Jump to content


Photo

Is The Mormon Church Christian?


  • Please log in to reply
130 replies to this topic

#101 Geode

Geode

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 07 October 2011 - 08:10 PM

Geode, I've been trying to objectively read as much as I can on this exchange regarding Mormonism. I have tried to find answers within your comments and some have been elusive to me, so I think more inline, direct answers would help move things along. I'm going to take TeeJay's list and answer them based on what I've read in your posts, to be honest most answers are based on inferences. Please fill free to fill in the blanks and correct me where I misinterpreted your position:

Geode's answers, mostly inferred - 4 possible responses, Yes, No, Undecided, Answer not given:

Is Jesus God--the God who is, the God who was, and the God who is to come? Yes
Is Father God flesh and bone? Answer not given
Did Jesus exist eternity past? Yes
Is Jesus the brother of Satan? No
Is Joseph Smith a false prophet? Undecided
Is Mormonism a false cult? Undecided
Is the Mormon jesus a false god who does not exist? Answer not given
Can men become gods? No
Can you denounce the Mormon jesus as a false god? Answer not given

Are the Yes/No answers correct? As you can see, there are also plenty of "Answer not given" that would be nice to clean up. Thanks,

Fred


Since you are asking and apparently do not think them irrelevent as to the OP or a waste of time.

My answers:

1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes
4. Yes, in that he made prophecies that were not true
5. No, I do not think Mormonism is a cult even though they have flirted with cult-like behaviour at times. It has become too large and too open to be considered one in my opinion.
6. I thought I had made it clear that I think Mormons believe in the same Jesus. If they held to a concept I thought was material to their worshipping a different figure than we find in the gospels I could answer yes or no, but as such the question assumes another question has been posed and answered already.
7. No, I do not think men can become gods.
8. Same answer as #6

#102 Geode

Geode

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 07 October 2011 - 08:34 PM

Those that are not answered are not easily yes or no questions. :( From a JW stand point, I would have to say that it is more complicated than that. I won't go into details until after Geode answers, just wanted to pop in and say that as a member of a cult (and isn't the term rank and file a cult term?) I understand that these questions are not easy to wrestle with. Someone on the ex-JW sites that I frequent asked How do you feel about Jehovah? That is a difficult question. The cult has ruined the use of that name and I have quite a struggle with it. I am so glad that I can talk to Jesus and ask for his help.


What are ex-JW sites like? I find some ex-Mormon sites interesting and having objective posts, but others have a lot of people just posting venom and accepting as fact some negative things about the LDS church which are probably half-truths at best.

I cannot see my prior post in this thread but I know I made a response to Fred. I fear that I made a mistake in the counting.

Is Jesus God--the God who is, the God who was, and the God who is to come? Yes
Is Father God flesh and bone? Answer not given
Did Jesus exist eternity past? Yes
Is Jesus the brother of Satan? No
Is Joseph Smith a false prophet? Undecided
Is Mormonism a false cult? Undecided
Is the Mormon jesus a false god who does not exist? Answer not given
Can men become gods? No
Can you denounce the Mormon jesus as a false god? Answer not given

Are the Yes/No answers correct? As you can see, there are also plenty of "Answer not given" that would be nice to clean up. Thanks,

Fred


My answers:

1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes
4. No
5. Yes, in that he made prophecies that were not true
6. No, I do not think Mormonism is a cult even though they have flirted with cult-like behaviour at times in my lifetime and probably do fit my definition of one when they practised polygamy. The LDS church has become too large and too open to really keep secrets to be considered one in my opinion. I have had a different opinion about this in the past and some atheists will answer that Christianity is a cult or at least that it started as one. An expert on Mormonism in an old documentary said that Mormons started as a cult, but evolved into a sect or a new religious tradition.
7. I thought I had made it clear that I think Mormons believe in the same Jesus. If they held to a concept I thought was material to their worshipping a different figure than we find in the gospels I could answer yes or no, but as such the question assumes another question has been posed and answered already.
8. No, I do not think men can become gods.
9. Same answer as #7

#103 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 09 October 2011 - 07:48 AM

[quote]name='Geode' timestamp='1318044878' post='75456']
What are ex-JW sites like? I find some ex-Mormon sites interesting and having objective posts, but others have a lot of people just posting venom and accepting as fact some negative things about the LDS church which are probably half-truths at best.

I cannot see my prior post in this thread but I know I made a response to Fred. I fear that I made a mistake in the counting.



My answers:

1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes
4. No
5. Yes, in that he made prophecies that were not true
6. No, I do not think Mormonism is a cult even though they have flirted with cult-like behaviour at times in my lifetime and probably do fit my definition of one when they practised polygamy. The LDS church has become too large and too open to really keep secrets to be considered one in my opinion. I have had a different opinion about this in the past and some atheists will answer that Christianity is a cult or at least that it started as one. An expert on Mormonism in an old documentary said that Mormons started as a cult, but evolved into a sect or a new religious tradition.
7. I thought I had made it clear that I think Mormons believe in the same Jesus. If they held to a concept I thought was material to their worshipping a different figure than we find in the gospels I could answer yes or no, but as such the question assumes another question has been posed and answered already.
8. No, I do not think men can become gods.
9. Same answer as #7
[/quote]

Geode,

Pastor Jeffress of the First Baptist Church of Dallas said in an interview that the Mormon Church is a cult. The whole world came down on him as a religious bigot. And, sadly, Pastor Jeffress, this morning on Fox News equivocated and said he meant a "theistic cult." People today, Christians included, do not care if something is true. If it offends, then the proclaimer of the truth mush back down or he is labeled intollerant, hateful and a "religious bigot." Now there are many definitions of a "cult", but the one we should zero in on is that it is a false religion where the leader or founder bears witnes of himself--somethng that Jesus did not do (John 5:31).

Answer to question l: I'm glad that you answered that Jesus is God eternal--past present and future. But the Mormon Church, which you refuse to denounce, does not agree with you (see my Post 91). They worship a different jesus--a jesus that came to be in the spirit world and then was birthed into the physical world by a literal S@xual union between the Mormon father god (who is flesh and bone) and Mary. So the Mormon father god and the Mormon jesus did not exist eternity past. Both came to be after, and this side of, creation. This is why Mormons teach that matter is eternal.

So, the teachings of Mormonism concerning god and the teachings of our Bible contradict each other. So will you agree that two contradictions can't both be true? Can you agree that if the Bible is true, then Mormonism must be false? If false, then a cult?

Answer to question 2, is Father God flesh and bone?: I agree with your answer (No). But the Mormon Church teaches just the opposite. Can you agree that both the Mormon Church and the Bible can't both be true?

Answer to question 3, Did Jesus exist eternity past? You answered yes. Good for you! But the Mormon jesus came to be. The Biblical Jesus always was. These are two different descriptions. Both can't be true. Do you agree?

Answer 4, Is Jesus the brother of Satan? You correctly answered no. But the Mormon Church teaches that Jesus is the brother of Satan. It can't possible be true that Jesus is the brother of Satan and Jesus is not the brother of Satan at the same time in the same way. So if Jesus is not the brother of Satan, then the Mormon Church is teaching false doctrine. Can you agree with this?

Answer 5, Is Joseph Smith a false prophet? You answered that he is a false prophet because he make some false prophecies. Surely you can find some other reasons to label him a false prophet. Is he a con-man? Is he a liar? Is he now in hell?

Answer 6, Is Mormonish a flase cult? Astonishingly, you answered no. Geode, if you were a born again Christian, you would have absolutely no compunction in denouncing Mormonish as a false cult. You would be screaming it from the mountains. I must judge you unsaved.

Answer 7, Is the Mormon jesus a false god? Why couldn't you answer this?

Answer to question 8, Cam men become gods? You answered no. But the Mormon Church teaches just the opposite. Both can't be true. Can you agree?

Answer to question 9, Can you denounce the Mormon jesus as a false god? Why can't you denounce a god that does not agree with the Bible?

Geode, your main argment seems to be that Mormonism has repented of what Joseph Smith and crazy Uncle Brigham taught, and are now in line with the Bible. I now challenge you to pick one Mormon doctrine that the Mormon church was founded on and I will show you that the doctrine you pick is alive and well in the current church. I assume you will not post the Mormon Church accepting Blacks or the dark skinned folk.

TeeJay

#104 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 09 October 2011 - 01:01 PM

What are ex-JW sites like? I find some ex-Mormon sites interesting and having objective posts, but others have a lot of people just posting venom and accepting as fact some negative things about the LDS church which are probably half-truths at best.

Yes, some are that way. I have found one that is very supportive to all, one that is supportive to Christians and insists on respect to God and the Bible, and one that contains helpful information if you feel strong enough to sift through the venom (of course, the first one I found, and had almost given up of finding a nice one). Then there is one that allows Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses to post and does not distinguish them from Christians. I have chosen not to post there at this time.

