Do you believe this?

[Aesa]

Some people will instantly take this as an attacking post, however, for those of you who truly have spoken to me over the past few days know that my curiosity is nothing more than just curiosity.

So, my thought is, how do you believe this?

Abortion

Ensign, November 1998, pg. 71; “Abortion is an ugly thing, a debasing thing, a thing which inevitably brings remorse and sorrow and regret…While we denounce it, we make allowance in such circumstances as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have serious defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.”

Genesis 9:6; “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”

Adam & Eve Praises God for Their Sin

Moses 5:11; “And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.”

Genesis 3:9-16; “And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. 11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? 12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

Adam-God?

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

D&C 78:16; “Who hath appointed Michael your prince, and established his feet, and set him upon high, and given unto him the keys of salvation under the counsel and direction of the Holy One, who is without beginning of days or end of life.”

Exodus 20:3-5; “Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”

Adam is Archangel Michael

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

Revelations 12:7; “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.”

Angel of Light

Intro D&C (1976); Moroni is an “angel of light”.

2 Cor. 11:14; “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”

Bible not for Modern Times

JD 2:75-76; “The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances…The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago. The history of our Church in this day, presents the scenes and transactions of this people—the revelations and words of God to them…”

1 Peter 1:25; “But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”

[BenRaines]

Aesa, please ask me more clearly what it is that is confusing to you.

I don't believe that these things just came to you so where did you find them? I know you have been reading the Book of Mormon but most of these do not come from Book of Mormon.

Oh and Journal of Discourses is not scripture.

Regards,

Ben Raines

[KristofferUmfrey]

Some people will instantly take this as an attacking post, however, for those of you who truly have spoken to me over the past few days know that my curiosity is nothing more than just curiosity.

So, my thought is, how do you believe this?

Abortion

Ensign, November 1998, pg. 71; “Abortion is an ugly thing, a debasing thing, a thing which inevitably brings remorse and sorrow and regret…While we denounce it, we make allowance in such circumstances as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have serious defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.”

Genesis 9:6; “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”

Adam & Eve Praises God for Their Sin

Moses 5:11; “And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.”

Genesis 3:9-16; “And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. 11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? 12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

Adam-God?

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

D&C 78:16; “Who hath appointed Michael your prince, and established his feet, and set him upon high, and given unto him the keys of salvation under the counsel and direction of the Holy One, who is without beginning of days or end of life.”

Exodus 20:3-5; “Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”

Adam is Archangel Michael

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

Revelations 12:7; “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.”

Angel of Light

Intro D&C (1976); Moroni is an “angel of light”.

2 Cor. 11:14; “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”

Bible not for Modern Times

JD 2:75-76; “The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances…The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago. The history of our Church in this day, presents the scenes and transactions of this people—the revelations and words of God to them…”

1 Peter 1:25; “But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”

Abortion: I align more with Catholic thought although I do think a woman that would die if giving birth is a exception, not anything else.

The Fall: How else wold Adam and Eve know the value of eternal life with God if they never knew the opposite? The teaching just makes sense, and they realized what a gift it would be when they returned home to God.

Angel of Light: satan transforming himself into an angel of light implies that there are angels of light he is trying to imitate. I see nothing wrong with the verse

The other stuff is LDS specific ideas so I'll leave them to answer those.

[RachelleDrew]

I'm with Ben, what exactly are you trying to ask?

The Adam-God thing isn't cannon or scripture recognized by the mainstream church. The "angel of light" thing is just as Kristoffer said.

Just to let you know, reading anti-mormon literature isn't going to give you an accurate portrayal of our beliefs. At all.

If you want literature or information that comes from a non-biased third party then that's one thing, but getting it from anti-LDS sites is not wise.

If you wanted to elaborate on your question maybe we could help you with it?

[Aesa]

All the things I have quoted come directly from LDS publications.

I understand that all of what I've posted is not "scripture," but my question is do you believe these things? They're from LDS publications, and that's enough.

[RachelleDrew]

All the things I have quoted come directly from LDS publications.

I understand that all of what I've posted is not "scripture," but my question is do you believe these things? They're from LDS publications, and that's enough.

Okay, that's what I was wondering then. But once again, just because it is a publication by church members doesn't mean it's truth anyway. If it were, I would need a serious backlog order of Ensign.

