BJ64

I read the New Era article which gives as a reference a talk by Elder Holland. I then read the talk by Elder Holland. I also read the other two references. Upon reading them I cannot figure out how the New Era article writer came to the conclusion he did in the article since what he gives as sources pretty much say the opposite from what is said in the article. I could go on but I’ll just ask you to read all the articles and see if you agree that what is written in the New Era article does not agree with the referenced articles. I’ll just post a couple of excerpts From the New Era article “The Church has no official position on the theory of evolution.” From the referenced material “Inquiries arise from time to time respecting the attitude of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints upon questions which, though not vital from a doctrinal standpoint, are closely connected with the fundamental principles of salvation. The latest inquiry of this kind that has reached us is in relation to the origin of man. It is believed that a statement of the position held by the Church upon this subject will be timely and productive of good. In presenting the statement that follows we are not conscious of putting forth anything essentially new; neither is it our desire so to do.” So the article says the church has no position then the referenced article gives the church’s position. Quite a contradiction.

“I know that God is a being with body, parts and passions and that His Son, Jesus Christ, grew and developed into manhood the same as you or I, as likewise did God, His Father, grow and develop to the Supreme Being that He now is. Christ the Savior, was born of woman; and God, the Father, was born of woman. Adam, our earthly parent, was also born of woman into this world, the same as Jesus and you and I.” Joseph F. Smith, Deseret Evening News, December 27, 1913, Sec. III, p. 7 “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity.” First Presidency of the Church, The Origin of Man, Improvement Era, Nov. 1909, 75–81 “Man is the offspring of God…. We are as much the children of this great Being as we are the children of our mortal progenitors. We are flesh of his flesh, bone of his bone, and the same fluid that circulates in our bodies, called blood, once circulated in His veins as it does in ours. As the seeds of grains, vegetables and fruits produce their kind, so man is in the image of God.” Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 9:283

You don’t seem to get it. As taught by early church leaders, our Heavenly Parents gave birth to Adam and Eve and placed them in the garden as immortal beings who then became mortal after the fall. They were then tried and tested in mortality as we are. Presumably this has been done for each world God has created. Therefore this has been done more times than the sands of the sea. If we follow that pattern we would create worlds and populate them with our posterity through all eternity, thus a continuation of the seeds forever. Since all of our posterity is also our Heavenly Father’s posterity then perhaps the spirits who would take on these bodies would be coming from the same “family” of spirits that we came from. There are quotes from prophets which say spirits have always existed and quotes saying that God created them. Sometimes by the same prophet. So I guess it’s sort of up to you what you believe but I’m siding with Joseph Smith. I believe he knew more about the things of eternity than anyone since Jesus Christ. We are told that everything we teach in the church should come from the scriptures and that if it doesn’t you may know that it is either opinion, speculation or false doctrine. Since these things I have written are based on quotes from prophets rather than scripture references they would then fall into one of these catagories. Nevertheless I am quoting prophets so it would be the opinions, speculations or false doctrines of them not me personally except where I have said so. I believe the church no longer traches these things because they are not directly in scripture. However I don’t know why more prophetic teachings haven’t been added to scripture. There are however scripture references to back up some of this. It’s sort of like how many early church leaders taught that Jesus married and the wedding mentioned in the Bible was his. This isn’t taught now days so far as I know but it is another case of something that is not directly in the scriptures. However I still believe it. We also learn things in the temple that are not in the scriptures.

I wouldn’t say that. Only the Adam God theory as far as I know.

Nothing. It is showing that in the eternities exalted couples will be baring children with physical bodies, not spirits.

What isn’t to understand? He is saying that God creates his children (Adam & Eve) the same way we create our children, that there is no other process for creating a human body.

“God has made His children like Himself to stand erect, and has endowed them with intelligence and power and dominion over all His works and given them the same attributes which He Himself possesses. He created man, as we create our children; for there is no other process of creation in heaven, on the earth, in the earth, or under the earth, or in all the eternities, that is, that were, or that ever will be.” Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 11:122-123

I think that the church’s stance in Brigham Young is the same as with another previous prophet. What they have said is true unless it doesn’t agree with current church policy in which case we can forget what they said. Bruce R. McConkie ”And all I can say to that is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.”

I didn’t disagree with myself. I merely attempted to restate the op in order to get the thread back on track.

It seems that most responders to this topic have misunderstood the original question. The question was not about evolution per se but rather why is it that the church says there has been nothing revealed about it and has no official stance on it when prophets have clearly made numerous statements on the topic. I realize that a few statements by prophets don’t necessarily equate to official policy or position but on other issues a statement or two from a single prothet has been considered doctrine or policy.

