Uncomfortable Doctrine

[Vanhin]

Hello Vanhin,

I have read several of your contributions as I " backed off " this thread due to my continued confusion and honestly seeming large contradictions that have and continue to be offered.

Your above qoute ( like many others ) is in total contradiction with what your first prophet and the very founder of your Church claims ( from the pulpit, I might add ). In his King Follet sermon ( I went back and read it again ) It could not be more clear, IMHO, that he tells a very different account of God then the one you and others offer, who God was before God, and indeed the ability for all of us to become Gods. In addition, JS is very clear when he " takes away the veil for us all to see " that our God was once a man of a different earth before he attained " God " of this earth.

At any rate, my confusion is growing by the minute.

God bless,

Carl

Well, there are several things that need to be addressed, but I have to go to work. However, I want to make one thing perfectly clear. If you want to know our doctrine, then you should read our scriptures, live the principles therein, and seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost.

One more thing that is important to understand. God, is the God of the whole universe, he is not just the God of one earth. I love this video by a recent apostle of the Lord.

Regards,

Vanhin

[a-train]

Go and pray about it and go to the temple (that is if you are a church member??).

The temple teachings clearly teaches to me who is the Godhead. Those who don't research much in this life about the Godhead are going to be very surprised in the next life as to who it is.

As for Christ, he was the second member of the Godhead in the pre-mortal existence, this does not mean he was exalted, else why come to earth a second time and die a second time, that would not make sense. He was a member of the Godhead without having an exalted body.

The holy endowment clearly illustrates the Godship of our LORD Jesus even before the earth's creation. He indeed, is as Moroni said on the first page of the Book of Mormon: THE ETERNAL GOD.

-a-train

[Hemidakota]

"The spirit of man" is most likely referring to a portion of "intelligence" which is co-eternal with God, and not referring to the spirit body (animated by intelligence as physical bodies are animated by the spirit body?) which God created for us??

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. . . .

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. . . . (HC 6:311.)

Joseph added clarity to Abraham's vision that was not written concerning this grand truth - intelligence – not considered or perceive what we term the spirit body. If that being the case, then the spirit body is another shell to house this intelligence as the same with our mortal body houses the spirit body. Using educational assumption from the above snippet we can add - What is this “intelligence”? What is the true form of intelligence? It has no beginning. It has no end. Where did it come from? Who created it? Who gave it life? Perhaps, more questions can be added. But you get the meaning on what is being given.

We do see that Joseph uses the term 'spirit' loosely in describing the intelligence form or material that constitutes the form. If I witnessed the same, I could not describe intelligence material but use a likeness in describing on what is being observed. So in conclusion, IMHO, I do not see intelligence as a Spirit body in which GOD created to be like HIM.

[Hemidakota]

The holy endowment clearly illustrates the Godship of our LORD Jesus even before the earth's creation. He indeed, is as Moroni said on the first page of the Book of Mormon: THE ETERNAL GOD.

-a-train

We need to define the ETERNAL principle.

[a-train]

deleted - my posts are duplicating, must be a glitch in the matrix.

Edited September 5, 2008 by a-train

[Guest ceeboo]

deleted - my posts are duplicating, must be a glitch in the matrix.

Hey a-train,

I thought maybe you were studdering.:)

[Hemidakota]

Hello Vanhin,

I have read several of your contributions as I " backed off " this thread due to my continued confusion and honestly seeming large contradictions that have and continue to be offered.

Your above qoute ( like many others ) is in total contradiction with what your first prophet and the very founder of your Church claims ( from the pulpit, I might add ). In his King Follet sermon ( I went back and read it again ) It could not be more clear, IMHO, that he tells a very different account of God then the one you and others offer, who God was before God, and indeed the ability for all of us to become Gods. In addition, JS is very clear when he " takes away the veil for us all to see " that our God was once a man of a different earth before he attained " God " of this earth.

At any rate, my confusion is growing by the minute.

God bless,

Carl

It is not speculation, Ceeboo! Nor does the church endorse it. It is a written discourse of two prophets and others that received the same visionary privilege.

As those who still think it is speculation, if you like, tell both the Prophet Joseph Smith and President Snow it was flight of fancy of speculation. I would be interested to see what would be their reply. LOL :

Ceeboo, it is not church policy in preventing any person in seeking that answer that was given to Joseph Smith and others I failed to mention or limit our knowledge to the basic principles or doctrine of the church. In seeking revelation in confirming both Prophet Joseph Smith and President Snow received should be the appropriate conclusion than to post erroneous statements.

[Guest ceeboo]

Well, there are several things that need to be addressed, but I have to go to work. However, I want to make one thing perfectly clear. If you want to know our doctrine, then you should read our scriptures, live the principles therein, and seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost.

