mikbone

I disagree. I have read and studied Skousen's The First 2000 years and I loved it. I felt the spirit particulairly strong when he explained Why was the Atonement necessary? as found in his Appendix B of the book. It opened my understanding and gave me a much greater appreciation for what Jesus Christ did for us. In my opinon, Skousen's commentary is harmonious with the many, many scriptures that we have which explain the atonement. In fact it was one of many concepts that brought me to a conclusion that the plan of salvation is much more vast than I had previously assumed. I don't know if you actually read Skousen's Appendix B or just the spoken talk that he gave to the missionaries in Texas. Sometimes people do a much better job of communicating via written word than spoken... But In his appendix B of only 9 pages he quotes 36 separate scriptures. I love the commentary given in Texas about 2 Nephi 2: 14, and remember this scripture and intrepretation was given to Skousen by Widtsoe. I hope you don't have anything negative to say about Widtsoe btw. The scripture 2 Ne 2:14 has been quoted over and over by the general authorities during general conference.

I have never heard any commentary on the matter. But for me, I suppose that they are permanent. I bet the belly button is a permanent fixture also. I would not be suprised in the least, If the Father had similar markings.

I tend to go directly to scripture, instead of commentary. Alma 34:8 is probably the best scripture you are going to find to state what you want it to. "And now, behold, I will testify unto you of myself that these things are true. Behold, I say unto you, that I do know that Christ shall come among the children of men, to take upon him the transgressions of his people, and that he shall atone for the sins of the world; for the Lord God hath spoken it." Here is the problem though. You think you know what that scripture means. I think that you don't. E=MC^2. Energy= Mass x the Speed of Light squared. Just because I know the defination of that simple equation does not mean that I understand the complexities of the theory of relativity. And the atonement is vastly more complex than relativity. The Widtsoe/Skousen model tries to take into account the concepts of Justice, and Honor to explain the atonement. Skousen had a legitimate question. Why was it necessary for Jesus to suffer? What does suffering accomplish? Who or What is demanding justice??? See 2 Nephi 9: 25-26 How did Jehovah create the Light of Christ? Why is Jehovah so special in relation to the rest of mankind? Why did Lucifer want Elohim's honor? How does someone obtain true honor? Here is a piece of truth from a fellow Mormon in a book I recently read: The Way of Kings - Brandon Sanderson "Authority doesn't come from a rank" “Where does it come from?” “From the men who give it to you. That’s the only way to get it.”

Kinda. There are multiple effects of sin. For example, If I were to drink alcohol and get drunk and do some things that I shouldn't, I have to suffer the effects of my sin. I get a hangover. I lose the companionship of the Holy Ghost. My body sustains the negative effects of the alcohol. If I make a stuipid comment and hurt someones feelings. Then I have to repair the relationship or lose a friend or perhaps gain a bad reputation. I lose honor, etc... The atonement does not save me from the repercussions of my actions. If I follow the steps of repentence completely then I can recieve forgiveness from God throught the power of the Atonement such that I can be reedemed and brought back into the presence of the Lord. Without the atonement we would all be subject to the Devil and eternal damnation. Because we are all sinners. Although lesser intelligences such as the 1/3 host are forever damned and can never return to live with God the Father. You and I have the opportunity to make mistakes, sin, and yet become entirely clean and return to live with our Heavenly Parents. Is this fair? In my opinion no. But it dosent matter. Jesus Christ did something to make it acceptable such that we can be redeemed. When you are dammed you are dammed. Dammed means that your progression is stopped. Everything that has life probably has a spirit or some form or intelligence. Can a dog ever become like God. No. At some point long long ago did the intelligence that eventually became a dog have the same potential as you or I. I don't know. But it is possible. If that scenario is correct then all the intelligences that have been placed into a spirit or body of a non-human are also dammned. What the atonement did was to allow mankind the opportunity to sin, fail, and yet still be able to continue to progress as if we had never made a damnable mistake. Did Jesus Christ suffer more for the redempion of a horrible sinner or a gentle 9 year old who stole a candy bar after her baptism? In my opinion its an irrevelant question. The horrible sinner just has to go through much more of the repentence process before He can justly lay hold of the atonement.

I read as far as I could. Im not really into bashing fellow mormons. Let alone ones that have recently passed. Yes during the talk that you quoted, which was given to a group of missionaries as I recall, he was probably a little too casual with his quotes and documentation. Yes Christ suffered for us. He partook of the cup in Gethsemane in the end because he loves us. But this does not mean that Christ suffered for our sins, I don't believe in the penal substitution theory. He partook of something that we cannot begin to understand. He went through that great trial to give us the opportunity to partake of salvation if we fulfil our parts. Believe me, we will suffer for our sins. The atonement cannont save us from our sins. It only works when we completly repent. Recognize our sin Feel remorse Confess Ask for forgiveness Give restitution forsake the sin What The atonement give us, is the ability to experience sin and still overcome it and be cleansed. If you sin and follow the steps of forgivenes completely you are still not whole. It takes the atonement, the grace of God to redeem us. What Christ did in the Garden gave him the ability to offer us redemption.