6. No, I do not think Mormonism is a cult even though they have flirted with cult-like behaviour at times in my lifetime and probably do fit my definition of one when they practised polygamy. The LDS church has become too large and too open to really keep secrets to be considered one in my opinion. I have had a different opinion about this in the past and some atheists will answer that Christianity is a cult or at least that it started as one. An expert on Mormonism in an old documentary said that Mormons started as a cult, but evolved into a sect or a new religious tradition.

I have heard of one cult that has as a whole repented of their incorrect views and come to Christianity, so I am open to that possibility.

#105 Geode

Geode

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 11 October 2011 - 05:05 AM

Yes, some are that way. I have found one that is very supportive to all, one that is supportive to Christians and insists on respect to God and the Bible, and one that contains helpful information if you feel strong enough to sift through the venom (of course, the first one I found, and had almost given up of finding a nice one). Then there is one that allows Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses to post and does not distinguish them from Christians. I have chosen not to post there at this time.
I have heard of one cult that has as a whole repented of their incorrect views and come to Christianity, so I am open to that possibility.


I see. Sounds like a mix.

#106 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 11 October 2011 - 06:18 AM

[quote] name='MamaElephant' timestamp='1318190472' post='75542']
Yes, some are that way. I have found one that is very supportive to all, one that is supportive to Christians and insists on respect to God and the Bible, and one that contains helpful information if you feel strong enough to sift through the venom (of course, the first one I found, and had almost given up of finding a nice one). Then there is one that allows Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses to post and does not distinguish them from Christians. I have chosen not to post there at this time.
I have heard of one cult that has as a whole repented of their incorrect views and come to Christianity, so I am open to that possibility.
[/quote]

ME,

Pastor Jeffress of the First Baptist Church of Dallas said that Mormonism is a cult. Do you deem this "venom" or truth?

TeeJay

#107 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 11 October 2011 - 08:10 AM

Pastor Jeffress of the First Baptist Church of Dallas said that Mormonism is a cult. Do you deem this "venom" or truth?

I am not educated enough on Mormonism to know sir, but I do not deem it venom. I know venom when I see it. Nasty words and slurs most certainly do not build others up and encourage them. Many former JWs are so hurt by the Bible that they hate anything to do with it. Poor dears. I only hope that they can one day be healed.

I know enough about Mormonism in contrast to the Watchtower teachings to know that they are less destructive and hateful, I will tell you that.

For example, I wonder, Geode, will your family speak to you? On what occasions will they acknowledge your existence? Are Mormons allowed to read books or use curriculum written by Christians? Are they encouraged to go to University?

If a religion keeps one away from Jesus Christ, then that is sad, but that in of itself is not the definition of a destructive cult.

May love and peace overflow you and yours,

ME

#108 Geode

Geode

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 11 October 2011 - 08:26 AM

Geode,

Pastor Jeffress of the First Baptist Church of Dallas said in an interview that the Mormon Church is a cult. The whole world came down on him as a religious bigot. And, sadly, Pastor Jeffress, this morning on Fox News equivocated and said he meant a "theistic cult." People today, Christians included, do not care if something is true. If it offends, then the proclaimer of the truth mush back down or he is labeled intollerant, hateful and a "religious bigot." Now there are many definitions of a "cult", but the one we should zero in on is that it is a false religion where the leader or founder bears witnes of himself--somethng that Jesus did not do (John 5:31).


Anyone can make a claim that they are correct in an assertion if they compare it to their own definition.

Answer to question l: I'm glad that you answered that Jesus is God eternal--past present and future. But the Mormon Church, which you refuse to denounce, does not agree with you (see my Post 91). They worship a different jesus--a jesus that came to be in the spirit world and then was birthed into the physical world by a literal S@xual union between the Mormon father god (who is flesh and bone) and Mary. So the Mormon father god and the Mormon jesus did not exist eternity past. Both came to be after, and this side of, creation. This is why Mormons teach that matter is eternal.

So, the teachings of Mormonism concerning god and the teachings of our Bible contradict each other. So will you agree that two contradictions can't both be true? Can you agree that if the Bible is true, then Mormonism must be false? If false, then a cult?


Once again, that s@xual union bit is really a claim from the past. The Mormons have a different definition of what eternity and Christ are all about. They have been re-defining the eternal aspect of God the Father from what you post (at least in my opinion and observation). The Bible is not terribly specific about this, and that is why the Mormons have felt justified in holding to a different viewpoint. I can agree that the Bible is true, but the concept of "eternity past" is somewhat of an open question to some, like the Mormons, even though I believe differently than them.

Answer to question 2, is Father God flesh and bone?: I agree with your answer (No). But the Mormon Church teaches just the opposite. Can you agree that both the Mormon Church and the Bible can't both be true?


Yes, they do. But once again the Bible is not very specific about the nature of God, causing men to ponder in various ways.

Answer to question 3, Did Jesus exist eternity past? You answered yes. Good for you! But the Mormon jesus came to be. The Biblical Jesus always was. These are two different descriptions. Both can't be true. Do you agree?


You and I hold to a different opinion than the Mormons.

Answer 4, Is Jesus the brother of Satan? You correctly answered no. But the Mormon Church teaches that Jesus is the brother of Satan. It can't possible be true that Jesus is the brother of Satan and Jesus is not the brother of Satan at the same time in the same way. So if Jesus is not the brother of Satan, then the Mormon Church is teaching false doctrine. Can you agree with this?


I do not hold to the Mormon concept, which really is that Jesus, Satan, and you and I are all brothers to each other. This concept is usually taken out of context, as you do here. It does not seem true to me, but I do not find a spiritual connection between all of us threatening, and that is the Mormon concept.

Answer 5, Is Joseph Smith a false prophet? You answered that he is a false prophet because he make some false prophecies. Surely you can find some other reasons to label him a false prophet. Is he a con-man? Is he a liar? Is he now in hell?


A false prophet is someone who by definition makes false prophecies. I think he actually bought into what he claimed, at least eventually, which left him in a different category than being a con man or a liar. I have already posted that I have no idea of his eternal outcome, and it is not my place to make that decision for God.

Answer 6, Is Mormonish a flase cult? Astonishingly, you answered no. Geode, if you were a born again Christian, you would have absolutely no compunction in denouncing Mormonish as a false cult. You would be screaming it from the mountains. I must judge you unsaved.


That is only your opinion. I offered mine. Once again your judgment about me is meaningless to me and from your prior posts you have not impressed me that you are really someone that enjoys the Spirit of God....making your comment doubly meaningless to me.

Answer 7, Is the Mormon jesus a false god? Why couldn't you answer this?



I have answered it multiple times. Check my posts.

Answer to question 8, Cam men become gods? You answered no. But the Mormon Church teaches just the opposite. Both can't be true. Can you agree?


To be honest I never believed this all the time I was a Mormon. The LDS church is now clearly on a path back-peddling about this concept, which is a good thing.

Answer to question 9, Can you denounce the Mormon jesus as a false god? Why can't you denounce a god that does not agree with the Bible?


I have posted that I do not agree with you (and many others) about this. Mormons believe in the same Jesus in terms of what matters most, as set forth in the Bible. I have experience in this regard that I think you lack. Have you ever attended a single Mormon service?

Geode, your main argment seems to be that Mormonism has repented of what Joseph Smith and crazy Uncle Brigham taught, and are now in line with the Bible. I now challenge you to pick one Mormon doctrine that the Mormon church was founded on and I will show you that the doctrine you pick is alive and well in the current church. I assume you will not post the Mormon Church accepting Blacks or the dark skinned folk.

TeeJay


Hold your horses. Didn't you ask me to provide what I considered a lie in "The God Makers"...? Did I not do so? Why not make a response to that instead of going off in another direction about questions?

But I will answer anyway. The Mormon church was founded upon the idea that they believed in "God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost" and at the time this claim was made Joseph Smith appeared for all intents and purposes to accept The Trinity. So now it is up to you to prove that this doctrine is alive and well in the current church.

In my opinion the discrimination against people of African heritage was not a doctrine, but a bad policy. Some Mormon leaders felt differently to me, some the same even before 1978.

#109 Geode

Geode

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 11 October 2011 - 08:42 AM

I am not educated enough on Mormonism to know sir, but I do not deem it venom. I know venom when I see it. Nasty words and slurs most certainly do not build others up and encourage them. Many former JWs are so hurt by the Bible that they hate anything to do with it. Poor dears. I only hope that they can one day be healed.

I know enough about Mormonism in contrast to the Watchtower teachings to know that they are less destructive and hateful, I will tell you that.

For example, I wonder, Geode, will your family speak to you? On what occasions will they acknowledge your existence? Are Mormons allowed to read books or use curriculum written by Christians? Are they encouraged to go to University?

If a religion keeps one away from Jesus Christ, then that is sad, but that in of itself is not the definition of a destructive cult.

