bytebear

But I am talking about the law of chastity, and adultery, which is contrary to current social standards. The simple fact is, if you want to be in the society of Zion, you cannot act on gay emotions. If you want to be one with the Saints, you have certain lifestyle restrictions, like the Word of Wisdom. If you want to have a glass of wine with dinner, then don't join the church. If you want to be in a gay relationship (or more commonly, slut around), then don't join the church. It's simply a choice of where you want to be. Similarly if you want a strict religious society, you can live in the middle East. It's still a choice. The church has every right to define the standards of morals that they will accept, and you have every right to choose not to join the church.

And I if I fall in love with someone who isn't available, perhaps I am already married, or they are? Do I just forgo the commandments against adultery and go for it?

The interesting thing about this statement, is it doesn't tell you what is true and what isn't. It instead tells you to search them out and prove them. It isn't a statement of fact as much as it is a challenge to see if God's words will be fulfilled.

That's just ridiculous. And it's equal for straight people too. If a man lusts after a woman, then he is sinning equally.

No, we are not Vulcans. I may be mad at my boss, but I don't throw a punch. Maybe I am "repressing my feelings" but in reality, I am controlling my actions. Having the feeling is not a sin. But you are saying it is impossible for some people to control those feelings, and therefor if someone belts their boss, they should be given a pass and can just say, "Well, some people just can't suppress their feelings." Sorry, but that's not how it works.

Only if it is canonized. Otherwise it is speculation. It may be true, but the church has not accepted it as defacto truth.

Repress your feelings is a poor choice of words. I would prefer you said control your actions. And anyone can control their actions.

Why are you asking for doctrinal declarations from someone who is not a prophet, cannot define canon, cannot create scripture or speak for God? Snow is exactly correct. We can speculate all day long on your assertions, but until and unless it becomes canonized, it is meaningless. Now, let me ask you a question. Is the statement "Heavenly Father lived a mortality similar to our" canonized or not? A simple yes or no, please.

Wow, Buzz Lightyear believed in Eternal Progression!

I just think it's tacky. The First Lady should be more classy than that.

From a scientific point of view. If God is infinite, and we are added to God via deification, what is infinity +1?

How do you interpret the following verses: D&C 20: 28 28 Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen. Alma 11 26 And Zeezrom said unto him: Thou sayest there is a true and living God? 27 And Amulek said: Yea, there is a true and living God. 28 Now Zeezrom said: Is there more than one God? 29 And he answered, No. 30 Now Zeezrom said unto him again: How knowest thou these things? 31 And he said: An angel hath made them known unto me. Mosiah 15: 4 4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth. 2 Ne. 31: 21 21 And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, 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. Amen. Alma 14: 5 5 And the people went forth and witnessed against them—testifying that they had reviled against the law, and their lawyers and judges of the land, and also of all the people that were in the land; and also testified that there was but one God, and that he should send his Son among the people, but he should not save them; and many such things did the people testify against Alma and Amulek. Now this was done before the chief judge of the land. Morm. 7: 7 7 And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world, whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto him to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom, to sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end.

Sorry, post messed up. He is referring to the Father, but the Father, along with the Son, along with the Holy Ghost is still ONE GOD. Again, do you believe the scriptures? You appear to be ignoring them. You say if they are separate beings they cannot be one God. but that directly contradicts the scriptures, so clearly we do not fully understand the parameters of what makes up one God.

