find an interesting story here, John 10:30 I and my‍ Father are one. 31 Then the Jews took up stones‍ again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent‍ into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Evidently the Jews saw before them a mere man who the Jews said “being a man, makest thyself God.” This really angered the Jews and Jesus came back to his defense with Psalms 82:6 I have said, Ye are‍ gods; and all of you are children‍ of the most High. This as Jesus stated was written in there law and Jesus said that he was the one who gave them this doctrine “I said.”

I often wondered out of all of holy writ why Jesus used this Psalms passage to his defense. Jesus even went as far to say that this passage of interpretation could not be broken. It could not be interpreted any other way. In my opinion no one will ever replace God the eternal Father, however, Jesus defended himself with their own scripture.

I find elsewhere in Exodus 7:1...And the lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. What another interesting statement, God made Moses a God unto pharaoh. Paul called Satan the “god of this world” in 2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god‍ of this world‍ hath blinded‍ the minds‍ of them which believe not, lest the light‍ of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image‍ of God, should shine unto them.

Peter used the term “Godliness three times. Paul used the term godliness six times. We have Jesus as the son of God, however the Jews took this a step further by saying Jesus claimed to be God. We have Moses a God and Satan a God. I don’t know what this all entails about being a God? I understand the concept and evidently “God” seems to be a title instead of a name. Is “God” a name? Going all the way back to the beginning, it seems to me that the likeness of humans to God is emphasized in the first chapter of Genesis: “God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. … So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” After Adam and Eve partook of the fruit of “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” God said they had “become as one of us,” suggesting that a process of approaching godliness was already underway. What do you think?


Notes:

Genesis 1:26–27, Genesis 2:17; 3:22, 2 Peter 1:6, 2 Peter 1:7, 2 Peter 3:11, 1 Timothy 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:10, 1 Timothy 4:7, 1 Timothy 4:8, 1 Timothy 6:5, 1 Timothy 6:6

Source:
Yes man is somewhat a god, in that man has been given the power to create.


Satan has also been given the power to create.


Because man, and Satan can create, some men and Satan believe they can create things that can overcome Jesus Christ our Lord and God.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Katzpur: Yes, you have posted to me before about C.S. Lewis and I read what you said. I actually have that book back home but the problem is I'm in Indonesia. I want to read the whole chapter myself. I don't think his books are available to read for free online though. A quote is always taken from part of an argument and I need to read the whole argument that he was making to see what he was talking about. I need to read the quote in it's context. I do like C.S. Lewis. I read all his novels.
Well, I hope you'll have a chance to read it, and I am confident that you'll see that the meaning of the quote in question will be unchanged when read in the context of the entire chapter.

Do the Mormon folk on this site know each other outside of this forum?.......eg. Do you attend the same church? (said in a friendly manner).
We live in entirely different parts of the country and even the world. I am in Salt Lake City, Utah. Scott is in Southern Utah, Norman is in Michigan, and Thanda is in South Africa.
 

Thanda

Well-Known Member
Thanda: Thanks for explaining the term. God said in the Bible that he didn't want man to become like him and he quickly expelled Adam and Eve so they wouldn't eat from the Tree of Life.

Nowhere in the bible does God say he doesn't want man to become like him. Instead the bible says God created Man in his own image, after his likeness. Why would God set aside a separate day to create Man? Why would he specifically want man to look like him?
In the sermon on the mount Jesus talks about how we need to love our enemies and he gives as a reason the fact that God makes his sun to shine on both the good and the evil. In Matthew 5:48 Jesus says, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father who is in Heaven is perfect."
To the ancient Israelites Jehovah said, "Be ye Holy for I am Holy".
God clearly wants us to become like him.

1. Mormons believe in a heavenly mother and father. And they have created everyone in existence? Protestants teach that there are no sexual relationships in Heaven.....or do Mormons believe that everyone was originally created by the divine couple in a different way? (non-sexual).

There is nothing in Mormonism that suggests that we will have sex in Heaven. God is not bound by the mechanics of the natural world. He can create children the way he wants to. Just like Jesus was able to turn water into wine. Jesus didn't have to go and get grapes and squash them like humans need to do. We may look like God but we are not God. God is a far more advanced being.