May love and peace overflow you and yours,

ME


My relationship with my family was not really altered much when I sought worship outside of Mormonism. My mother joined me at Presbyterian services a few times and sent me sermons on tape from the senior pastor there when I departed that congregation for an assignment outside the country. Others in my family accept me as they always did. Mormons are not taught to shun those who depart, but to continue to welcome and fellowship them. Mormon leaders occasionally quote Christian texts outside of Mormonism, and they are cited in Mormons services and classes at times.

The Mormons stress education and encourage young members to get as much education as possible, including going to universities and getting degrees. They have a higher percentage of people with college degrees than the general population. In addition, the LDS church has a university system of their own which are accredited.

One interesting statistic is that Mormons tend to be more religious with increasing education. The opposite is true of most other faiths.

In my opinion when practiced correctly that Mormon faith can lead people towards Christ.

#110 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 11 October 2011 - 09:06 AM

My relationship with my family was not really altered much when I sought worship outside of Mormonism. My mother joined me at Presbyterian services a few times and sent me sermons on tape from the senior pastor there when I departed that congregation for an assignment outside the country. Others in my family accept me as they always did. Mormons are not taught to shun those who depart, but to continue to welcome and fellowship them. Mormon leaders occasionally quote Christian texts outside of Mormonism, and they are cited in Mormons services and classes at times.

The Mormons stress education and encourage young members to get as much education as possible, including going to universities and getting degrees. They have a higher percentage of people with college degrees than the general population. In addition, the LDS church has a university system of their own which are accredited.

One interesting statistic is that Mormons tend to be more religious with increasing education. The opposite is true of most other faiths.

In my opinion when practiced correctly that Mormon faith can lead people towards Christ.

Thank you.

One point about that: the JW "faithful and discreet slave class" does quote from Christian writings, but the rank and file are actively discouraged from reading, using, or purchasing them, as they are considered a part of Babylon the Great. The way you worded things makes it seem that the Mormons could be the same way.

You can see the contrast:


Going to University constitutes a spiritual weakness. The world is sure to end before one is able to take advantage of such education, and pursuing the education is likely to destroy one's relationship with God.

Once my family finds out that I have attended a Church or that I simply do not believe that the JWs have everything right, they will treat me as worse than dead and have no contact with me whatsoever. I will be allowed to attend a funeral, but not a wedding, and no memorial dinner after the funeral, with very few speaking to me there if looking at me at all.

#111 Geode

Geode

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 11 October 2011 - 09:45 AM

Thank you.

One point about that: the JW "faithful and discreet slave class" does quote from Christian writings, but the rank and file are actively discouraged from reading, using, or purchasing them, as they are considered a part of Babylon the Great. The way you worded things makes it seem that the Mormons could be the same way.



Some Mormons are similar. One current Mormon leader has been lampooned for making a speech where he preached against reading things "not necessary for your salvation"...such as popular novels, etc. He criticized pop music decades ago and even steadfast Donny Osmond publicly said that he was wrog about subject.

You can see the contrast:

Going to University constitutes a spiritual weakness. The world is sure to end before one is able to take advantage of such education, and pursuing the education is likely to destroy one's relationship with God.


The brightest student in my undergraduate classes in geology as a fellow that disappeared one day. We learned that he had dropped out of classes to await the imminent end of the world somewhere. He was said to have done this due to JW beliefs.

Once my family finds out that I have attended a Church or that I simply do not believe that the JWs have everything right, they will treat me as worse than dead and have no contact with me whatsoever. I will be allowed to attend a funeral, but not a wedding, and no memorial dinner after the funeral, with very few speaking to me there if looking at me at all.


That is quite different from the Mormons.

#112 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 12 October 2011 - 08:42 AM

Teejay, on 09 October 2011 - 09:48 AM, said:
Geode,

Anyone can make a claim that they are correct in an assertion if they compare it to their own definition.

Geode, I must ask. Do you believe that truth exists? The reason I ask is that what you are claiming here is truth is relative?

Once again, that s@xual union bit is really a claim from the past. The Mormons have a different definition of what eternity and Christ are all about. They have been re-defining the eternal aspect of God the Father from what you post (at least in my opinion and observation). The Bible is not terribly specific about this, and that is why the Mormons have felt justified in holding to a different viewpoint. I can agree that the Bible is true, but the concept of "eternity past" is somewhat of an open question to some, like the Mormons, even though I believe differently than them.


Geode, you claim to have been a leader in the LDS Church; yet you deny the following? Obama claimed that he did not hear any of the Right Rev. Wrong’s anti-American sermons in the 20 or more years he attended his church. He must have been asleep. Can you explain why you are denying the truth of Mormonism? And then, astonishingly, you write, “The Mormons have a different definition of what eternity and Christ is all about.” No! They do not have a different interpretation; they have a false interpretation. If Jesus did not exist eternity past, nothing could exist—you, me, or the universe. And even God can’t bring Himself to be if He did not always exist.


In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints "do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times. (President Hinckley, June 6, 1998).


Among the spirit children of Elohim the firstborn was and is Jehovah or Jesus Christ to whom all others are juniors .... There is no impropriety, therefore, in speaking of Jesus Christ as the elder brother of the rest of humankind.... Let it not be forgotten, however, that He is essentially greater than any and all others by reason (1) of His seniority as the oldest or firstborn; (2) of His unique status in the flesh as the offspring of a mortal mother and of an immortal, or resurrected and glorified, Father; (3) of His selection and foreordination as the one and only Redeemer and Savior of the race; and (4) of His transcendent sinlessness. (Improvement Era, vol. 19, pp. 941-942, June 30, 1916)


When the time came that His first-born, the Saviour, should come into the world and take a tabernacle, the Father came Himself and favoured that spirit [Mary] with a tabernacle instead of letting any other man do it. The Saviour was begotten by the Father of His spirit, by the same Being who is the Father of our spirits, and that is all the organic difference between Jesus Christ and you and me. And a difference there is between our Father and us consists in that He has gained His exaltation, and has obtained eternal lives. The principle of eternal lives is an eternal existence, eternal duration, eternal exaltation. Endless are His kingdoms, endless His thrones and His dominions, and endless are His posterity; they never will cease to multiply from this time henceforth and forever. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, pp. 217-218)

Apostle George Q. Cannon preached that Christ, Satan and all the mortals born on this earth are actually brothers and sisters from a pre-earth life:

We are here to be tested and tried. There is a war between Satan and God. We are brethren and sisters of Satan as well as of Jesus. It may be startling doctrine to many to say this; but Satan is our brother. Jesus is our brother. We are the children of God. God begot us in the spirit in the eternal worlds. This fight that I speak of arose, as we are told, over the question as to how man should work out his earthly probation in a tabernacle of flesh and bones and obtain redemption. Satan differed from God, and he rebelled. We are told in the scriptures that he drew after him one third of the family of God. They thought his plan better than that of the Savior Jesus Christ. From that time until the present he has been struggling to destroy the plans of Jehovah, and to seduce the children of men—his brothers and sisters—from their allegiance to God. (Apostle George Q. Cannon, March 11th, 1894, Collected Discourses, compiled by Brian Stuy, vol. 4, p. 23,)

JESUS ACHIEVED GODHOOD

Speaking in 1949, LDS leader Milton R. Hunter, of the First Council of the Seventy, stated:

You and I were sons and daughters of our Eternal Parents in the spirit world. In fact, all the people in this world were of that family, and Jesus Christ was the Firstborn.

During his pre-mortal life Jesus Christ rose to the status of Godhood. At that time he was foreordained to be the Savior of this world. Father Abraham was privileged to see in vision the grand council in heaven that was held prior to the peopling of this earth, and he saw, as the Lord showed him, "many of the noble and great ones." (LDS Conference Report, October 1949, p. 69)
Apostle James E. Talmage taught:

Through the sure word of revealed truth we learn of the actual relationship between God and man, and that this is the literal relationship of parent to child. The spirits of men are the offspring of Deity, born in the antemortal world and endowed with the Divine birthright of eternal development and progression, in which course of advancement the life on earth is but a stage. ... To become perfect as God is perfect is to attain the state, power, dignity, and authority of godship. Plainly there is a way provided by which the child of God may follow the footsteps of the Father, and in time—sometime in the distant eternities—be as that Divine Father is. Even as Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh, endured the experiences of mortality, passed the portals of death and became a resurrected Being, so the Father before Him had trodden the same path of progression from manhood to Godhood, and today sits enthroned in the heavens by right of achievement. He is the Eternal Father and with Him, crowned with glory and majesty, is the eternal Mother. They twain are the parents of the spirit-children for whose schooling in the lessons of mortality this earth was framed. ... Eternal exaltation is the assured attainment of those who obey in its fulness the whole law of the Gospel of Christ; theirs it is to become like unto their Celestial Parents.