Read my post again. You obviously didn’t understand it. Only those who become gods will have a continuation of the seeds. How do you suppose gods populate the worlds they create? Do they populate them by putting spirits into physical bodies created out of thin air? Brigham Young said there is only one way to create a physical body and that is how it has always been done.

According to Joseph Smith spirits have always existed. Therefore there is no need to give birth to them. What our Heavenly parents did was create bodies of flesh and bone for our spirits God created this world and countless others. How do you suppose he populated them? Out of nothing? Did Adam and Eve appear out of nowhere? D&C 132 says nothing of giving birth to spirit children. It says a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.

You bring up a very interesting point. It’s something I’ve also noticed.

Where does this concept of having “spirit children” come from? Where is the doctrine? And how does that concept fit in with this statement of Joseph Smith? “I have another subject to dwell upon, which is calculated to exalt man; but it is impossible for me to say much on this subject. I shall therefore just touch upon it, for time will not permit me to say all. It is associated with the subject of the resurrection of the dead—namely, the soul—the mind of man —the immortal spirit. Where did it come from? All learned men and doctors of divinity say that God created it in the beginning; but it is not so: the very idea lessens man in my estimation. I do not believe the doctrine; I know better. Hear it, all ye ends of the world; for God has told me so; and if you don’t believe me, it will not make the truth without effect. I will make a man appear a fool before I get through; if he does not believe it. I am going to tell of things more noble. We say that God Himself is a self-existing being. Who told you so? It is correct enough; but how did it get into your heads? Who told you that man did not exist in like manner upon the same principles? Man does exist upon the same principles. God made a tabernacle and put a spirit into it, and it became a living soul. (Refers to the Bible.) How does it read in the Hebrew? It does not say in the Hebrew that God created the spirit of man. It says, “God made man out of the earth and put into him Adam’s spirit, and so became a living body.” The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal [co-eternal] with God himself. I know that my testimony is true; hence, when I talk to these mourners, what have they lost? Their relatives and friends are only separated from their bodies for a short season: their spirits which existed with God have left the tabernacle of clay only for a little moment, as it were; and they now exist in a place where they converse together the same as we do on the earth. I am dwelling on the immortality of the spirit of man. Is it logical to say that the intelligence of spirits is immortal, and yet that it has a beginning? The intelligence of spirits had no beginning, neither will it have an end. That is good logic. That which has a beginning may have an end. There never was a time when there were not spirits; for they are co-equal [co-eternal] with our Father in heaven. I want to reason more on the spirit of man; for I am dwelling on the body and spirit of man—on the subject of the dead. I take my ring from my finger and liken it unto the mind of man—the immortal part, because it had no beginning. Suppose you cut it in two; then it has a beginning and an end; but join it again, and it continues one eternal round. So with the spirit of man. As the Lord liveth, if it had a beginning, it will have an end. All the fools and learned and wise men from the beginning of creation, who say that the spirit of man had a beginning, prove that it must have an end; and if that doctrine is true, then the doctrine of annihilation would be true. But if I am right, I might with boldness proclaim from the housetops that God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself. Intelligence is eternal and exists upon a self-existent principle. It is a spirit from age to age and there is no creation about it. All the minds and spirits that God ever sent into the world are susceptible of enlargement. The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits. This is good doctrine. It tastes good. I can taste the principles of eternal life, and so can you. They are given to me by the revelations of Jesus Christ; and I know that when I tell you these words of eternal life as they are given to me, you taste them, and I know that you believe them. You say honey is sweet, and so do I. I can also taste the spirit of eternal life. I know that it is good; and when I tell you of these things which were given me by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, you are bound to receive them as sweet, and rejoice more and more.” I don’t believe in the concept of giving birth to spirits. Joseph Smith certainly didn’t. The source of my quote is lds.org

How else would they populate worlds?

Teaching from the scriptures is your best bet.