2. What is the official Mormon church position on the modern theory of Ancient Astronauts?

I don't think there is a position. But we believe that angels have come from heaven to visit man on Earth many times. And some men have been taken up into heaven.
 
Thanda: Yes, I agree. God wants us to be holy and righteous like him. I was referring to Genesis 3:22. My interpretation of this verse is that God didn't want man becoming like God.....in terms of living eternally on Earth with their bodies. Where do Mormons believe Eden was? I believe it was an actual place on Earth but it was taken up to Heaven after the expulsion.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Thanda: Yes, I agree. God wants us to be holy and righteous like him. I was referring to Genesis 3:22. My interpretation of this verse is that God didn't want man becoming like God.....in terms of living eternally on Earth with their bodies. Where do Mormons believe Eden was? I believe it was an actual place on Earth but it was taken up to Heaven after the expulsion.

God wants man to be holy and righteous like Him, while God did not want man to become like Him?

What?

Ciao

- viole
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
God said in the Bible that he didn't want man to become like him
He did? Where?

and he quickly expelled Adam and Eve so they wouldn't eat from the Tree of Life. What do Mormons say in regards to this verse?
Which verse? Genesis 1:24?

1. Mormons believe in a heavenly mother and father. And they have created everyone in existence? Protestants teach that there are no sexual relationships in Heaven.....or do Mormons believe that everyone was originally created by the divine couple in a different way? (non-sexual).
We believe that God created the spirits of each and every one of us. We have no idea how He did so, but there is no reason on earth to think that this involved sexual relations or pregnancy. We would say that you physical body was created at conception, by your own mortal parents, and that God placed your spirit into that tiny body, giving it life.

2. What is the official Mormon church position on the modern theory of Ancient Astronauts?
The Church has no position on this theory.

3. How did JS get the translation of the tablets? I've heard some people say he looked into a hat and others say he put his head into a sack. I'd like to hear the official version. Did he see words in sentences or did they come one word at a time? And then his scribe (who was present) would write down what he saw.....is that correct?
The reason why you have seen multiple accounts of the process is that nobody knows for sure exactly what was involved. I don't normally post links to articles, because I see it as kind of a cop out. But this one: Book of Mormon Translation may be able to address your question better than any of us here on this website could. It is found on the official LDS site, so I think that you could assume it to be pretty reliable. There are two subheadings on which you might want to focus: Translation Instruments and Mechanics of Translation. But even as you read it, you will probably notice that there are a still a few questions that the Church has no definitive answers to.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Thanda: Yes, I agree. God wants us to be holy and righteous like him. I was referring to Genesis 3:22. My interpretation of this verse is that God didn't want man becoming like God.....in terms of living eternally on Earth with their bodies.
We don't believe He wanted men to "live eternally on Earth with their bodies" either, and that's why He prevented them from eating of the Tree Life. In understanding the LDS perspective, though, you really need to go further than just the Genesis account of the Fall. But unless you want to consider what the Book of Moses in the "Pearl of Great Price" has to say, it's not going to be easy for you to comprehend what we actually believe. In short, though, we believe that the Fall of Adam was a fortunate and anticipated one. Adam and Eve did not derail His Plan before it even got off the ground. When they ate the forbidden fruit, God didn't suddenly have to engage in some kind of frantic damage control. He simply did what He knew all along He would be doing when the time was right. He cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden. This was in order that they be able experience mortality, to be able to learn to distinguish between good and evil, to learn to trust Him, and to be able to look forward to a time in the future where they would be reconciled to God -- in which their condition would ultimately far surpass what they had in Eden.

Where do Mormons believe Eden was? I believe it was an actual place on Earth but it was taken up to Heaven after the expulsion.
There is a reference in the LDS scriptures to Eden being on the American continent. I confess that I have a hard time reconciling that with the rest of what the Bible says about the four thousand years prior to Christ's coming. In the end, I don't see it as really mattering, though. I believe that Eden was a real place.