Abortion: I think that in the situation of rape, incest or immediate danger of the mother's life a woman has the right to explore abortion as an option without fear of condemnation.

Praise for Sin: I guess I do believe in that, although i'm not certain what the statement has to do with anything. Kris is right, it would be hard to appreciate the glory of the father if the fall of Adam never happened.

Adam-God: I do not believe in this. I think it was an opinion or a theory and nothing more.

Angel of light thing, once again i'm not sure where you are going with this. Are you calling Moroni Satan or what? I think it was a reference to the fact that angels have a specific light about them and Satan tries to re-create in an attempt to fool others.

The modern usage of the bible- I agree with both statements and i'm not really sure how they contradict one another.

Anyway, you are going to get a lot of variation on these questions. Not everyone here is LDS. But I hope you get the answers you need. Bear in mind, i'm a fairly recent convert and there is a good chance I don't have a firm understanding of the things you've mentioned.

Edited December 13, 2008 by RachelleDrew

[FunkyTown]

Some people will instantly take this as an attacking post, however, for those of you who truly have spoken to me over the past few days know that my curiosity is nothing more than just curiosity.

So, my thought is, how do you believe this?

Abortion

Ensign, November 1998, pg. 71; “Abortion is an ugly thing, a debasing thing, a thing which inevitably brings remorse and sorrow and regret…While we denounce it, we make allowance in such circumstances as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have serious defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.”

Genesis 9:6; “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”

Adam & Eve Praises God for Their Sin

Moses 5:11; “And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.”

Genesis 3:9-16; “And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. 11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? 12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

Adam-God?

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

D&C 78:16; “Who hath appointed Michael your prince, and established his feet, and set him upon high, and given unto him the keys of salvation under the counsel and direction of the Holy One, who is without beginning of days or end of life.”

Exodus 20:3-5; “Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”

Adam is Archangel Michael

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

Revelations 12:7; “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.”

Angel of Light

Intro D&C (1976); Moroni is an “angel of light”.

2 Cor. 11:14; “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”

Bible not for Modern Times

JD 2:75-76; “The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances…The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago. The history of our Church in this day, presents the scenes and transactions of this people—the revelations and words of God to them…”

1 Peter 1:25; “But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”

All right. It sounds to me like someone has been feeding you a line of bull, Aesa. All of these tired old arguments have been done to death and could easily have been discovered had you gone to FAIR. Regardless, let's address them:

1) Your admonition against the shedding of blood in Genesis is interesting. How do you justify the bloodshed -after- that to cleanse the Holy Land? The slaying of Goliath? The fact that a soldier named Cornelius is the only person in the bible that garnered Jesus' unfettered praise or the fact that David was considered a man after God's own heart? Clearly, sometimes bloodshed is necessary. Thankfully, we have a living prophet.

2) Adam and Eve praises God for their Sin - Which do you believe, Aesa? That the fall was part of God's plan or that the omniscient God was hit out of left field and surprised by Satan? Since Adam and Eve didn't know good from evil when they choose to disobey, it couldn't have been a test. They weren't capable of knowing the difference.

3) Adam-God doctrine - Not doctrine.

4) Moroni Angel of Light - Yep. The Devil can look like an angel. Surprisingly, so can an angel.

5) You're picking at words here. He isn't saying it's irrelevant. He's saying God needs to continue to guide us. What does the Bible say about genetic engineering? Computers? How about quantum physics, robotics, modern economics, medicine or psychology? For everything you state on any of these subjects, I will find people who follow just the bible who say something different. Not just different - I would hazard a guess I could find someone who interpreted other script to mean the exact opposite of what you believe.

Aesa? If you aren't here to spread disharmony, then there is someone who is feeding you garbage theology about the church. Which is it?

[Aesa]

Praise for Sin: I guess I do believe in that, although i'm not certain what the statement has to do with anything. Kris is right, it would be hard to appreciate the glory of the father if the fall of Adam never happened.

No, my understanding is that Adam and Eve chose to forsake God and rebel against what He had commanded them not to do (partake of the fruit).

What does the Bible say about genetic engineering? Computers? How about quantum physics, robotics, modern economics, medicine or psychology?

Well, there is one verse that says in the latter days we will be "fooled by the sciences," I've read it once before and cannot find it again though.

someone who is feeding you garbage theology about the church. Which is it?