Adam/God was published in church manuals, spoken of in conferences, etc. It was as prevalent as any other doctrine at the time. I know of no prophet who has ever used the term "henotheism," nor do I know any who has claimed God is not ONE, per Bible, Book of Mormon and D&C definitions. Henotheism is the definition of man, not the words of prophets. One in purpose is still ONE GOD, and still monotheistic. How do you interpret the following verses: D&C 20: 28 28 Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen. Alma 11 26 And Zeezrom said unto him: Thou sayest there is a true and living God? 27 And Amulek said: Yea, there is a true and living God. 28 Now Zeezrom said: Is there more than one God? 29 And he answered, No. 30 Now Zeezrom said unto him again: How knowest thou these things? 31 And he said: An angel hath made them known unto me. Mosiah 15: 4 4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth. 2 Ne. 31: 21 21 And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, 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. Amen. Alma 14: 5 5 And the people went forth and witnessed against them—testifying that they had reviled against the law, and their lawyers and judges of the land, and also of all the people that were in the land; and also testified that there was but one God, and that he should send his Son among the people, but he should not save them; and many such things did the people testify against Alma and Amulek. Now this was done before the chief judge of the land. Morm. 7: 7 7 And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world, whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto him to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom, to sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end.

The LDS Church is monotheistic. The Bible, Book of Mormon and D&C explicitly teach that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are ONE GOD. Period. That means that at least three beings can make up ONE GOD. I believe that when we become gods, we become one with God, and therefore, we are ONE GOD. Still monotheistic. Now you can take man's definition of polytheism and henotheism, but the prophets of God have defined God as being more than one being, so man's understanding of God is limited, and non-scriptural. Therefore, to claim polytheism or henotheism are to claim man made definitions instead of the clear definitions of the prophets, which is God is ONE.

I agree with your assessment, and I would fall into one of either category, but I claim monotheism only because we have scripture in the Bible, Book of Mormon and D&C that explicitly teach that. Your interpretation of why and how may vary, but the Godhead is ONE God per scripture.

My guess is most Christians who believe have never read the Bible.

yes, they are, as long as they are done with adequate counseling and the assessment of a reliable medical doctor. And there are ramifications if the person is married and has children, so those factors are taken into account, just as they would be with a divorce, or other family altering decision.

It's not that children don't sin. It's that they are still learning how to control and repent from their sin, so they are automatically forgiven, hence not held accountable for their sins (i.e. age of accountability, not age of sinful living).

To the OP, I think this can be a lesson for you. Magnify your callings, since you know now how it is to be on the other side of the fence. If your ward is stagnant, then maybe suggest some activities that will get people out. Maybe something simple like a weed pulling party at the chapel.

So was Adam/God, and yet, it is not doctrine. The thread is called "semantics" and that is what you are arguing. But the scriptures are very clear. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are ONE God. Period.

Yet, the King Follet Discourse is not canonized, but the verses I quoted directly from a prophet of God are. Definitely monotheistic. Now you bring up an interesting point, and that is on the level or worship. We worship God because we are not divine. Will we worship God when we become one with God? Or is that only what lesser beings do? And when we worship God, do we worship them separately, or do we simply worship the divine (encompassing all things God), or do we worship them individually? We pray to the Father in the name of Christ, but we do no specific interaction with the Holy Ghost, and yet, the Holy Ghost is still God (or if you like, a God). But does that mean he is part of that worship too? And if so, then what about all the countless nameless beings who may also be one with God. Are we worshiping them as we worship God? And if not, then do we worship two Gods simultaneously, the Father and the Son? and then we are polytheistic? No, we worship ONE God made of at least 3 beings, possibly more, but still ONE God. I think worship is a temporal state, and when we become divine, we will have a closeness with God that worship no longer applies. Again, monotheistic. as there is one God of worship.

Yes, I think that's fair. Similarly, God does progress, but not because he becomes more knowledgeable or powerful, but his creations (us) do, and so his progression is really due to our progression.

Well, I think you need to understand the difference between secret and sacred, and I don't mean that as a cop out, but really try to understand what that means. Just as you want to have control over who may be present at the birth of your child, so it is with the temple. It's not a big secret, having a baby, but it is a sacred time for a family, and you probably have some criteria on who you would want there.

I disagree. Henotheism implies more than one God, but even if we become "gods" we still are only becoming one with God, and therefore there is only one God of which we become one with. We are not gods. We are God. We are a people. We are Zion. We are Mankind. All of these represent a group, but that group is still singular. Still one.