I had to give a lesson on this exact topic (i.e. the Fall of Adam and the Atonement of Jesus Christ) in Relief Society (the LDS women's auxiliary) last Sunday. I am almost tempted to post it in its entirety, because I put in hours of work on it and got a lot of positive feedback on it. I'm not sure how meaningful it would be to you, though.
 
Last edited:
God wants man to be holy and righteous like Him, while God did not want man to become like Him?

What?

Ciao

- viole
Yes...I know that sounds confusing. I mean God does want us to have the good attributes that he has but not for us to be divine like him.....we are human only but he is God.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Yes...I know that sounds confusing. I mean God does want us to have the good attributes that he has but not for us to be divine like him.....we are human only but he is God.
We are His offspring, though, and He is the father of our spirits. So why wouldn't we have a spark of the divine in us? And more importantly, why wouldn't a loving Father want His children to reach their full potential? How would He be threatened by our wanting to be like Him? I would think that nothing would make Him happier.
 
Katzpur....yes, please feel free to post your talk. Even though some people, including myself, may not agree with it, I'm interested to read about Mormon theology. I'm sure some others will be too. It could lead on to other topics too.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Katzpur....yes, please feel free to post your talk. Even though some people, including myself, may not agree with it, I'm interested to read about Mormon theology. I'm sure some others will be too. It could lead on to other topics too.
I'll post it. It will probably take several posts, due to length restrictions. Keep in mind that it was written for a Mormon audience and for that reason, there may be background information that you are lacking that my audience had. I'm posting it exactly as I presented it (including with discussion questions I asked).
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
(Post 1 of 3; Discussion questions are in red font; verbatim quotes are in blue)

Where Justice, Love, and Mercy Meet


We're going to start today by talking about three words: Justice, love and mercy.

We'll start with justice. When I think of justice, I think of the little sign on the wall of Jimmy John's Sandwiches up on 30th East, which says, "When you do what you did, you get what you got." What do you think of when you think of justice?

Love. We all know what it feels like to love someone and what it feels like to be loved, but what are some of the specific attributes you associate with love?

Mercy. What does the word "mercy" bring to mind?

It's easy to think of love and mercy as being almost intrinsically related. But when you throw justice into the mix, things don't seem quite right any more. You have a sense of justice not quite belonging. But the point at which these three things -- justice, love and mercy -- converge was the subject of a Conference address given by Elder Jeffrey R. Holland this past April, and it's the subject of today's lesson.

I think we would all agree that justice, as incompatible as it seems to be with mercy and love, is a good thing, and that people should be held accountable for their wrong-doings. God established laws for a reason. What kind of God would give us commandments, and then simply turn a blind eye when we disobeyed them? Or worse, what kind of God would condemn the same act of disobedience in one person but completely overlook it in someone else? I don't know about you, but I would find it very difficult to trust and respect a God who was so fickle and inconsistent in administering justice. You'd never really know where you stood with such a God, and there would be nothing just in that kind of justice.

Elder Holland told the true story of two brothers, Jimmy, age 14, and John, age 19. These two teenage boys set out one day from their home in Southern Utah to go rock climbing. They neglected to take with them any kind of safety gear, because -- well, as I said, they were teenage boys. And when you're a teenage boy, you're invincible.

Well, near the top of their climb, they suddenly realized that they were positioned in such a way that they could neither climb over a protruding ledge that would have taken them to the top of the cliff, nor could they turn around and go back down to look for another way up. They were essentially trapped. Eventually, John was able to find enough sure footing that he succeeded in boosting his younger brother to safety. But, having done so, he realized that he had no way to lift himself up and over the ledge. He started to panic. He knew that he couldn't possibly survive a fall from that height. While he realized that his only option was very unlikely to succeed, he decided to try to jump vertically and try to grasp on to the top of the ledge and, using the strength of his arms, pull himself up to the top. We'll hear the rest of the story in John's own words:

“Prior to my jump I told Jimmy to go search for a tree branch strong enough to extend down to me, although I knew there was nothing of the kind on this rocky summit. It was only a desperate ruse. If my jump failed, the least I could do was make certain my little brother did not see me falling to my death. “Giving him enough time to be out of sight, I said my last prayer—that I wanted my family to know I loved them and that Jimmy could make it home safely on his own—then I leapt. There was enough adrenaline in my spring that the jump extended my arms above the ledge almost to my elbows. But as I slapped my hands down on the surface, I felt nothing but loose sand on flat stone. I can still remember the gritty sensation of hanging there with nothing to hold on to—no lip, no ridge, nothing to grab or grasp. I felt my fingers begin to recede slowly over the sandy surface. I knew my life was over."