I will respectfully disagree with you. I may be incorrect but are you saying that Christ essentially paid a 1 for 1 pain for pain price be it mental, physical, or spiritual for our sins? Essentially that each sin we have committed or will commit, lays another straw upon the burden that he shouldered in the garden and on the cross? Because I don't. All the pain that we (all of mankind) endure because of our sins is a finite amount. The atonement was infinite and eternal. D&C 19 11-20. You seem to favor the penal substitution theory. To me the Atonement is much more vast. It in and of itself is an ordinance. Apparently God the Father also went through a similar experience. And I believe that it will happen again in the future.

If you want to have a discussion about the atonement or at least your dislike of Skousen's intrepretation you might want to break it down into bite size pieces. Otherwise you will get a pretty feeble response to the thread.

I agree with your statement. And I believe it. Although there are many Mormons that do not. The Genesis and evolution of Elohim (or abscense thereof) is not required for our exaltation. That being said... Based on John 5:19 and the fact that Jehovah is the Firstborn in the Spirit. We can make a few assumptions. 1) Before anyone in our Pre-mortal existance was organized as a spirit, Jehovah had been. 2) We do not know how long Jehovah pre-dates the organization of our souls, but I believe that the time differential was VAST. 3) Jehovah (John 5:19) wittnessed Elohim produce an atonement. I am convinced that no one else that resided within our pre-mortal existence had knowledge of that event.

One of my favorite quotes about the Adam God Theory is from Bruce R McConkie's Seven deadly heresies, "Anyone who has read the Book of Moses, and anyone who has received the temple endowment and who yet believes the Adam-God theory, does not deserve to be saved." I think it is a beautiful quote. On the other hand I do like the Adam-God theory. But I think that it has to be read carefully. Just as when Isaiah writes and it is unclear if he is writing about the past, present, or future, etc... When Young writes about Adam, He is using Adam as a generic term. And that term can be substituted for Adam, Jehovah, or Eloheim. Thus you are best able to understand his words if you have the spirit of prophecy...

D&C 107: 40-41 Implies that Adam received the priesthood from his Father. Moses 5: 58-59, Although these scriptures most likely refer to the temple endowment, holy ordinance. We can assume that the priesthood was conferred upon him as well. During your lesson, you could use these verses. But I would try to stay clear of attempting to reason about the detalis of how the actual ordinance occurred. We just don't know.

I was told that the requirements to each of level of the Celestial kingdom are as follows: Highest - New and Everlasting Covenant (Eternal Marriage and all...) Middle - Melchizedek Priesthood Lowest - Baptism Lynn Alvin Mickelsen - During a district meeting in Southern Chile circa 1989.

Saturday's Warrior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the post. I loved the Thomas Covenant Chronicles and read them in High School. I never really got into his other serries but loved the land. I had no idea that this 3rd trilogy was out. I just downloaded the electronic version.

You should wait till tonight and ask these questions to the LDS member on the pannel. Although you may be sincere, I get the impression that you are trolling.

I agree. I have always thought that Jehovah was a VERY special personage in our pre-mortal existence. He was so different than us. He was already God. He appeared to have a full understanding of the plan of salvation. And He was able to create physically. I believe that His understanding of the Atonement infinately surpassed 'our' understanding of atonement during the per-mortal existence. If you look a Jehovah and his roles, a few things stand out as essential to His nature. He is the Firstborn. He is the director of the plan of salvation. He is the Creator. He is the Savior. When we chose to follow the Father's plan of salvation and accepted Jehovah as the director of this plan, He necessairly gained authority. We honored and sustained Him as our leader. When He created physically possibly the most difficult part of the creation act was Moses 2:3 "let there be light". This act may have been the first time that the Light of Christ was enacted. Based on our limited knowledge of physics and science this act of creating light requires making a star. It is an impressive undertaking. As you say the Light of Christ was in existence prior to the atonement, but I have to agree with D&C 88:6. I think that the creation, fall, and atonement are linked actions. Each of these activities become pointless without the others to give them importance and meaning. I think that when Jehovah began the physical creation that He was destined to fulfill the position as Savior. And for some reason this is what allowed him to use this power, the Light of Christ. Interestingly, the fall is what caused the Light of Christ to act as a conscious (prior to the fall, Adam and Eve did not know the difference between right and wrong). Yes. I agree. The beauty of the Light of Christ is that it is hard to understand, but yet so easy to experience. As you evaluate right and wrong you just know what is right. And what is wrong. To me it seems so obvious the difference between right and wrong. Sometimes I look at people and their incorrect assumptions and actions and am baffeled as to how they can mis-intrepret or completely ignore the Light of Christ. I doubt that our intelligence and the Light of Christ are the same sort of thing. And Im still unsure what 'intelligence' is... I like this idea. And I agree with you. In my personal experiences I have used the Light of Christ way more than the Holy Ghost. The Light of Christ is just so obvious. The Holy Ghost does leave a lasting impression though. It is of special note though that if we continually ignore the Light of Christ and break the commandments that we will eventually not be able to discern the Light of Christ and we will walk in darkness. D&C 95:12