Perhaps, yes, but they all come from the Church? How can a church which has a mantra "perfect church, imperfect people" (which is kinda impossible, to my understanding - the church is the people) get so much wrong?

[KristofferUmfrey]

No, my understanding is that Adam and Eve chose to forsake God and rebel against what He had commanded them not to do (partake of the fruit).

Well, there is one verse that says in the latter days we will be "fooled by the sciences," I've read it once before and cannot find it again though.

Perhaps, yes, but they all come from the Church? How can a church which has a mantra "perfect church, imperfect people" (which is kinda impossible, to my understanding - the church is the people) get so much wrong?

And what do you believe would have happened had they chosen not to eat of the fruit?

[Justice]

This is kind of off topic, but I hope to make a point.

Peter denied Christ 3 times. Does that mean you ignore everything Peter says in the New Testament?

You can't call the church of the God it worships false because of anything the people of the church do. That's bad logic.

As I have said many times over (which I know is very difficult for you to understand because you are attempting to prove the church right or wrong by the way man studies) the ONLY way you can prove the church true or false is by the Book of Mormon. If the Book of Mormon is true and of God then the church must be. If it is not, then the church is not. It ALL hinges on the Book of Mormon. That is our claim. Prove the Book of Mormon wrong and you have proven the church wrong.

Besides, along with what's already been mentioned here, Adam WAS / IS the father of the human race... physically.

[Wingnut]

All the things I have quoted come directly from LDS publications.

I understand that all of what I've posted is not "scripture," but my question is do you believe these things? They're from LDS publications, and that's enough.

If you read an LDS published book that is not scripture (not look it up online, but look at the actual book), you'll find a disclaimer at the beginning that says something to the effect of "This is not official doctrine of the CJCLDS, this is opinion expressed by the author." Something like that. It should be taken as such.

Second, this is too many different topics for one thread. That's my opinion, and I'm guessing I'm not the only one with it.

[Aesa]

And what do you believe would have happened had they chosen not to eat of the fruit?

Well, you see, it wasn't that they discovered their nakedness and their genitalia.

What it was is that they were given over to reprobate minds and saw it as filthy, thus guilt came upon them and they saw need to cover it up.

It ALL hinges on the Book of Mormon.

I agree with you, thank-you for reminding me of this.

[prisonchaplain]

I've been here a little over two years, and have largely avoided these strings that seem to traffic in Anti-LDS propaganda. This string, though, might be a good time to share my impressions from two years of cyber-conversation.

Abortion

Ensign, November 1998, pg. 71; “Abortion is an ugly thing, a debasing thing, a thing which inevitably brings remorse and sorrow and regret…While we denounce it, we make allowance in such circumstances as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have serious defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.”

Genesis 9:6; “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”

First, I'm not sure how this works as "Anti" material, accept that the opposition to abortion may seem tepid. My church's position paper on this subject is probably stronger. Nevertheless, a member who had an abortion would not likely be dismissed, so I'm not sure your church loses points for being gentler rhetorically.

Adam & Eve Praises God for Their Sin

Moses 5:11; “And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.”

Genesis 3:9-16; “And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. 11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? 12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

The LDS plan of salvation is dramatically different from traditional teaching on the Fall, Original Sin, and Christ's atonement by faith alone. Usually the discussion bogs down as faith vs. works, and the larger teaching gets missed. Rather than being seen as the fotter of Antis, this question should open up a fruitful discussion about what God's plan for our salvation really is.

Adam-God?

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

D&C 78:16; “Who hath appointed Michael your prince, and established his feet, and set him upon high, and given unto him the keys of salvation under the counsel and direction of the Holy One, who is without beginning of days or end of life.”

Exodus 20:3-5; “Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”

While initially shocking to non-LDS, the theory of Adam-God is secondary to the whole idea of human deification (exaltation). It might be useful for LDS to move conversations about this common "Anti" topic by saying, "Yes, some early church leaders offered speculation...but what is clearly LDS doctrine from the beginning until now is that we really are joined heirs with Jesus--we shall become as he now is...Would you like to know why we say so?"

Adam is Archangel Michael

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

Revelations 12:7; “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.”

I'm not sure how crucial this one is, but I admit to remaining unclear on the distinction LDS make between humans and angels. I sometimes gather that you see far less of a difference than most of us.

Angel of Light

Intro D&C (1976); Moroni is an “angel of light”.