“But then suddenly, like a lightning strike in a summer storm, two hands shot out from somewhere above the edge of the cliff, grabbing my wrists with a strength and determination that belied their size. My faithful little brother had not gone looking for any fictitious tree branch. Guessing exactly what I was planning to do, he had never moved an inch. He had simply waited—silently, almost breathlessly—knowing full well I would be foolish enough to try to make that jump. When I did, he grabbed me, held me, and refused to let me fall. Those strong brotherly arms saved my life that day as I dangled helplessly above what would surely have been certain death."
 
Last edited:

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
(Post 2 of 3)

I always love Elder Holland's talks on the Atonement and, judging from how powerful and moving they always are, my guess is that this must be one of his favorite topics to speak on. I got something a little different out of this particular talk, though, than I have gotten in the past out of his many talks on the Atonement. And it was this: The Atonement was part of a grand plan that unfolded exactly as God knew it would and exactly as He wanted it to.

At this point, I want to stop and explain the reason behind my approach to the next part of the lesson. I am going to be talking quite a bit about "traditional Christianity," and will be comparing traditional Christian beliefs to LDS doctrine. I just want to make it clear that it is not my intent to denigrate the beliefs of other Christians, but to emphasize how blessed we are to have the knowledge that has been restored to us in this day and age.

Elder Holland pointed out that among Christians today, the belief in what he called a "fortunate fall" is very unusual. I picked up on the phrase, "fortunate fall," because I'd heard it before, and I decided to see where it originated. As it turns out, the words, "fortunate fall" come from the Latin phrase "felix culpa." The Latin word "felix" means "happy," "lucky," or "blessed." If you speak Spanish, you'll immediately make the connection between the Latin "felix" and the Spanish "feliz," as in "Feliz Navidad," or "Happy Christmas." "Culpa" means "fault" or "fall." During the first few centuries of Christianity, Christ's followers understood the fall of Adam to have been a necessary event and part of God's plan for the eternal happiness of His children. There were exceptions to this. For instance, one 2nd-century Church father, Tertullian, told an all-female audience, "You are the devil's gateway," and went on to tell them that they were collectively (as daughters of Eve) responsible for the death of Christ. It was, however, primarily with St. Augustine (in the late 4th and early 5th centuries) that the doctrine of "Original Sin" as well as the associated concept of "original guilt" began to take hold.

The average Christian today believes this doctrine. He characterizes Adam and Eve as being rebellious, vain and power-hungry, and believes that their choice not only brought sin and death into the world, but condemned every person who would ever live to bear their guilt and supposed depravity -- from birth. Their decision to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is consequently seen by most Christians today as being incredibly stupid and selfish on Adam's and Eve's part. When viewed from this perfective, there is nothing, absolutely nothing, "fortunate" about the Fall of Adam.

I listened to a Mormon podcast awhile back in which a BYU professor related an experience that happened to him when he told a non-member friend that he was the father of a new baby boy. His friend asked what they had named the baby. When he answered, "Adam," his friend was horrified, and actually said something to the effect that they might as well have picked the name "Lucifer." His reaction may have been extreme, but it does reflect the traditional Christian perspective of the Fall and of the kind of people Adam and Eve are believed to have been.

We as Latter-day Saints see the Fall of Adam as being fortunate in a number of respects. If you were to try to explain to someone why this is, how would you go about doing so? In what respects do we see the Fall what we see as "fortunate"?

If Adam and Eve truly were the defiant and self-centered individuals traditional Christianity paints them as, how would you explain the fact that Genesis 3:6 says, that "when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat"? After all, if the Tree is said to have been "good for food, pleasant to the eyes and [desirable] to make one wise," doesn't it sound more as if Eve, rather than being defiant and self-centered, was actually just a woman pursuing wisdom, truth and beauty?