"Then shall they be Gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be Gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them." (Doctrine and Covenants 132:20). (The Essential James E. Talmage, edited by James P. Harris, pp. 132-133)

LITERAL SON OF GOD

While Mormon leaders assert that they believe in the virgin birth they have changed the definition. The LDS Church teaches that God the Father has a physical, tangible, resurrected body and that God literally sired Jesus in the same physical sense that any other man begets a child. Consequently "the virgin birth" is redefined to mean Mary had intercourse with a god, not a mortal, in order to literally conceive the baby Jesus. In a 1916 doctrinal statement by the LDS First Presidency we read:

1. "Father" as Literal Parent ... God the Eternal Father, whom we designate by the exalted name-title "Elohim," is the literal Parent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and of the spirits of the human race. Elohim is the Father in every sense in which Jesus Christ is so designated, and distinctively He is the Father of spirits. ... Jesus Christ is the Son of Elohim both as spiritual and bodily offspring; that is to say, Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh, and which body died on the cross and was afterward taken up by the process of resurrection, and is now the immortalized tabernacle of the eternal spirit of our Lord and Savior. (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, vol. 4, pp. 1670-1671)

In a Christmas message to the general membership, the LDS First Presidency wrote:

A CHRISTMAS GREETING FROM THE FIRST PRESIDENCY

The Latter-day Saints unite with the people of every creed and tongue and race in the general commemoration of the day observed throughout Christendom as the anniversary of the God-Man's earthly birth. ... We bow to Him as the veritable Son of the living God in the fullest sense of the hallowed term. As Mary was His saintly mother, so the Mighty God was His everlasting and literal Father. He was "the only begotten" of Deity, in the flesh, to die that man may live. This we once more affirm and declare as a glorious truth and a fundamental of "Mormon" faith. (Messages of the First Presidency, Vol. 4, pp. 318-319)

Apostle Bruce R. McConkie explained:

God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says. (Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce McConkie, p. 742)

Apostle McConkie explained that there was nothing figurative about Mary’s conception:

And so it is with the Eternal Father and the mortal birth of the Eternal Son. The Father is a Father is a Father; he is not a spirit essence or nothingness to which the name Father is figuratively applied. And the Son is a Son is a Son; he is not some transient emanation from a divine essence, but a literal, living offspring of an actual Father. ... There is nothing figurative or hidden or beyond comprehension in our Lord's coming into mortality. He is the Son of God in the same sense and way that we are the sons of mortal fathers. (The Promised Messiah, pp. 468-469)
In the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, under the heading JESUS CHRIST we read:

He was able to accomplish his unique ministry—a ministry of reconciliation and salvation—because of who and what he was. President Ezra Taft Benson stated, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was fathered by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost. He is the Son of the Eternal Father!" ... From Mary, a mortal woman, Jesus inherited mortality, including the capacity to die. From his exalted Father he inherited immortality, the capacity to live forever. (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, vol. 2, pp.724-725)
On another page of the same volume we read: The fact of Jesus’ being the literal Son of God in the flesh is crucial to the ATONEMENT,...
For Latter-day Saints, the paternity of Jesus is not obscure. He was the literal, biological son of an immortal, tangible Father and Mary, a mortal woman (see Virgin Birth). Jesus is the only person born who deserves the title "the Only Begotten Son of God" ... He was not the son of the Holy Ghost; it was only through the Holy Ghost that the power of the Highest overshadowed Mary (Luke 1:35; 1 Ne. 11:19). (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, vol. 2, p. 729)

Joseph Fielding Smith wrote:

Throughout the scriptures he is spoken of as the Son of God. The story of his birth is plain and free from mystery, insofar as the fact is made that he is in very deed the Son of God. We are emphatically informed that he was begotten by the Father. He recognized God as his Father. He referred to himself as being the Son of God. This is not a mystery. ... It is true of Jesus Christ, as it is of any other son, he was begotten in the image of his Father and in his case his Father is the Eternal God, and the scriptures inform us that Jesus was the express image of his Father. (The Restoration of All Things, p. 61

Apostle McConkie declared that Jesus was begotten in the normal way:

And so, in the final analysis it is the faithful saints, those who have testimonies of the truth and divinity of this great latter-day work, who declare our Lord's generation to the world. Their testimony is that Mary's son is God's Son; that he was conceived and begotten in the normal way; that he took upon himself mortality by the natural birth processes; that he inherited the power of mortality from his mother and the power of immortality from his Father—in consequence of all of which he was able to work out the infinite and eternal atonement. (The Promised Messiah, Bruce McConkie, pp. 472-473)

Apostle James E. Talmage wrote:

That Child to be born of Mary was begotten of Elohim, the Eternal Father, not in violation of natural law but in accordance with a higher manifestation thereof; and, the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the "Son of the Highest." In His nature would be combined the powers of Godhood with the capacity and possibilities of mortality; and this through the ordinary operation of the fundamental law of heredity, declared of God, demonstrated by science, and admitted by philosophy, that living beings shall propagate—after their kind. The Child Jesus was to inherit the physical, mental, and Spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers that characterized His parents—one immortal and glorified—God, the other human—woman. (Jesus the Christ, James E. Talmage, p. 81

Yes, they do. But once again the Bible is not very specific about the nature of God, causing men to ponder in various ways.


You must be reading a different Bible. In Matthew 16:17 Jesus could not have made this more clear if He had used crayon. Jesus talking of the Father: “God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). According to Jesus, you can’t worship a Mormon father god. Why? Because Jesus said that you must worship Him in “truth,” and it’s not true that Father God is flesh and bone. And this is why I judge you to be a Mormon in your heart. You have not left the Mormon Church and you still worship a false father god and a false jesus that do not existed in the fertile imagination of the con-man Joseph Smith.

You and I hold to a different opinion than the Mormons.


Yes we do. But both of us can’t be right. Your belief and my belief contradict. Two contradictions can’t be true. Can you at least agree with me on this one point? Can you answer the following:

Is matter eternal? (I ask this because no Mormon god is eternal. All Mormon gods became gods.)

If the Mormon god did not exist eternity past, how can anything or anyone exist now? I really would like you to answer this. There is a Nobel Prize waiting if you can answer.

I do not hold to the Mormon concept, which really is that Jesus, Satan, and you and I are all brothers to each other. This concept is usually taken out of context, as you do here. It does not seem true to me, but I do not find a spiritual connection between all of us threatening, and that is the Mormon concept.


Why in the world do you accept all the other goofy Mormonism beliefs and reject this one? But I will not let you lie and say that this concept is “taken out of context.” It is what the Mormon Church teaches and you know it!

A false prophet is someone who by definition makes false prophecies. I think he actually bought into what he claimed, at least eventually, which left him in a different category than being a con man or a liar. I have already posted that I have no idea of his eternal outcome, and it is not my place to make that decision for God.


But did he found a false religion that worships a false father god, a false jesus and a false holy spirit? So far, if I were holding a cocked revolver to the back of your head, you would not admit this.

That is only your opinion. I offered mine. Once again your judgment about me is meaningless to me and from your prior posts you have not impressed me that you are really someone that enjoys the Spirit of God....making your comment doubly meaningless to me.


You have your opinion. I have my opinion. Whose opinion lines up with the Bible? Who would the Holy Spirit agree with, you or me? And what I have posted is not my “opinion.” It’s God’s opinion.

I have answered it multiple times. Check my posts.


But you posted that you have to “ponder” as to whether Jesus existed eternity past. Please explain the disconnect?

To be honest I never believed this all the time I was a Mormon. The LDS church is now clearly on a path back-peddling about this concept, which is a good thing.


No. They are not back-peddling. They are concealing what they are all about. If you do not believe this, then why in the world are you reluctant to confess that the Mormon Church is a false cult, that Joseph Smith is a con-man, that the Mormon gods are false gods? Why? Why? Why?

I have posted that I do not agree with you (and many others) about this. Mormons believe in the same Jesus in terms of what matters most, as set forth in the Bible. I have experience in this regard that I think you lack. Have you ever attended a single Mormon service?


I have not attended a a Mormon service, but I watched one on TV. But neither have I experienced a nanosecond in Hell. But I don’t have to. I will take Jesus at His word that it is a place to which I do not wish to live.

The Jesus of the Bible is the “God who is, the God who was, and the God who is to come.” He always existed eternity past. He exists now in the present. And He will exist eternity future. The Mormon Jesus did not exist eternity past. He really does not exist except in the mind of Joseph Smith. But for sake of argument, the Mormon jesus did not exist eternity past but came to be. If Jesus did not exist eternity past, then nothing or anyone could exist. So the Mormon jesus can’t guarantee existence let alone salvation. Now will you at least admit that since the Jesus of the Bible and the jesus of Mormonish contradict, then both can’t be true?

Hold your horses. Didn't you ask me to provide what I considered a lie in "The God Makers"...? Did I not do so? Why not make a response to that instead of going off in another direction about questions?

But I will answer anyway. The Mormon church was founded upon the idea that they believed in "God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost" and at the time this claim was made Joseph Smith appeared for all intents and purposes to accept The Trinity. So now it is up to you to prove that this doctrine is alive and well in the current church.