2 Cor. 11:14; “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”

Critics of your church do indeed wonder if the supposed angel that appeared to Joseph was a demon or not. It's absurd to believe that your Scriptures admits this, but you'll not squelch the question unless you convince the critic that what Moroni said was God's truth.

Bible not for Modern Times

JD 2:75-76; “The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances…The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago. The history of our Church in this day, presents the scenes and transactions of this people—the revelations and words of God to them…”

1 Peter 1:25; “But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”

I have indeed run into many LDS posters who, in an apparent effort to bolster the validity of the Sacred Works, find it necessary to emphasis alleged problems, weaknesses, and even contradictions in translations of the Bible. On occasion I find myself asking, "The Bible is part of your canon, right?" Then come the reassurances...oh yes, we believe it, we love it...what we offer is in addition, not replacement. So, I'd only suggest that your apologists discipline themselves to focus on the goodness of the Triple, and to askew apparent criticisms of the Bible.

[BenRaines]

PC, as a non LDS person a very good view. Thank you for contributing.

Ben Raines

[Wingnut]

While initially shocking to non-LDS, the theory of Adam-God is secondary to the whole idea of human deification (exaltation). It might be useful for LDS to move conversations about this common "Anti" topic by saying, "Yes, some early church leaders offered speculation...but what is clearly LDS doctrine from the beginning until now is that we really are joined heirs with Jesus--we shall become as he now is...Would you like to know why we say so?"

Wow. That is really amazing. I don't think I've ever heard such a great response to this issue from any LDS person, much less a non-LDS person. PC, why is it that you're not LDS yet?

Angel of Light

Intro D&C (1976); Moroni is an “angel of light”.

2 Cor. 11:14; “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”

Critics of your church do indeed wonder if the supposed angel that appeared to Joseph was a demon or not. It's absurd to believe that your Scriptures admits this, but you'll not squelch the question unless you convince the critic that what Moroni said was God's truth.

I take more issue with the original question here. The verse quoted from Corinthians, when read in context, refers to those who are false Christs, saying that what a person professes is not always accurate to what they are, "for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." As Shakespeare said, "The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose." It's not so much about Moroni as it is about the devil's ability to imitate and deceive.

[Aesa]

As Shakespeare said, "The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose."

Shakespeare's opinion is irrelevant, if we look at Satan tempting Jesus in the desert we clearly see that satan can cite scripture for his own purpose.

While initially shocking to non-LDS, the theory of Adam-God is secondary to the whole idea of human deification (exaltation). It might be useful for LDS to move conversations about this common "Anti" topic by saying, "Yes, some early church leaders offered speculation...but what is clearly LDS doctrine from the beginning until now is that we really are joined heirs with Jesus--we shall become as he now is...Would you like to know why we say so?"

While this is a very good response, and yes Bible-believing Christians believe they'll be joint heirs governed by God (for the servant is not greater than the Master) ... my point of issue (and I'm never very clear, as I'm sure people might be getting used to) is this ... I've never heard someone describe the words of the prophet as anything but "It is as if God Himself is speaking..." so what makes all the things Brigham and others that are questionable in many ways any different?

Isn't that God speaking also?

[prisonchaplain]

Wow. That is really amazing. I don't think I've ever heard such a great response to this issue from any LDS person, much less a non-LDS person. PC, why is it that you're not LDS yet?

I'm more useful in my current role.

[Oligith1]

Some people will instantly take this as an attacking post, however, for those of you who truly have spoken to me over the past few days know that my curiosity is nothing more than just curiosity.

So, my thought is, how do you believe this?

Nothing more than...

cu·ri·os·i·ty

Pronunciation: \ˌkyu̇r-ē-ˈä-s(ə-)tē\

Function: noun

Inflected Form(s): plural cu·ri·os·i·ties

Date: 14th century

1: desire to know: a: inquisitive interest in others' concerns : nosiness b: interest leading to inquiry

...eh?

Meaning that you will just go, "Oh, thank you for sharing your opinion and thoughts on the question that I asked. I just desired to know/ had an inquisitive interest in your concerns/was nosy about what you thought/ or had an interest which led me to inquire of you your opinion," if I do answer your question? That you won't argue with my opinion should I answer? Because curiosity according to the definitions I've read isn't critical, nor is it analytical. It is simply...curious.