Regardless of how literally one takes the story of the Creation and the events which transpired in Eden, we must ultimately acknowledge that there would have been no need for an Atonement had there not been a Fall, an actual fall from grace by two people who really did live and were given a choice which would impact the billions of their descendants. This makes you stop and think -- or at least it should -- that to believe anything other than that the Fall was a fortunate and anticipated one is to suggest that God was a pretty incompetent planner and this His Plan was derailed before it ever got off the ground. Contrary to popular opinion, Adam and Eve did not create some kind of a glitch in God's plan. When they ate the forbidden fruit, God didn't suddenly have to engage in some kind of frantic damage control. He simply did what He knew all along He would be doing when the time was right. He cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden.

Most Christians today see the expulsion from Eden as a much-deserved punishment. Period. The end. There's actually a very good reason for that. Reading the account of the Fall of Adam in Genesis, you will see that the story jumps from where Adam and Eve were cast out of Eden to where Cain and Abel are both grown men in about three verses. To say that Adam and Eve's story ends on a depressing note is an understatement. There is no indication in Genesis that God ever told Adam that all was not lost. There is no hint that Adam was ever given any hope for future redemption. We haven't so much as a clue that Adam and Eve didn't spend the rest of their lives feeling the burden of having failed God and the entire human race. Here's how Elder Holland put it:

"What a plight! The entire human race in free fall -- every man, woman, and child in it physically tumbling toward permanent death, spiritually plunging toward eternal anguish. Is that what life was meant to be? Is this the grand finale of the human experience? Are we all just hanging in a cold canyon somewhere in an indifferent universe, each of us searching for a toehold, each of us seeking for something to grip -- with nothing but the feeling of sand sliding under our fingers, nothing to save us, nothing to hold on to, much less anything to hold on to us? Is our only purpose in life an empty existential exercise -- simply to leap as high as we can, hang on for our prescribed three score years and ten, then fail and fall, and keep falling forever?"
 
Last edited:

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
(Post 3 of 3)

Now, let's read from Moses 5: 9-12 to see what really transpired following their expulsion from Eden:

"And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record of the Father and the Son, saying: I am the Only Begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will. And in that day Adam blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God. And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient. And Adam and Eve blessed the name of God, and they made all things known unto their sons and their daughters."

We know, both through modern revelation and through the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price, that God's Plan was instituted long before Adam and Eve ever set foot in Eden, that it existed, at least in concept, long before Eden was even created. We know that a Savior had been chosen and that we were all told how the Plan was to work. We, in fact, chose to participate in it. Try to imagine how we might have reacted to the news during that Grand Council in Heaven during our pre-earth life. I would think that, when our Father in Heaven first started to explain His Plan to us, we were probably pretty excited. We understood that obtaining a physical body and experiencing mortality were the first of many steps we would have to take in order to eventually become like Him. Things probably sounded pretty good until He got to the part where He told us that He had a zero-tolerance policy with respect to sin. In other words, when it was time for us to return home, entrance to God's Kingdom wouldn't be based on whether our good deeds outweighed our sins. The qualifying factor for salvation would be that we be "100% sin-free." That must have taken the wind out of our sails.

When Jesus Christ stepped forward and offered to pay the price for our sins so that we could be forgiven of them without having to endure the punishment, we must have been kind of overwhelmed. I can easily imagine myself having said, "Wait a minute. Are you saying that if I were to accept this opportunity, this gift of mortality and then were to mess up, you'd suffer and die so that I didn't have to be punished? Why would you do that?"

And then Jesus would probably have explained that He would do it because He loved me, more than I could possibly imagine. And all I would need to do was sincerely repent of my sins, resolve to do better in the future, and believe that He really would come through for me. Hey, I could do that! But still it wouldn't seem "just" that I sin and that He suffer. I suspect that He probably had to patiently explain the process to me, maybe several times, before I could actually get my head around the idea that justice, love and mercy actually could meet in such a way that I could accept His gift and feel not guilty for doing so, but instead, just joyous and grateful.