TeeJay

#113 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 12 October 2011 - 08:45 AM

Geode, continuing:

Joseph Smith's Role as 'Prophet' in View of the King Follet Discourse
By Sandra Tanner
Today there are approximately 50,000 LDS missionaries going door to door throughout the world to announce that the true church has been restored by the prophet Joseph Smith. But how are we to determine if Smith's claims are true? One of the ways is to examine his teaching on the nature of God.
In the Ten Commandments God declared:
Thou shalt have none other gods before me.... Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God.... (Deut 5:7-9)
Then in Deuteronomy 6:4 we read:
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD
Turning over to chapter 13, verses 1-3, Israel was warned about false prophets who would try to lead them after strange gods.
If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. (Deut. 13:1-3)
In fact, it was such an offense that God decreed the false prophet should be put to death.
Seeing how important it was for Israel to only worship the true God we should give great diligence to insure that we are not following a false god or a false prophet.
The Bible declares the following about God—
1. There is only one God.
(Isa. 43:10-11; 44:6; 45:5; 46:5 & 9)
2. God is "from everlasting to everlasting."
( Psalm 90:2; 1 Tim. 1:17)
3. God does not change.
(Mal. 3:6; Psalm 119:142)
4. He created the universe and all that is within it.
(Isa. 44:24; 66:1-2; Psalm 33:6-9; Col. 1:17)
With that in mind, let us look at Joseph Smith's doctrine of God and see how it measures up. We will show that Joseph Smith taught just the opposite of the above:
1. There are many gods.
2. Heavenly Father advanced from being an imperfect mortal to a perfected god.
3. God is a resurrected being.
4. Our God did not create everything.
Most Mormons assume that Joseph Smith's teaching on the nature of God was the same from the beginning of the church. However, history shows that his story and doctrines changed over time.
In the early 1830's Joseph Smith taught a fairly Biblical doctrine of God. The Book of Mormon teaches that there is only one God. In 2 Nephi 31:21 it states:
...this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. (2 Nephi 31:21)
When the Book of Mormon prophet Amulek was asked "Is there more than one god?" He answered "No." (Alma 11:26-29, 44)
The Book of Mormon also teaches that God has eternally been the same.
Moroni 8:18 says
... God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity. (Moroni 8:18).
In agreement with the Bible, Mormon 9:9 proclaims "God is the same yesterday, today and forever, and in him there is no variableness, neither shadow of changing." (Mormon 9:9-10).
In fact, Mormons often use the Book of Mormon to counter criticism that they believe in many gods. The problem is that the Book of Mormon contradicts Joseph Smith's later doctrine of a plurality of gods.
Shortly after the Book of Mormon was published Smith started on his Inspired Version of the Bible. But interestingly he did not change the Isaiah passages on God. Isaiah 44:8 in Smith's revision is the same as the King James Version.
Is there a God beside me: yea, there is no God; I know not any.
One change Smith made in his Inspired Version is of particular interest. Rev. 1:6 states:
And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father.
In 1844 Joseph Smith appealed to this verse as it appears in the King James Bible to prove that God the father has a father. In his June 16, 1844 sermon he said:
I will preach on the plurality of Gods. . . . Our text says "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father." The Apostles have discovered that there were Gods above, for Paul says God was the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. (History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 474)
But Smith totally ignored his earlier revision of that verse. Revelation 1:6 in his Inspired Version was changed in such a way that one can not twist it to mean that God has a father:
and hath made us kings and priests unto God, his Father.
By dropping the "and" and inserting a comma it is obvious that Smith originally intended to make the text even clearer that only Heavenly Father was intended. This is another example of how Smith's doctrine of God evolved from one to many.
In 1835 the LDS Church published the Lectures on Faith as part of the Doctrine and Covenants. Lecture 3 clearly lays out the importance of a "correct idea of his [God's] character, perfections and attributes." Yet it presents the standard view that God is a spirit. It contains nothing about God once being a man, plural gods or that God has a physical body. Lecture 5 contrasts God the Father with Jesus by stating that the father has a body of spirit while Jesus has a body of tabernacle. Obviously there was no understanding in Mormonism at that time about God the Father being a resurrected man.
The LDS Church claims that in 1820 Joseph Smith went out into the woods to pray and received his first vision. Supposedly God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him and restored to him the true doctrine of the nature of God. From this vision they claim Smith learned that God has a resurrected body the same as Jesus.
However, this understanding of God is not present in any church publications until after 1835. Smith did not record his first vision until 1832 and in that account he only mentions Jesus as appearing. There is no mention of the Father. Then in 1835 he told his first vision to two different visitors. In these accounts he claimed that "angels" appeared, but no mention of an appearance of God the Father. (Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, pp. 105, 112-113, 2002 ed.)
For the first five years of Mormonism the teaching on the nature of God was far closer to traditional Christianity than we find in the 1840's. Also, early criticism of Joseph Smith did not include problems with his view of God. It was after Joseph Smith studied Hebrew in 1836 that his doctrine of God became more radical.
By 1839 Smith was hinting at plural gods. While in Liberty Jail Smith dictated a long letter that has since been condensed into Doctrine and Covenants, section 121. In verse 28 we read:
A time to come in the which nothing shall be withheld, whether there be one God or many gods. They shall be manifest.
In verse 32 he continues:
According to that which was ordained in the midst of the Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world was, ... (Doctrine and Covenants 121:32)
Then in 1842 Joseph Smith began the publication of his Book of Abraham which has a number of references to plural gods. For example, Abraham 4:1 states
...they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth.
In 1843 Smith introduced the concept that God has a body. In the Doctrine and Covenants, section 130, verse 22, we read:
The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit.
If Joseph Smith had been teaching since 1820 that God had a body there would have been no reason for this revelation.
Also introduced in 1843, although privately at first, was the doctrine of man's progression to godhood. Sec. 132, verse 19 speaks of many "gods" and verse 20 says that those who are sealed in an eternal marriage will become "gods" themselves and be "from everlasting to everlasting."
At the April 1844 LDS Conference Joseph Smith gave his most famous sermon, sometimes referred to as the King Follett discourse. At the 1994 unveiling of the sun stone for the reconstruction of the Nauvoo temple, Pres. Hinckley commented on Joseph Smith's doctrine of God presented in this 1844 sermon:
The text of that address has become an important doctrinal document in the theology of the Church. It is known as the King Follett Sermon. (Ensign, Sept. 1994)
Let's look at a few of Smith's statements about God from that sermon:
God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! ...it is necessary we should understand the character and being of God and how He came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see. (History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 305)
Further on he said:
The scriptures inform us that Jesus said, as the Father hath power in himself, even so hath the Son power to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious in a manner to lay down his body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again. ... Here, then, is eternal life to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all gods have done before you, ... (History of the Church, vol. 6, pp. 305-306)
Skipping down further—
These are the first principles of consolation. ... To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a god, and ascend the throne of eternal power, the same as those who have gone before. What did Jesus do? Why, I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence. My Father worked out His kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom, I shall present it to My Father, so that He may obtain kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt Him in glory. He will then take a higher exaltation, and I will take His place, and thereby become exalted myself. (History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 306)
Keep in mind that Pres. Hinckley considered this sermon "an important doctrinal document in the theology of the Church." Joseph Smith's sermon is printed in the History of the Church, vol. 6, chapter 14, and Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. It was also published in the 1971 April and May issues of the Ensign.
(The History of the Church can be read online at the BYU site [link]. Simply go down to vol. 6, then go to chapters 14 and 23 to read both of Smith's sermons on God.)
On June 16th of 1844, and just a week before his death, Smith again preached on the plurality of gods:
Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many. . . .
Some say I do not interpret the scripture the same as they do. They say it means the heathen's gods. Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many; and that makes a plurality of Gods in spite of the whims of all men. (History of the Church, vol. 6, pp. 474-475)
Further on in the same sermon Smith said:
If Abraham reasoned thus—If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and John discovered that God the Father of Jesus Christ had a Father, you may suppose that He had a Father also. Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son? Whenever did a tree or anything spring into existence without a progenitor? And everything comes in this way. Paul says that which is earthly is in the likeness of that which is heavenly, Hence if Jesus had a Father, can we not believe that He had a Father also? (History of the Church, vol. 6, pp. 476)
Let me give a brief summary of Joseph Smith's main points on the nature of God from his two sermons:
Summary of Joseph Smith's Doctrine as
Preached in April and June of 1844.
1. God has not always been God.
2. God was once a mortal.
3. God performed the role of a savior on his world when he was a mortal.
4. There was a different Heavenly Father in charge of that world.
5. There are multiple gods above our Heavenly Father.
6. Our Heavenly Father worked out his kingdom in the same way we are to do it.
7. Men may become gods like Heavenly Father.
8. God becomes more powerful and achieves a higher exaltation as his children advance to godhood.
That the doctrines taught in Smith's 1844 sermons were new to the church is made plain when one reads the charges against Smith in the one and only issue of the Nauvoo Expositor:
Among the many items of false doctrine that are taught the Church, is the doctrine of many Gods, one of the most direful in its effects that has characterized the world for many centuries. We know not what to call it other than blasphemy, for it is most unquestionably, speaking of God in an impious and irreverent manner. It is contended that there are innumerable gods as much above the God that presides over this universe, as he is above us... (Nauvoo Expositor, June 7, 1844)