That said, I'll bite.

1) I believe both statements because I believe the scriptures to be true, and I believe that God still speaks today through His prophets. I do not find them to contradict each other either when it comes down to it. I mean, that verse in Genesis has many interpretations including what you are alluding to and "if anybody makes anyone else bleed, someone else will make that person bleed." Now remember that you are just "curious." No arguing.

2) Again, I don't see a contradiction on those verses. The verses out of Moses are hindsight. The verses from Genesis are as the facts happened. I mean look at the context of Moses 5:11. It was after Adam and Eve had been making sacrifices to Heavenly Father out of obedience to what he'd been commanded. After an angel had come to them to explain why they had been commanded to do so. After the Holy Ghost had "fallen upon" Adam and they learned that "as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will." (5:9) After they had gained great hope in their own possible Salvation. Wouldn't you praise God?

3) I always find it funny when people read that part in Exodus "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (bold and italics added for emphasis) as meaning "Thou shalt have no other gods." I mean, if he'd meant that, why not just say, "None, nada, zilch No other gods at all." Why add that whole "before me" clause? Mmmm? The way I read it, God was saying that we should be putting Him first in our lives and that we are to worship only Him. That isn't to say that there wouldn't be any other Gods, or were no other Gods (heck, when it comes down to it, nowdays people talk about the modern gods known as TV, Video Games, or money. *shrugs* I mean, what are people spending most of their time "worshipping" now, eh?) So as far as Adam being a "prince...under...the Holy One," so what?

4) *yawns* So someone has two names....and?

5) As many have already stated...yay! We now can be sure that Satan can imitate an angel. So...um...yeah. Is that news?

6) Mmmm...you may have me on this one. I've read all of the standard works, the official canon of the LDS church, what is authorized by the Prophets of modern times as "scripture" several times, and I can't seem to find the Journals of Discourses anywhere in them. As such, I can't say if what was written in this non-canon work is true or not. I mean, I've never read those Journals. Heck, I don't even know who is supposed to have written it. In any case, I do have to say that the Bible is greatly historical in nature despite the overwhelming spiritual and doctrinal aspects of it. I would never say that it has no value though or is of no worth in modern times. I rather like the Bible. I mean, it is a part of our canon after all. It is scripture.

So there ya go. I do hope that I satisfied your "curiosity" about my particular opinion. I'm sure that you won't take a list of quotes out of my post and critique them, denounce them, or attempt to argue with them due to this not being an attacking post, but...

nothing more than just curiosity.

[Aesa]

Now remember that you are just "curious."

Just because I am curious does not mean I will not be critical.

There is a difference between being critical and arguing.

This is a discussion of curiosity.

I'm sure that you won't take a list of quotes out of my post and critique them, denounce them, or attempt to argue with them due to this not being an attacking post

We're on a discussion forum, so we can discuss each others points.

If not, then we might as well just state each others opinion and say "okay, you believe this, nice." and "okay, i believe that." *hug*

Why are most LDS incredibly touchy as soon as someone wants to discuss their faith without just swallowing what is fed?

[Justice]

Why are most LDS incredibly touchy as soon as someone wants to discuss their faith without just swallowing what is fed?

It's a difficult position to be in, trying to defend a faith like ours. It is the same reason; exactly the same reason, why many in Christ's day did not believe His words nor did they think He was the Son of God...

It is because what Christ said was "different" than what they believed and how they interpreted the scriptures.

Now, today, we say, "Judge us by the Book of Mormon." yet, most who question and are critical never give an honest effort to read it. Sure, they may think they do, but they never figure out that you can't learn the things of God the same way you learn the things of man.

One more time:

The son of the man whose name the book bares said this as his last words to us...

Moroni 10:

3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

May I make some points about this verse?

when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them

Please clear your mind of all questions and thoughts. Make your only desire to know the truth. That's all I ask. Take as much time as you need to go on. It may even take prayer and meditation.

If you read the Book of Mormon for the sole purpose of knowing if it is of God, and not to trifle with what's being said... if you read the Book of Mormon seeking wisdom of who God is and believe that He has the ability to appear to, and cause another group of people to write His words, and don't doubt just because you don't beleive...

Surely He can do this? Surely there is evidence in the Bible that He WAS going to do this!

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

You have never, yet, "received these things." You have never thought for a moment that they *might* be true. Your intention has been to look for errors and how the words are wrong.