Regards,

Vanhin

Hey Vanhin,

I can certainly appreciate the need to go to work, even us Catholics need to do that:)

To " know your doctrine " ( teachings ) one would have to read the BofM and live the principles therin and seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost?????:confused:

That would lead me to believe that non LDS people ( me ) who does not do the above can not and has no way of getting an answer as to what LDS believe or teach?????????

Getting MORE confused ( if that is possible )

Peace,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

It is not speculation, Ceeboo! Nor does the church endorse it. It is a written discourse of two prophets and others that received the same visionary privilege.

As those who still think it is speculation, if you like, tell both the Prophet Joseph Smith and President Snow it was flight of fancy of speculation. I would be interested to see what would be their reply. LOL :

Ceeboo, it is not church policy in preventing any person in seeking that answer that was given to Joseph Smith and others I failed to mention or limit our knowledge to the basic principles or doctrine of the church. In seeking revelation in confirming both Prophet Joseph Smith and President Snow received should be the appropriate conclusion than to post erroneous statements.

Hi Hemidakota,

Thanks for your patience with me on all this :)

Are you suggesting ( I am sorry, I was a little unclear ) that I was posting erroneous statements??

Thanks,

God bless,

Carl

[a-train]

Hello Vanhin,

I have read several of your contributions as I " backed off " this thread due to my continued confusion and honestly seeming large contradictions that have and continue to be offered.

Your above qoute ( like many others ) is in total contradiction with what your first prophet and the very founder of your Church claims ( from the pulpit, I might add ). In his King Follet sermon ( I went back and read it again ) It could not be more clear, IMHO, that he tells a very different account of God then the one you and others offer, who God was before God, and indeed the ability for all of us to become Gods. In addition, JS is very clear when he " takes away the veil for us all to see " that our God was once a man of a different earth before he attained " God " of this earth.

At any rate, my confusion is growing by the minute.

God bless,

Carl

Ask yourself this question: 'Did Joseph Smith in the King Follet discourse say that God the Father or that Jesus Christ was at one time NOT God?'.

It is the assumed definition of 'God' that is the trouble here. The Holy Ghost does not have a body of flesh and bone, has not endured mortality, has not suffered physical death, nor resurrection, and yet He is God. Jesus also was God when He showed himself to the brother of Jared in Ether 3.

Let any instance be quoted of any LDS leader saying that any member of the Godhead was at one time NOT God. I have studied the subject for many years, including and especially the King Follet Discourse, and have yet to discover such.

Joseph Smith did NOT say that "when he " takes away the veil for us all to see " that our God was once a man of a different earth before he attained " God " of this earth."

Here is what the Prophet Joseph Smith said:

First, God himself, who sits enthroned in yonder heaven, is a man like one of you. That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today and you were to see the great God who holds this world in its orbit and upholds all things by his power, you would see him in the image and very form of a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion and image of God. He received instruction from and walked, talked, and conversed with him as one man talks and communes with another.

Again, did Joseph Smith say that the Father was once 'NOT God'?

-a-train

[Guest ceeboo]

Ask yourself this question: 'Did Joseph Smith in the King Follet discourse say that God the Father or that Jesus Christ was at one time NOT God?'.

Let any instance be quoted of any LDS leader saying that any member of the Godhead was at one time NOT God. I have studied the subject for many years, including and especially the King Follet Discourse, and have yet to discover such.

Joseph Smith did NOT say that "when he " takes away the veil for us all to see " that our God was once a man of a different earth before he attained " God " of this earth."

Again, did Joseph Smith say that the Father was once 'NOT God'?

-a-train

Hi a-train

YES, he did say that

JS VERY CLEARLY SAID AS SUCH. Amongst others here are some of his qoutes from that sermon.

" God himself was once as we are now, AN EXALTED MAN"

" I am going to tell you how God came to be God, these are incomprehensible ideas for some, but they are simple, HE WAS ONCE MAN LIKE US"

" God himself, Father of us all dwelt ON AN EARTH, THE SAME AS JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF DID".

Peace,

Carl

[Hemidakota]

Hi Hemidakota,

Thanks for your patience with me on all this :)

Are you suggesting ( I am sorry, I was a little unclear ) that I was posting erroneous statements??

Thanks,

God bless,

Carl

Carl, I stood in your shoes years ago and seeked the same answers. However, changing your life to be harmony with the Godhead is the first initial step to take while seeking the truths or further light. I made it a point with that initial transformation of a worldly life while seeking those answers. It became clear to me; this truly works in pondering the results with learning at the hands of the Holy Ghost. Remember Ceeboo, it is the core desire that the Savior will see in your life what is important. It should be the gospel and to be like Him.

Now, for some Ceeboo, the Savior will make it a point to open those doors of truths early in life than to receive it in the latter part of life for them who seek to harmonize their lives to the Godhead. .