Smith's teaching that God was once a man inspired Lorenzo Snow, who became the 5th President of the LDS Church, to write the following couplet:
As man is, God once was; as God is man may be. (The Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, pp. 8–9)
The 1984 LDS Priesthood manual, Search These Commandments, printed the following endorsement by Joseph Smith of Lorenzo Snow's couplet:
Elder Snow expressed this new found understanding in these words: "As man now is, God once was: As God now is, many may be." Later the Prophet Joseph Smith assured him: "Brother Snow, that is true gospel doctrine, and it is a revelation from God to you. . ." (Search These Commandments, Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, 1984, pp. 151-152)
Apostle James E. Talmage mentioned Snow's couplet in his book, Articles of Faith:
We believe in a God who is Himself progressive, whose majesty is intelligence; whose perfection consists in eternal advancement—a Being who has attained His exalted state by a path which now His children are permitted to follow, whose glory it is their heritage to share. In spite of the opposition of the sects, in the face of direct charges of blasphemy, the Church proclaims the eternal truth: "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may be." (Articles of Faith, by James E. Talmage, Deseret Book, 1981 ed., p. 390 [p. 442, 1899 ed.])
While Smith's sermons on God and Snow's couplet are not referenced as often as in the past, that is not a signal of the demise of the doctrine. Speaking at the October 2001 LDS Conference Pres. Hinckley emphasized that Mormonism is not changing:
Those who observe us say that we are moving into the mainstream of religion. We are not changing. The world's perception of us is changing. We teach the same doctrine. (Ensign, Nov. 2001)
Then we have to assume that Joseph Smith's doctrine of a plurality of gods is still believed. Remember that this doctrine has consistently been taught by every president of the LDS Church since Joseph Smith.
Some people have felt that Mormonism is moving away from Smith's doctrine of multiple gods and that God was once a mortal. However, the importance of Smith's 1844 sermon can be seen in the many references to it in official LDS literature. In the 2003 Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Gospel Doctrine Teacher's Manual we find a quote from Joseph Smith's sermon on the nature of God, including the portion "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man." Following the Smith quote is a statement by Apostle Bruce R. McConkie:
Knowledge of God is the greatest truth in all eternity. ... Joseph Smith came to reveal God, in a day of almost total spiritual darkness, in a day when men no longer knew the nature and kind of Being whom they should worship. (Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Gospel Doctrine Teacher's Manual, Lesson 32)
In other current LDS manuals are similar statements teaching a finite god. Gospel Principles, a manual used in LDS meetings and given to converts, includes a quote from Smith's 1844 sermon:
This is the way our Heavenly Father became God. Joseph Smith taught: "It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. . . . He was once a man like us;...God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did"... (Gospel Principles, 1997 ed, p. 305)
Not only that, the manual also teaches that God has a wife.
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... Because we are the spiritual children of our heavenly parents we have inherited the potential to develop their divine qualities. (Gospel Principles, p. 11)
In the 2004 edition of Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual we encounter the same teaching. On p. 8 is a quote from Joseph Smith that "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man." Further down on the same page is a quote from Spencer W. Kimball, 12th president of the LDS Church, that "God made man in his own image and certainly he made woman in the image of his wife-partner."
On p. 14 of Doctrines of the Gospel is a quote from the 1909 First Presidency statement that
All men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother, and are literally the sons and daughters of Deity. (Doctrines of the Gospel, p. 14)
At the end of the 1909 doctrinal statement, although not included in the 2004 manual, is the following:
Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God. (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, vol. 4, p. 1669)
Keep in mind that this is an official statement signed by the First Presidency which puts it on the level of binding doctrine.
This doctrine is also presented in the 2003 LDS lesson book Eternal Marriage Student Manual. It teaches that we have "heavenly parents" and that man's goal is to achieve godhood (see pp. 65, 82, 83, 167-180, 202, 259).
Their official manuals Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young (pp. 15,-17, 19, 29-31, 34) and Teachings of Presidents of the Church: John Taylor (pp. 2-3, 8, 13, 40, 59) both teach that our Heavenly Father was once a mortal, that man has the same capacity to achieve godhood and there are multiple gods. While LDS leaders seldom mention these doctrines in public interviews, they are repeatedly taught in the manuals given to the membership.
Even though these doctrines have appeared over and over again in official LDS literature I often encounter LDS members who never understood these things.
Recently I had a Mormon woman in the store who asked me why I didn't believe Mormonism any more. I explained to her that I couldn't accept Joseph Smith's teaching that God was not always God, that he had a father who had a father, etc. and that man can progress to godhood, the same as Heavenly Father did. She said she had never heard that before.
I told her that those teachings are in Smith's famous King Follett discourse, which is printed in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. But this doctrine completely contradicts the Bible, which repeatedly teaches that God is eternal and has always been God. I then told her that I believed she had heard the plural god doctrine but may not have thought it through.
So I asked her if she had ever heard Lorenzo Snow's couplet, "As man is, God once was; As God is, man may be." She said that she was familiar with it. So I asked her to explain the first half of that statement to me, the part that says "As man is, God once was." She seemed confused by the question, so I asked her if she believed God once lived as a mortal on an earth. She said "yes," so I followed up with the question, "Who was the god in charge of that earth when our Heavenly Father was a mortal?"
She admitted she had never thought about it before. I then challenged her to read the Biblical passages on the nature of God and compare them with Joseph Smith's doctrine of God. Either the Bible is right or Joseph Smith is right, it can't be both.
On Thursday, May 22nd, 2008, I received an email from a Christian who had been talking with the LDS missionaries in his area. He wrote:
I've been talking to some Mormon missionaries in California. . . . I asked them if Joseph Smith taught that there is more then one god and they said no. Where can I find a copy of Vol. 6 [of the History of the Church]?
I sent him an email with links to the BYU site that has the whole History online and a link to the 1971 Ensign printing of Joseph Smith's King Follet sermon. This is another example of the lack of understanding of basic LDS doctrine among the members. These doctrines are in the LDS manuals but obviously many Mormons do not comprehend the implications of the statements.
Over the last several years we have heard much from Dr. Robert Millet, of the BYU, discussing the LDS doctrines. While he sometimes speaks of God in ways that sound like evangelical teachings, a close examination of his writings shows that he, too, holds to the standand LDS doctrine of a god who achieved godhood, not one who has eternally existed as God.
In his 1998 book, The Mormon Faith: A New Look at Christianity, Dr. Millet candidly states:
First, the Latter-day Saints believe that God the Father is an exalted man, a corporeal being, a personage with flesh and bones. . . . Joseph Smith taught in 1844 that God our Father was once a mortal, that he lived on an earth, died, was resurrected and glorified, and grew and developed over time to become the Almighty that he now is. To say this another way, they teach that God is all-powerful and all-knowing, but that he has not been so forever; there was once a time in an eternity past when he lived on an earth like ours. (The Mormon Faith: A New Look at Christianity, by Robert L. Millet, 1998, pp. 29-30)
Since writing that book, Dr. Millet seems to have been more reserved in his statements. However, the same teaching can be seen in the book Bridging the Divide, where he described God the Father as follows:
Joseph Smith taught that God is an Exalted Man, a Man of Holiness, and that while He is God and possesses every power, every divine quality, and every perfected attribute, He is not of a different species with mortal men and women. Now don't misunderstand me here: the chasm between man and God is immense, but we do not believe it is unbridgeable, nor do we hold the same Creator-creature dichotomy that most Christians do. For us God is a man, a person, an actual being with a glorified and exalted personality. (Bridging the Divide: The Continuing Conversation Between a Mormon and an Evangelical, by Dr. Robert L. Millet and Rev. Gregory C.V. Johnson, 2007, p. 58)
These words, "perfected" "glorified" and "exalted", point to the very issue of God's nature. A perfect God does not arrive at perfection. To say that God has "glorified" and "exalted" traits is to say he did not always have these qualities, but achieved them. I refer you back to Millet's 1998 statement that "God is all-powerful and all-knowing, but that he has not been so forever."
When discussing the doctrine of God in the book Claiming Christ: A Mormon and Christian in Dialogue, Dr. Millet mentions Joseph Smith's King Follett discourse and the "idea that the Almighty was once a mortal man who lived on an earth." (p. 82) In a seeming effort to deflect the problems encountered in claiming God was once a mortal, on p. 84 he mentions President Hinckley's statement "I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it."
In fact, Millet complains that he hears far more about the LDS doctrine of God advancing to godhood from Evangelicals than he does from his own church. But I notice that he never repudiated the doctrine.
The reason he hears so much about it from the Evangelicals is because to those who look to the Bible as their rule of faith, Joseph Smith's doctrine of God is a great blasphemy.
Continuing on with the discussion on p. 85, Millet switches to a discussion of Christ having a body and asks if it would be as much of a problem for Evangelicals if Lorenzo Snow's couplet were rephrased as follows:
"As man is, Christ once was;
As Christ is, man may become."
(Claiming Christ: A Mormon and Christian in Dialogue, p. 85)
The answer is, "Yes, it is an equal problem." Jesus and men are not the same species with the same potential. Christians believe Jesus and the Father exist eternally as God, both in the past and the future. What is said of one is true of the other, but not of man. Christians reject the LDS doctrine that God, Jesus and men are all the same species, that Jesus is literally our older brother and that man has the potential to become a God. Millet goes on to state:
I may believe that God and man are not of a different species, but the last thing in the world I want to be accused of is shortening the distance between a frail, weak, and imperfect mortal and an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfected God. (Claiming Christ, p.85-86)