This process would involve something called a covenant. To illustrate how a covenant would work in this situation, imagine that you are young and single. You meet a guy and he is perfect. He is exactly the man you had always hoped to meet. The two of you fall in love and he asks you to marry him. Of course you say, "yes." And then you start talking about your the life you'll make together. You talk about how you'll share everything, and about how there will be no more "yours" or "mine"; there will only be "ours." This means, among other things, that you will open a joint bank account. Oh, there's one thing I neglected to mention. You are not only young and single, but deeply in debt -- to the tune of $1 million. Your fiancé, on the other hand, is wealthy -- I mean very wealthy. He is worth more money than you can possibly even conceive of. What does this mean to you in terms of your future financial security? From the moment the two of you say, "I do" and sign on the dotted line for that joint account, you are debt free. As long as you are true and faithful to him, your debt becomes his and his ability to pay it off becomes yours.

We entered into a covenant much like that when we were baptized. We agreed to love our Savior, our Benefactor, forever, and to always do our best to live in a way that would please Him. He agreed to lead us back home to our Father in Heaven, clean and pure. Immediately upon our receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, this new partnership was sealed, and it will remain binding unless we choose to break the terms of the covenant. This partnership resulted in each one of us becoming, as King Benjamin put it, a "new creature." Because Christ's "assets," so to speak, are infinite, that is without end, no matter how great our "liabilities," we became "perfect in Christ." We two became one. And as in a marriage, we even agreed to take our partner's name upon ourselves.

Beginning in the spiritual anguish of the Garden of Gethsemane, moving to an agonizing death by crucifixion on Calvary, and concluding on a beautiful Sunday morning inside a borrowed tomb, Jesus Christ demonstrated, through the most pure and perfect love the world has ever known that, as the Prophet Alma said, "justice exerciseth all his demands, and... mercy claimeth all which is her own."

I leave these thoughts with you and pray that you may reflect on them throughout the coming week. And I do so in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
 
Last edited:
Cat's Purr: I understand your sermon except for 2 names: King Benjamin and Prophet Alma. Thank you for your time in putting this sermon on this site. From a Christian perspective (non-LDS), we don't have to have certain knowledge about Adam and the fall to be saved. Do LDSs have to believe in a certain doctrine about the fall to be saved? If so, it would be included in your article of faith. Christians (non-LDS) only have to believe in Jesus and his sacrifice (John 3:-18), make sure our actions are pure (James 2:24), and repent and be baptized (Acts 2: 38) to be saved. And in some cases, where baptism is impossible, like when the thief on the cross repented, it can be waved as long as there was a heart change. Maybe we could discuss the article of faith for your church. I've never seen it. Each denomination has a different article of faith but usually share the important salvation components that I've just mentioned. In my mind the "extras" that are included in the articles of faith are not important for salvation but are important to gain membership of the different denominations. Maybe in JS's time, there was more focus on accepting a certain article of faith when people should have, in my opinion, been focused on the core elements of salvation: Belief in Christ, redemption, repentance, and a pure life. God bless.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Cat's Purr: I understand your sermon except for 2 names: King Benjamin and Prophet Alma. Thank you for your time in putting this sermon on this site. From a Christian perspective (non-LDS), we don't have to have certain knowledge about Adam and the fall to be saved. Do LDSs have to believe in a certain doctrine about the fall to be saved? If so, it would be included in your article of faith. Christians (non-LDS) only have to believe in Jesus and his sacrifice (John 3:-18), make sure our actions are pure (James 2:24), and repent and be baptized (Acts 2: 38) to be saved. And in some cases, where baptism is impossible, like when the thief on the cross repented, it can be waved as long as there was a heart change. Maybe we could discuss the article of faith for your church. I've never seen it. Each denomination has a different article of faith but usually share the important salvation components that I've just mentioned. In my mind the "extras" that are included in the articles of faith are not important for salvation but are important to gain membership of the different denominations. Maybe in JS's time, there was more focus on accepting a certain article of faith when people should have, in my opinion, been focused on the core elements of salvation: Belief in Christ, redemption, repentance, and a pure life. God bless.
We don't really speak of "having to believe" any specific doctrines in order to be saved, except that Jesus Christ is our Savior and that it is through Him that we can be reconciled to our Heavenly Father. This ties to our fourth Article of Faith, which states, "We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the gospel are: First, faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, second, repentance, third, baptism by immersion for the remission of sins, and fourth, the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost." All other doctrines are of varying degrees of importance. The only Article of Faith that deals with the Fall is the second one, which reads, "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam's transgression." You were probably able to pick that up from my lesson. I'd be happy to discuss the Articles of Faith with you any time you're interested in doing that. (I'd probably end up learning a few things about a couple of them I don't give as much thought to as the others.)
 