First, a teaching from Joseph Smith. “I have another subject to dwell upon, which is calculated to exalt man; but it is impossible for me to say much on this subject. I shall therefore just touch upon it, for time will not permit me to say all. It is associated with the subject of the resurrection of the dead—namely, the soul—the mind of man —the immortal spirit. Where did it come from? All learned men and doctors of divinity say that God created it in the beginning; but it is not so: the very idea lessens man in my estimation. I do not believe the doctrine; I know better. Hear it, all ye ends of the world; for God has told me so; and if you don’t believe me, it will not make the truth without effect. I will make a man appear a fool before I get through; if he does not believe it. I am going to tell of things more noble. We say that God Himself is a self-existing being. Who told you so? It is correct enough; but how did it get into your heads? Who told you that man did not exist in like manner upon the same principles? Man does exist upon the same principles. God made a tabernacle and put a spirit into it, and it became a living soul. (Refers to the Bible.) How does it read in the Hebrew? It does not say in the Hebrew that God created the spirit of man. It says, “God made man out of the earth and put into him Adam’s spirit, and so became a living body.” The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal [co-eternal] with God himself. I know that my testimony is true; hence, when I talk to these mourners, what have they lost? Their relatives and friends are only separated from their bodies for a short season: their spirits which existed with God have left the tabernacle of clay only for a little moment, as it were; and they now exist in a place where they converse together the same as we do on the earth. I am dwelling on the immortality of the spirit of man. Is it logical to say that the intelligence of spirits is immortal, and yet that it has a beginning? The intelligence of spirits had no beginning, neither will it have an end. That is good logic. That which has a beginning may have an end. There never was a time when there were not spirits; for they are co-equal [co-eternal] with our Father in heaven. I want to reason more on the spirit of man; for I am dwelling on the body and spirit of man—on the subject of the dead. I take my ring from my finger and liken it unto the mind of man—the immortal part, because it had no beginning. Suppose you cut it in two; then it has a beginning and an end; but join it again, and it continues one eternal round. So with the spirit of man. As the Lord liveth, if it had a beginning, it will have an end. All the fools and learned and wise men from the beginning of creation, who say that the spirit of man had a beginning, prove that it must have an end; and if that doctrine is true, then the doctrine of annihilation would be true. But if I am right, I might with boldness proclaim from the housetops that God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself. Intelligence is eternal and exists upon a self-existent principle. It is a spirit from age to age and there is no creation about it. All the minds and spirits that God ever sent into the world are susceptible of enlargement. The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits.” From what Joseph Smith taught I would say no, resurrected couples do not give birth to spirits.

From the teachings of Harold B. Lee “Now let me read from the 132nd section of the Doctrine and Covenants. … “And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise,” and I shall skip a few words in order to give you the meaning, “it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory.” Now listen to this: and shall have “a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.” [D&C 132:19.] The Prophet Joseph Smith said this meant that those who were married in the new and everlasting covenant and were true to their covenants, that after they passed through the resurrection they would be able to live together again as husband and wife and have what he calls here, a continuation of the seeds.

From the teachings of Harold B. Lee. Now that is the way it ofttimes sounds, that the things that are forbidden are the things which are the most desirable, and the things that are right for us are sometimes pretty bitter pills for us to swallow, as we say. Now, in order to give man the chance to choose, “Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other.” [2 Nephi 2:16.] Now to be an independent thinking individual, we had to have not only just the good but we had to have the evil in order that we could choose between the two. Now you think about that for a moment. If everything were good in the world and there were none evil, would you be able to choose anything but good? If everything were evil in the world, if there wasn’t any good to choose, could you choose anything else but evil? When you think about it for a moment, the only way there could be free agency in the individuals who live upon this earth is to have both the good and the bad and each one of us given the opportunity to choose for ourselves. … You see, free agency takes its chances. The Lord was willing to risk that in order that we might walk by faith and, as free, independent agents, choose the right.

How else do you expect to have a “continuation of the seeds” forever or sexual pleasure? We are created in the image of our father. Why would a resurrected and perfected being be without functional genitals? The scriptures say that not one hair of the head will be lost. How will you populate your own worlds without sexual relations with your spouse?

If a married couple has sexual attraction for each other in this life why wouldn’t they have it in the next life? Do you expect resurrected beings to be sexless individuals?

I wrote this presuming that love goes along with sexual attraction but I guess that wouldn’t have to be the case.

Yet we are given a sex drive to bring us together in marriage and to get us to have children. Sexual attraction also helps keep marriages strong. Marriage without sexual attraction is just two people living in the same house.

Since celestial marriages will continue in the next life I presume couples will retain a sexual attraction for each other.

To get back to the original question. I don’t see the church moving anywhere in regards to gay marriage. It will always be a sin and those entering gay marriage or living a gay lifestyle will not be part of the church. However I think the church will continue to reach out to them as much as possible to bring them back to the fold but only on the terms of the Church. Not on the terms of the LBGT agenda.