Notice the phrase "shortening the distance." He can claim the distance is beyond our understanding but he is still saying that God and men are traveling the same path, they are the same species with the same potential. It would also imply that God at one time was in the same situation as man, "a frail, weak, and imperfect mortal." Thus the only true difference between man and God would be a matter of time, obedience and moral perfection.
The Bible does not present man and God as being on the same progression track with God light years ahead of us. He is our creator, not our literal parent with a wife.
When Prof. Millet refers to God as "perfected" he is teaching a doctrine of God that is totally foreign to the Bible. Perfection is not an attribute that God acquired. He is perfect, past and future. To be "perfected" implies God was not always "perfect." Notice also, the misuse of "omnipotent" and "omniscient." A being that acquired perfection can not also be "omniscient" and "omnipotent."
This reminds me of a statement by Apostle James E. Talmage:
To become perfect as God is perfect is to attain the state, power, dignity, and authority of godship. Plainly there is a way provided by which the child of God may follow the footsteps of the Father, and in time—sometime in the distant eternities—be as that Divine Father is. Even as Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh, endured the experiences of mortality, passed the portals of death and became a resurrected Being, so the Father before Him had trodden the same path of progression from manhood to Godhood, and today sits enthroned in the heavens by right of achievement. He is the Eternal Father and with Him, crowned with glory and majesty, is the eternal Mother. (The Essential James E. Talmage, edited by James P. Harris, p. 132-133)
Notice the statement that man may achieve godhood "sometime in the distant eternities" as God did and God is God "by right of achievement." This is totally unbiblical.
Mormons want to portray God's qualities as something all men can achieve, like learning everything there is to know about physics. God has not arrived at total knowledge; he is the embodiment of all knowledge. He did not acquire all the power needed to operate his world; he stands outside of time and space and is the creator of all that there is anywhere. He is the sum total of all power.
Hosea 11:9 declares:
I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee.
In Psalms 119:142 we read:
Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness.
It is obvious that the LDS leaders today continue to believe the same as their past prophets. I read on the LDS web site where Dallin Oaks, in his interview for the 2007 PBS special The Mormons, stated that God has a "resurrected" body:
Before the close of his ministry, in Illinois, Joseph Smith put together the significance of what he had taught about the nature of God and the nature and destiny of man. He preached a great sermon not long before he was murdered that God was a glorified Man, glorified beyond our comprehension, (still incomprehensible in many ways), but a glorified, resurrected, physical Being, and it is the destiny of His children upon this earth, upon the conditions He has proscribed, to grow into that status themselves. That was a big idea, a challenging idea. It followed from the First Vision, and it was taught by Joseph Smith, and it is the explanation of many things that Mormons do — the whole theology of Mormonism. . . .
Further on he states:
Eternal means Godlike and to become like God. One of the succeeding prophets said: "As man is, God once was. And as God is, man may become." That is an extremely challenging idea. . . . but it explains the purpose of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. . . ([link])
Notice that Apostle Oaks sums up Joseph Smith's 1844 teaching on God and man as encompassing "the whole theology of Mormonism" and links it to Lorenzo Snow's couplet. Mormons need to face the implications of this claim. Clearly Mr. Oaks is teaching that God has not always been God and that man has the same potential to advance from mortality to become a deity.
One of the books on the LDS missionary approved reading list is Jesus the Christ by Apostle James E. Talmage. On p. 39 Talmage explained that God the Father was once a mortal:
During that antemortal period there was essential difference between the Father and the Son, in that the former had already passed through the experiences of mortal life, including death and resurrection, and was therefore a Being possessed of a perfect, immortalized body of flesh and bones, while the Son was yet unembodied. (Jesus the Christ, by James E. Talmage, 1983, p. 39)
Since this is on the approved reading list for the missionaries it obviously represents the view of God sanctioned by the church. This teaching necessitates a god above our Heavenly Father to run that world when he was a mortal. Thus, we are faced with an eternal regression of gods where each Heavenly Father has a father. Or if there is an ultimate first God in Mormonism it couldn't be the god we are praying to since he was once a human. The LDS doctrine of God sounds a lot like Paul's warning in Romans 1: 22-25:
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man,...who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. (Rom. 1:22-25)
The Bible clearly teaches that God had no beginning and there are no other gods, he didn't 'earn' the right to be our god. He has never been less than he is today. In Isaiah 44:6 God declared:
I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. (Isaiah 44:6)
Therefore I know that Joseph Smith can't be a true representative of God and the Mormon doctrine of deity is not Biblical.
Now I would like to share with you a few thoughts on talking with a Mormon.
The missionaries have a lesson book, Preach My Gospel, that lays out the basic claims of Mormonism and instructs them on the basic concepts to be presented in each lesson. Part of Lesson One is the LDS claim of a total apostasy and the need for a restoration of the true church through a prophet, namely Joseph Smith. I often start with questions relating to their first lesson:
1. How do we know if someone is truly a prophet of God?
2. Are there Biblical guidelines for testing someone claiming to be a prophet?
Yes. According to Deut. 13 a prophet can't lead you after a false god. In order to consider Joseph Smith as a prophet of God I would need to know what he taught about the nature of God.
I don't get into the doctrine of the Trinity—I just focus in on the nature of God the Father. I also put the issue of whether or not God has a body aside, and stick to the main point—Has God the Father always been God, never less than he is today, and the only God anywhere.
Another question for the Mormon would be—
Do you believe all that Joseph Smith taught about God the father?
The Mormon might ask what you are getting at, at which point you could say something like this: In Joseph Smith's sermons in 1844 he taught that God was once a mortal on another earth, died and was resurrected and progressed to godhood, which implies God had a Heavenly Father as well. This would mean there are many gods. Do you believe this?
If they say yes, there are many gods, but they only pray to one, or there is only one over our earth, you can then bring up the various verses from the Bible about there only being one God over everything, not just our world. Remind them that God declared He alone is God and He knows of no others. Isaiah 44:8 says:
Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any. (Isa 44:8)
If they have never heard that the LDS Church teaches a plurality of gods you can ask something like this—Have you read Joseph Smith's 1844 conference talk, sometimes referred to as the King Follett sermon? It seems to be teaching a doctrine of God completely foreign to the God of the Bible. The Bible declares that God has always been God yet Joseph Smith taught that God progressed to godhood, the same as mortal men may do. When I read such Bible verses as Isa. 43:10 & 11 where God says "before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me" I feel I must reject Joseph Smith as a prophet.
When asked about Smith's sermons the missionary may counter that they are only bound by the four standard works, not every thing their leaders say, sometimes their leaders speak from personal opinion, etc.
I then point out—In order for me to believe Joseph Smith's revelations in the LDS additional books of scripture I would first need to be sure that he was a true prophet and taught a right concept of God, regardless of whether his sermons were canonized or not.
I often relate my experience when I was in the 8th grade in California. A young girl came up to me and asked if I was a Mormon. I told her that I was. She then asked me what the Mormons believe about God. I assume that either her parents or church leaders had warned her that the Mormons have some pretty weird doctrines and she wanted to find out if that was true. In trying to think of the right thing to say I decided Snow's couplet explained it as good as anything, so I said to her "We believe that as man is, God once was; as God is man may become." She just looked at me with this horrified expression and said "That's blasphemy" and walked away. It took me several years to figure out why she was so offended by my statement. But at least she got me thinking about it. It would have helped if she had referred me to Isa. 43:10-11.
At this point the Mormon will often revert to his testimony, that he knows Joseph Smith is a prophet because he prayed about it and received divine confirmation. However, no amount of 'prayer' can change the fact that Joseph Smith taught a doctrine of God that contradicts the Bible.
If God has eternally been a Holy, all knowing, all powerful God, and has never been less than he is today, as taught in the Bible, then wouldn't it be blasphemous to say he was once a mere mortal and progressed to godhood, the same as many others have done and as Mormons hope to do?
The question remains, Are Smith's teachings about God Biblical? If not, he has led the LDS people after a false god and he can't be a prophet. His sermons do not agree with either the Bible or the Book of Mormon as both teach one eternal God.
Then I quietly, lovingly say to them something to the effect that—Even your church leaders say it is important to have a correct understanding of who God is. What Joseph Smith taught about God is blasphemy and that is one reason I left Mormonism. I wanted to worship the true and living God of the Bible.
Then I challenge them—The Bible was here first, I must judge Joseph Smith and any others claiming to speak for God by what God has already revealed about himself.
In John 17:3 Jesus prayed that "this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." It is imperative that we know the true God. You may feel that your prayers have confirmed to you that you are following the true God, but is it the God of the Bible or the invention of man?
The Bible never says prayer is the way to test a prophet. Instead, it tells us to test the spirits, to check out doctrinal claims, to search the scriptures, to be wary of false prophets. I then give them several papers listing the verses I mentioned.
I realize this isn't going to change a Mormon overnight, but it will give him something to think about. We are to plant the seed, God brings the harvest.
I owe a great deal to that girl who challenged me in the 8th grade. She was willing to step out of the crowd and speak to me about my faith. Yes, we need to be friends to our LDS acquaintances and approach them in love, but we also need to discuss the real issues. Joseph Smith was not honoring the God of the Bible when he taught that God and men are the same species and on the same trajectory. In Isaiah 42:8 God declared "I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another,..."
There is only one God who has eternally been God. My prayer is that someday we will all be in the heavenly throng mentioned in Rev. 19:6 singing—
"Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth."