This is what the Scribes and Pharisees spent their time doing and because of that they never got what Jesus was saying. They were looking to prove Him wrong at every turn. They trifled with every word, not trying to apply it to themselves, because they knew better. They never paused for just one moment and thought, "could this man actually *be* the Messiah?" Therefore, they never knew. They never did as He asked and prayed about it with real intent, they never asked God, and they never knocked for the truth to be opened to them. They relied on their own understanding.

The truth is only revealed to a willing, open heart.

Questions like, "Where can I find this principle from the Book of Mormon taught in the Bible?" are more telling of someone who is really seeking.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

If you dispute the way provided to learn truth, you will never come to know truth. Posting a question here about a thing is the very wrong way to find out if the Book of Mormon is true.

If you read something that disagrees with what you beleive then you MUST believe it is possible that you are wrong. This is being humble and teachable, or having a broken heart and contrite spirit. Your desire must be to learn truth, not to prove your beliefs are right, or others are wrong. You must really want to know if what you read in the Book of Mormon is true. You can't fake honest intent. You can *say* you do or that you *want* to know the truth, but the Spirit knows for what purpose you read and question.

Afterall, if we are not willing to change our views and beliefs to align ourselves with the teachings of Christ, we are no better than the Scribes and Pharisees.

Do we have Christ's words anywhere else besides the Bible? Does a book *claim* to be the words of Christ? Aren't those the life-changing questions? Why trifle with details? Why would a true follower of Christ automatically reject all possible books that claim to be Christ's words? It seems to me all true followers of Christ would open the book with a great desire to know if it really is of Christ. The Jews and Gentiles who rejected Christ did so because they just didn't want to know, or they didn't want to give it the effort. They were comfortable with who they were and what truth they had.

I do pray that you will understand the spirit behind my words and look within. Let the desire to know Christ purge your unbelief and may it give way to light and truth, which is anything and everything that the Spirit is trying to teach you.

Surely, God is able to make more of His word known to man.

Surely, all followers of Christ would desire to know if we have more of His words.

Edited December 13, 2008 by Justice
pesky footnotes :)

[Oligith1]

Just because I am curious does not mean I will not be critical.

There is a difference between being critical and arguing.

This is a discussion of curiosity.

We're on a discussion forum, so we can discuss each others points.

If not, then we might as well just state each others opinion and say "okay, you believe this, nice." and "okay, i believe that." *hug*

Then why frame your whole topic by stating...

my curiosity is nothing more than just curiosity

?

You did not say "my curiosity is nothing more than a desire to criticize your beliefs." You did not say "my curiosity is nothing more than a desire to discuss what I think is wrong in your beliefs." You did say that you were just curious, meaning, only curious, meaning that you "just wanted to know" our beliefs.

When it comes down to it, I just want you to own up to the fact that you obviously were lying about being "just curious," and instead just wanted to provoke a "discussion" where you attempt to put the LDS here on the defensive regarding some scripture and non-scripture (I mean, Journal of Discourses? weak). Personally I believe that the best defense is a good offense, hence my behavior in my posts.

But when it really comes down to it, I would prefer to believe in true tolerance and the whole "we might as well just state each others opinion and say "okay, you believe this, nice." and "okay, i believe that." *hug*" People really are entitled to their own opinions after all. Just don't try to mask your own opinion as an innocent, honest question.

As far as...

Why are most LDS incredibly touchy as soon as someone wants to discuss their faith without just swallowing what is fed?

Is that what you think this is? Pointing out a wolf in sheeps clothing is "being incredibly touchy?" I mean, if you came as just a wolf, I'd be fine with it, it's the sheeps clothing that is offensive...so to speak, of course (unless you really are wearing a sheep as you sit at the computer right now....eeeewwww)

In other words, if you just came out and said, "Hey, I think that your beliefs are wrong in these ways. Go ahead and try to refute me." I would just take it at face value, respond accordingly (as I did in the "I'll bite" section of my previous post), and move on. It's just your whole "I'm just curious" bit that annoyed me. The whole "I'm not attacking you" thing (paraphrased, of course). I think you should have the guts to go ahead and be open with your contempt for our beliefs, and what you have heard are our beliefs. (I still think item six in your list is of dubious origin).