[Guest ceeboo]

Carl, I stood in your shoes years ago and seeked the same answers. However, changing your life to be harmony with the Godhead is the first initial step to take while seeking the truths or further light. I made it a point with that initial transformation of a worldly life while seeking those answers. It became clear to me; this truly works in pondering the results with learning at the hands of the Holy Ghost. Remember Ceeboo, it is the core desire that the Savior will see in your life what is important. It should be the gospel and to be like Him.

Now, for some Ceeboo, the Savior will make it a point to open those doors of truths early in life than to receive it in the latter part of life for them who seek to harmonize their lives to the Godhead. .

I thought my shoes seemed a little worn:). I do appreciate the " back and forth " but I don't think you answered my question as to If it was me you suggested was making erroneous posts??

God bless,

Carl

[a-train]

Hi a-train

YES, he did say that

JS VERY CLEARLY SAID AS SUCH. Amongst others here are some of his qoutes from that sermon.

" God himself was once as we are now, AN EXALTED MAN"

" I am going to tell you how God came to be God, these are incomprehensible ideas for some, but they are simple, HE WAS ONCE MAN LIKE US"

" God himself, Father of us all dwelt ON AN EARTH, THE SAME AS JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF DID".

Peace,

Carl

Yes, Yes, we are all Mormons here and we have read it many times. The question still stands. When God was 'once a man like us', was He at that time not God? If 'God himself, Father of us all dwelt ON AN EARTH, THE SAME AS JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF DID' then was He not also eternally God just as was Jesus Christ? Was Jesus not God while walking the streets of Jerusalem working mighty miracles, forgiving sins, and preaching repentance?

What did Joseph say Jesus was doing? "Why, what the Father did." Did Jesus pass from God status to non-God status at His birth? What did He do? "Why, what the Father did." If they both did the same, and Jesus did not lay down His Godship, then neither did the Father. Jesus was Emmanuel, meaning 'God with us' (Matt. 1:23).

Mosiah 3:5-8 makes it plain, Jesus is "the Lord Omnipotent who reigneth, who was, and is from all eternity to all eternity". Even His name is "I AM". Jesus has always been and always will be God and I see no place where LDS leadership has said otherwise.

Jesus' birth, His mortality, His death, and His resurrection made no dent in His Godship nor did such activities make any dent in the Godship of the Father.

-a-train

Edited September 5, 2008 by a-train

[Hemidakota]

[quote name=ceeboo;253751making erroneous posts??

God bless' date='

Carl

I was referring too a few members here. :)

[justamere10]

I was referring too a few members here. :)

Everyone on this board of course speaks only for themselves unless they are directly quoting someone else and provide a verifiable reference. We're all on equal ground expressing our own opinions and understandings as best and as sincerely as we can. I'm speaking generally and not by way of criticism of anyone else writing here, every post and every poster is of value in my opinion.

I think it important for all of us to keep that in mind or we'll start throwing sand and chanting something like "my ego is bigger than your ego." :)

God does reveal things to individuals, for the benefit of those individuals and perhaps their family or flock if they are a bishop, stake president etc. Genuine revelation of course is filtered through our own mortal faculties and level of understanding, and therefore may have some contradictions with that which other individuals may receive on the same topic.

Apparently the Savior will teach us for the entire Millennium and we will still have things to learn. Nobody can expect anyone to know it all.

But let's keep working towards that goal...

That's my opinion on that.

[Guest ceeboo]

Yes, Yes, we are all Mormons here and we have read it many times. The question still stands. When God was 'once a man like us', was He at that time not God?

-a-train

Hello again a-train,

First, thanks for the perspective :)

NO, we are all NOT Mormons here.:)

The question, IMHO, is very clearly answered differently than yours. I would also " stand "

on the very clear claims and teachings of JS in this matter.What continues to confuse me to no end, is the many LDS who do not accept the prophetized teachings of JS himself.

I do appreciate the time you have spent with me on this, I simply disagree , as completly supported by JS.( IMHO)

God bless,

Carl

[Vort]

Once agency is granted, that removes the one who granted it from responsibility.

Why?

If I write a computer program and then say, "I grant thee AGENCY!", the program will still act exactly as I programmed it to act.

If God created my decision-making capacity and then merely said, "I grant thee AGENCY!", I will still make decisions exactly as my God-created decision-making ability dictates.

[justamere10]

Hello again a-train,

First, thanks for the perspective :)

NO, we are all NOT Mormons here.:)

The question, IMHO, is very clearly answered differently than yours. I would also " stand "

on the very clear claims and teachings of JS in this matter.What continues to confuse me to no end, is the many LDS who do not accept the prophetized teachings of JS himself.