Light of Christ Knock yourself out with the above link. In my opinion, D&C 88: 6-13 is the ultimate source concerning the nature of the Light of Christ. There is a huge amount of info in those verses. 1) The light of Christ is the Light of Truth. 2) Somehow the act of Christ ascending up on high, and descenging below all things (ATONEMENT) endowed Him with this power. 3) Light (photons) are energized by the Light of Christ. 4) This same light quickeneth our understanding (gives us a conscious). 5) It gives life to all things. 6) It is the Law by which all things are governed. 7) It is the power of God.

I don't know if this has been posted before, but I couldnt resist.

How 'bout a double down KFC Double Down - KFC.com

I've already made it twice! My kids keep asking when I am gonna make "Behold the Glory" again. We added some jalapeno peppers to the cheese. It was devoured in seconds. We do have quite a large family though.

I don't know the exact mechanism in which Heavenly Father and Mother 'begat' our spirits but I do believe that they both took part in the 'creation' of our spirits. But I do agree with you that a spiritual adoption by Jehovah trumps the spirit birth by Elohim, as previously stated in post #14 3a & 3b For example Lucifer is a spirit child of Elohim. Abraham, Adam, etc. have become spiritually reborn children of Christ through the atonement. The 2nd option if obviously better. But you can't get to option 2 unless you previously resided within the first subset.

John 5:19 Matthew 5:48 Romans 8:17 Revelations 3:21 Thats a good start. If your serious in your questions, I'd be more than happy to recite a multitude more.

Thank you for the post I may be incorrect but your statements appear to stem from 2 different concepts. 1) Joseph Smith's discourses dealing with the Saviors on Mount Zion January 21, 1844 May 12, 1844 2) Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, Atonement of Christ. “When the prophets speak of an infinite atonement, they mean just that. Its effects cover all men, the earth itself and all forms of life thereon, and reach out into the endless expanses of eternity. … the atonement of Christ, being literally and truly infinite, applies to an infinite number of earths.” Does your concept fit into #4 in the original post or is it a variation?

Good point, you do have a valid alternate explanation there. For the sake of sanity though I will choose to ignore the Adam - God Theory LDS.org - Ensign Article - Our Own Liahona Another matter. We hope that you who teach in the various organizations, whether on the campuses or in our chapels, will always teach the orthodox truth. We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine. I also like Bruce R. McConkie's statement "anyone who has read the Book of Moses, and anyone who has received the temple endowment and who yet believes the Adam-God theory does not deserve to be saved." BYU Devotional, June 1, 1980. This is what McConkie said in the audio recording of this sermon. The print version has subsequently been changed to "has no excuse whatever for being led astray by it." Compare PDF text with MP3 audio at 26:48 :)

To fulfill prophecy? Nice throwdown! And well done. I'll grant you that it is not plainly found within the quad. But I will honor official declarations and hymns as scripture. The Family: A Proclamation to the World "All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose. Hymn 292 In the heav’ns are parents single? No, the thought makes reason stare! Truth is reason; truth eternal Tells me I’ve a mother there. When I leave this frail existence, When I lay this mortal by, Father, Mother, may I meet you In your royal courts on high? LDS.org - Ensign Article - The Origin of Man, By the First Presidency of the Church, Nov 1909 “God created man in His own image.” This is just as true of the spirit as it is of the body, which is only the clothing of the spirit, its complement—the two together constituting the soul. The spirit of man is in the form of man, and the spirits of all creatures are in the likeness of their bodies. This was plainly taught by the Prophet Joseph Smith (see D&C 77:2). Adam was the son of God. Yes the JST "...who was formed of God, and the first man upon the earth" is irritating. You know full and well that I detest the idea that Adam was formed/created as opposed to born.

One vote for #1 by captmoroniRM Thanks Wingnut, I've been going through the list and already found one applicable post, by Vanhin I think that this view is becoming more popular. I don't personally like it, but it does have some internal validity. Ill try to condense it and give it a listing of its own There are 2 great documents that do support a infinite regression of Gods though. One is the Joseph Smith June 16, 1844 Sermon in the Grove discourse as recorded in the Thomas Bullock Report. The other is hymn 284 If You Could Hie to Kolob. There are many others. But these are both plain and precious in my mind.