[gabelpa]

Just My take on these everyone's understanding is going to be different we are all at different stages, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints except on basic doctrine or where the direction from the current prophet is clear allows for many points of growth and understanding.

Abortion

Ensign, November 1998, pg. 71; “Abortion is an ugly thing, a debasing thing, a thing which inevitably brings remorse and sorrow and regret…While we denounce it, we make allowance in such circumstances as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have serious defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.”

I believe the same article certainly the church handbook of instructions teaches that even in these incidents that it should be a decision taken with great thought, meditation, prayer and consultation with proper priesthood authorities. If someone with full personal revelation from God decides in one of those circumstances that an abortion is necessary then who am I to question it?

Adam & Eve Praises God for Their Sin

Moses 5:11; “And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.”

Not only that I am greatful to them for their transgression. My personal view is if Heavenly Father really did leave two of his children with Satan when they did not know Good from Evil then isn't that irresponsible parenting? especially in an all knowing omnipotent God. Without their sacrifice my progression would not be possible.

Adam-God?

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

D&C 78:16; “Who hath appointed Michael your prince, and established his feet, and set him upon high, and given unto him the keys of salvation under the counsel and direction of the Holy One, who is without beginning of days or end of life.”

My own view of how the Godhead is one is what allows this to be possible - we are all commanded to be one with Christ as He is with the Father etc

Adam is Archangel Michael

D&C 27:11; “And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.”

Revelations 12:7; “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.”

Explain to me any contradiction here not seeing it?

Angel of Light

Intro D&C (1976); Moroni is an “angel of light”.

2 Cor. 11:14; “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”

By this reasoning any vision of an Angel etc in the Bible would be null and void. Of course if you are not LDS Moroni needs to be evil, but I think if you read the first vision Joseph Smith got to experience both Satan and God close together imo nothing prepares you better to know the difference.

Bible not for Modern Times

JD 2:75-76; “The words contained in this Bible are merely a history of what is gone by; it was never given to guide the servant of God in the course he should pursue, any more than the words and commandments of God, given to a generation under one set of circumstances, would serve for another generation under another set of circumstances…The Bible is not a sufficient guide; it is only the history of the people who lived 1800 years ago. The history of our Church in this day, presents the scenes and transactions of this people—the revelations and words of God to them…”

1 Peter 1:25; “But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”

For me the Gospel is living, and growing and still happening. His word does endureth, but our undestanding grows therefore the current word takes priority over the BIble and always will, as what President Monson says is for me now, he even takes precedent over President Hinckley and as they keep going back all the way to Adam, the one alive is the one that is most relevant. As the prophet of the church at the time Peter more than anyone would have understood this principle

-Charley

Edited December 13, 2008 by gabelpa

[Wingnut]

Do we really have to argue about whether or not we're arguing? Does anyone else find irony in this?

[prisonchaplain]

Wingnut is right. If a poster believes s/he is being personally attacked, please make a report to the moderators. Likewise, if posts go beyond discussion or polite debate, and directly attack the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, please make that report. Whenever strings degenerate into questions about intentions, motivations, accusations, personalities the potential benefit plunges rapidly.

[cjmaldrich]

I have indeed run into many LDS posters who, in an apparent effort to bolster the validity of the Sacred Works, find it necessary to emphasis alleged problems, weaknesses, and even contradictions in translations of the Bible. On occasion I find myself asking, "The Bible is part of your canon, right?" Then come the reassurances...oh yes, we believe it, we love it...what we offer is in addition, not replacement. So, I'd only suggest that your apologists discipline themselves to focus on the goodness of the Triple, and to askew apparent criticisms of the Bible.

I would add to this that one of the big claims that we LDS tend to use against the Bible is that it's been translated from its original form and that some important books were not included (and we still choose not to include those books in our own canon), and therefore many "plain and simple truths" have been removed. We forget, though, that the Book of Mormon is a translation itself. It's been translated into many languages at that, and a significant portion of it was lost. So I agree with our saying that it is the most correct of any book, but we often throw out the fact that it is also a translation just like the Bible, and some of it is not included just like the Bible.

Any problems in any of our scripture are man-made, and the things that we read in our English scriptures had an original writer (who may or may not have been the person who is actually relaying the experience or revelation), a translator, maybe another translator, and all of this being relayed from the memory of the person who experienced an event or had a revelation. It seems that there is plenty of room for error with all of those fallible human hands involved.