Thanda

Well-Known Member
Cat's Purr: I understand your sermon except for 2 names: King Benjamin and Prophet Alma. Thank you for your time in putting this sermon on this site. From a Christian perspective (non-LDS), we don't have to have certain knowledge about Adam and the fall to be saved. Do LDSs have to believe in a certain doctrine about the fall to be saved? If so, it would be included in your article of faith. Christians (non-LDS) only have to believe in Jesus and his sacrifice (John 3:-18), make sure our actions are pure (James 2:24), and repent and be baptized (Acts 2: 38) to be saved. And in some cases, where baptism is impossible, like when the thief on the cross repented, it can be waved as long as there was a heart change. Maybe we could discuss the article of faith for your church. I've never seen it. Each denomination has a different article of faith but usually share the important salvation components that I've just mentioned. In my mind the "extras" that are included in the articles of faith are not important for salvation but are important to gain membership of the different denominations. Maybe in JS's time, there was more focus on accepting a certain article of faith when people should have, in my opinion, been focused on the core elements of salvation: Belief in Christ, redemption, repentance, and a pure life. God bless.

While it is not important to know all the details about Adam and Eve to be saved: it is important to understand the purpose of their creation in order to have the faith necessary to lay hold on eternal life.

Let me start with an example: it was only in 1954 when the four-minute-mile barrier was broken. Though it took years to break, the second time it was broken was only two months later. This shows that once the mental barrier had been removed and the possibilities revealed - people were more easily able to achieve what was thought to be impossible.

Next I will talk about Jesus Christ. There is something about Jesus Christ that most people do not realise but when you see it, it will really change your spiritual view. When Jesus came to earth he came as a baby. He was not a magic baby (though his birth was miraculous). He cried just as any other baby cried. He felt hunger as we all feel it. He was fully human. Jesus' power to do miracles did not come because he was God's son (others, like Elijah, had also done great miracles). His power came because of His faith, righteousness, purity, obedience, and closeness with the Father.
And that closeness was something that didn't come automatically either. He spent forty days in the wilderness fasting and praying. It is recorded that he would wake up before dawn to go and pray.
It was the way Jesus conducted his life that that led to his miraculous power.

This same Jesus told his disciples that if they had Faith, they would be able to do the same things he did. And we see that this was true. The seventy who Jesus called and sent out to preach told how they were able to cast out demons. Peter walked on water with Jesus until he began to doubt. Peter healed people with just his shadow passing over them just as Jesus healed the woman with his garments. Peter not only became like the Saviour in his character, he became like the Saviour in power as well. And throughout time whenever people have had faith in God they have had God's power. Daniel and the lion's den, Elisha raising a boy from the dead, Moses parting the Red sea.

Access to God's power has also not been limited to prophet's. In Mark chater 16 Jesus says the following:

15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
And so we see that with faith comes power. Power to do what? Power to become like God!
 

Norman

Defender of Truth
Consider for a oment that the esperience of death and suffering are for our education as


Hi, yet another Mormon here. I'd like to rebut a couple of things here and then I'll turn you back over to my brothers. Satan was not removed from heaven for wanting to be a god. He was removed from heaven for wanting to take away man's agency which God had granted. Calling LDS polytheists is the same as saying you have more than one father. We only have one Heavenly Father to whom we are answerable. Just as there may be other fathers on the block, in the same city, state, country... world,.. universe, there is still only one father for each of us. OK, I'm done.

Norman: Hi ether-ore, well said!
 
Top