I do appreciate the time you have spent with me on this, I simply disagree , as completly supported by JS.( IMHO)

God bless,

Carl

There are reasons why journals of discourses including King Follett are not in our canon. Perhaps there are questions about the accuracy of the record we have in our possession, when was it written, who wrote it (probably not the prophet himself) etc.

That which is not yet doctrine can be changed, such as the Word of Wisdom that began as just that and much later became a law that if not obeyed would keep us from worthily attending the temples. But in the meantime, that which is not in our canon or the official statements of the First Presidency is only profitable for learning and speculation (similar to the apocrypha) not something we can validly be held to or justly judged by.

That's how I see it.

[a-train]

Hello again a-train,

First, thanks for the perspective :)

NO, we are all NOT Mormons here.:)

The question, IMHO, is very clearly answered differently than yours. I would also " stand "

on the very clear claims and teachings of JS in this matter.What continues to confuse me to no end, is the many LDS who do not accept the prophetized teachings of JS himself.

I do appreciate the time you have spent with me on this, I simply disagree , as completly supported by JS.( IMHO)

God bless,

Carl

So help me out here, to what portion of Joseph Smith's Sermon do you look to find him saying God was once not God? I am an ardent life-long student of, believer in, and defender of the word of the LORD through the Prophet Joseph Smith. I am not among those 'who do not accept the prophetized teachings of JS himself.' I believe firmly every word of the King Follet Discourse, and it does NOT say at all that God passed through some non-God status, but it rather says just the opposite. I am not disagreeing with Joseph Smith's teachings, I am defending them.

-a-train

[Guest ceeboo]

So help me out here, to what portion of Joseph Smith's Sermon do you look to find him saying God was once not God? I am an ardent life-long student of, believer in, and defender of the word of the LORD through the Prophet Joseph Smith. I am not among those 'who do not accept the prophetized teachings of JS himself.' I believe firmly every word of the King Follet Discourse, and it does NOT say at all that God passed through some non-God status, but it rather says just the opposite. I am not disagreeing with Joseph Smith's teachings, I am defending them.

-a-train

Hey a-train,

:confused: I thought I shared a few of the quotes from his sermon that were IMHO very obvious that he ( JS ) indeed claimed that God was once man like us on a different earth, an exalted man, etc . In addition to my last posts examples from his sermon, JS also encourages us to " become Gods ourselves ".

I am still confused if you are " among those LDS who do not accept the prophetized teachings of JS himself " but I can suggest that with a simple review of this thread, there are indeed many who seem not to accept JS teachings.

God bless,

Carl

[candyprpl]

There are reasons why journals of discourses including King Follett are not in our canon. Perhaps there are questions about the accuracy of the record we have in our possession, when was it written, who wrote it (probably not the prophet himself) etc.

That which is not yet doctrine can be changed, such as the Word of Wisdom that began as just that and much later became a law that if not obeyed would keep us from worthily attending the temples. But in the meantime, that which is not in our canon or the official statements of the First Presidency is only profitable for learning and speculation (similar to the apocrypha) not something we can validly be held to or justly judged by.

That's how I see it.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could ask Joseph now just what he meant when he gave that sermon. He obviously had a personal revelation on this subject and wanted to share it. And, obviously, we all have different understandings of what he was talking about. How often do we read the Bible over and over again, or the Book of Mormon over and over again and come across a verse(s) and have an aha moment. We understand a more advanced meaning. I know when I don't understand something I need to ponder it out in my mind and then go to the Lord and ask if my understanding of this is right. Ceeboo, with all do respect (I mean that):) you don't believe Joseph Smith was a prophet and you (IMO) aren't trying to understand what he may have been trying to teach us about God.:)

[HiJolly]

Ceeboo -- I think I can see something that will be helpful and confusing, all at once.

Mormons believe that men ARE gods. So if God was once a man as we now are, it's not a problem, because we ARE gods. Not will be, but are. This is because at our core we are intelligences, and intelligences are co-equal, co-existent, and co-eternal with God. He is greater than we, and got to where He is first, and is now leading us there to join Him.

I can see how a Catholic, with total adhereance to creeds, can be confused by all this. Joseph Smith couldn't stand creeds, and I'll bet he is as happy as a clam, looking down from heaven on all this discussion.

Let us be open to new beliefs (yes, Mormons & all), and live a life of devotion to God, trusting Him to lead us to where we need to be.

HiJolly

Edited September 5, 2008 by HiJolly

[Misshalfway]

I don't know if this helps or not but the king follet discourse is not the keystone of our religion. The Book of Mormon is. It is thru this book that a man gets nearer to God. Any ideas from this discourse that are true are icing on the cake.

[HiJolly]

I don't know if this helps or not but the king follet discourse is not the keystone of our religion. The Book of Mormon is. It is thru this book that a man gets nearer to God. Any ideas from this discourse that are true are icing on the cake.

Bringing us to our senses? Very good. I agree with you.

HiJolly