In my opinion the discrimination against people of African heritage was not a doctrine, but a bad policy. Some Mormon leaders felt differently to me, some the same even before 1978.


It was doctrine. Crazy Uncle Brigham taught that if the Mormon Church were ever to allow Blacks into the church, the priesthood would be taken from them (Brigham Young Addresses, Ms d 1234, Box 48, folder 3, LDS Church Historical Dept., as cited in The Changing World of Mormonism, p. 312).

Apostle Bruce McConkie wrote: “… 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.” (Mormon Doctrine (1958), p. 476).

And I could go on and on with quotes. Geode, Mormonism can’t be defended with truth. It was founded on a lie and a lie can only be defended with further lies.

TeeJay

#114 Geode

Geode

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 13 October 2011 - 04:03 AM

It was doctrine. Crazy Uncle Brigham taught that if the Mormon Church were ever to allow Blacks into the church, the priesthood would be taken from them (Brigham Young Addresses, Ms d 1234, Box 48, folder 3, LDS Church Historical Dept., as cited in The Changing World of Mormonism, p. 312).

Apostle Bruce McConkie wrote: “… 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.” (Mormon Doctrine (1958), p. 476).

And I could go on and on with quotes. Geode, Mormonism can’t be defended with truth. It was founded on a lie and a lie can only be defended with further lies.


You still don't understand what makes something Mormon doctrine and what does not. The ban on men of African heritage being ordained to the Mormon priesthood did not start as doctrine, it started as a policy and then continued as such to the point that many believed it must have a doctrinal basis. Some Mormon leaders right up to 1978 thought it could be reversed just as easily as it started, others did not. Nobody could cite a revelation or confirmation vote being taken in a general conference, it just started happening behind the scenes. A black member who had been ordained was told not to exercise his priesthood and new ordinations were halted. Young and McConkie were citing their own opinions and McConkie later ruputiated those comments you cite.

You have gone on and on with far too many quotes already. Your post is one of the most egregious examples of "hurling an elephant" that I have ever seen. Is one actually supposed to wade through all of this to determine if anything is worth answering? But why should I even make such an attempt? A few days ago you set forth a simple challenge to provide a lie made in "The God Makers" and I complied. You ignored this and then asked me to provide an idea upon which the Mormon church was founded with which you were going to prove something or other. As far as I can tell you have now avoided that as well and have simply thrown a hodge-podge of cut and paste at me instead. I guess it is possible that hidden somewhere within is some reply, but quite frankly I do not have the time it might take to find where it might be buried. It would appear that you feel the greater the volume of your posts the easier you can escape from actually staying on track with what the discussion was supposed to be.

I do not find your approach that of one interested in honest conversation. I answer questions and you avoid the ones I pose. Every other post you pass judgment upon my salvation simply on the basis that I do not agree with TeeJay. You ignore my responses that come from solid knowledge to simply post the same old tired and innaccurate or distorted statements.

#115 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 13 October 2011 - 05:28 PM

[quote] name='Geode' timestamp='1318503798' post='75655']
You still don't understand what makes something Mormon doctrine and what does not. The ban on men of African heritage being ordained to the Mormon priesthood did not start as doctrine, it started as a policy and then continued as such to the point that many believed it must have a doctrinal basis. Some Mormon leaders right up to 1978 thought it could be reversed just as easily as it started, others did not. Nobody could cite a revelation or confirmation vote being taken in a general conference, it just started happening behind the scenes. A black member who had been ordained was told not to exercise his priesthood and new ordinations were halted. Young and McConkie were citing their own opinions and McConkie later ruputiated those comments you cite.

You have gone on and on with far too many quotes already. Your post is one of the most egregious examples of "hurling an elephant" that I have ever seen. Is one actually supposed to wade through all of this to determine if anything is worth answering? But why should I even make such an attempt? A few days ago you set forth a simple challenge to provide a lie made in "The God Makers" and I complied. You ignored this and then asked me to provide an idea upon which the Mormon church was founded with which you were going to prove something or other. As far as I can tell you have now avoided that as well and have simply thrown a hodge-podge of cut and paste at me instead. I guess it is possible that hidden somewhere within is some reply, but quite frankly I do not have the time it might take to find where it might be buried. It would appear that you feel the greater the volume of your posts the easier you can escape from actually staying on track with what the discussion was supposed to be.

I do not find your approach that of one interested in honest conversation. I answer questions and you avoid the ones I pose. Every other post you pass judgment upon my salvation simply on the basis that I do not agree with TeeJay. You ignore my responses that come from solid knowledge to simply post the same old tired and innaccurate or distorted statements.
[/quote]

Geode,

What I have posted refutes your post that claims that the Mormon Church has evolved and is now Christian. My posts show irrefragably that this is not true. The pagan beliefs of the Mormon Church as laid down by the founders, are alive and well. You are in denial.

TeeJay

#116 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 15 October 2011 - 09:32 PM

I received this in an e-mail today I thought I would add this radio sermon on Mormonism to this thread.

http://www.truthinac...41122&tab=radio

#117 Teejay

Teejay

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 78
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 18 October 2011 - 08:03 AM

[quote] name='ikester7579' timestamp='1318739536' post='75768']
I received this in an e-mail today I thought I would add this radio sermon on Mormonism to this thread.

http://www.truthinac...41122&tab=radio
[/quote]

Ikester,

Thank you! Very enlightening. It is my contention that it is impossible to claim to be a Christian and defend Mormonism at the same time. This is not possible. And until Geode publically denounces Mormonism as a false cult and Joseph Smith for the con-man he was, I judge him to be unsaved. And as this radio show so clearly shows, the jesus that the Mormons worship is not the true Jesus who is God and Creator. Jesus warned that "many will come in My name, but don't believe them [paraphrased]."

TeeJay

#118 Remnant of The Abyss

Remnant of The Abyss

    Bible Inerrantist

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 178 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Raised Catholic and became born again in college. Now I'm non denominational.
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Southern USA

Posted 31 March 2012 - 11:27 AM

I borrowed a copy of "The God Makers" and have not had one in my possession for about 20 years. I most certainly will not purchase a copy because I feel that supplying any profit to anybody connected with the book to be against my moral principles. I do not think it is available free online. I do remember some untruths that can only be considered lies due to what the authore most certainly would know.


Good news everybody! I've found The God Makers, both the original (1982) and The God Makers 2 (1992) both online, free, and showing together in one video! Cheers!


  • gilbo12345 and JayShel like this

#119 SomchaiA

SomchaiA

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bangkok, Thailand
  • Interests:Movies. music, science.
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 07 April 2012 - 02:10 AM

Good news everybody! I've found The God Makers, both the original (1982) and The God Makers 2 (1992) both online, free, and showing together in one video! Cheers!



We have Mormons in Thailand. They seem nice enough. They do a Nativity sort of thing at Christmas.

#120 Remnant of The Abyss

Remnant of The Abyss

    Bible Inerrantist

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 178 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Raised Catholic and became born again in college. Now I'm non denominational.
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Southern USA

Posted 07 April 2012 - 06:47 AM

We have Mormons in Thailand. They seem nice enough. They do a Nativity sort of thing at Christmas.



Being "nice" isn't good enough to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Redemption is not achieved by being "nice enough".

I notice that you and geode, the Mormon apologist on this thread, come from the same place (Bangkok). Are you going to defend Mormonism as well? What is your point of stating that they are nice?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users