exaltation

[Guest ceeboo]

Fair enough. And please know that any replies I make are made in the same spirit--I just want to understand (and I don't want to keep typing that with each reply. )

So, does it bother you that Jesus was a man on earth with you and I? He was a man...a perfect man, but a mortal man nonetheless. If Jesus was a man, why is it more than disturbing to think of God the Father once as a man?

Fair enough back at you ( In a cowly way :))

Looks like we may enter a " way off topic " part of our conversation :lol:

No Mam, Jesus was NEVER a mere man, Jesus was and is GOD himself ( The Savior and Lord ) in human form. Jesus took on human flesh to come and teach and pay the ultimate price of cleansing, for ALL OF US, out of pure love.

Sadly, I must suggest to you that God the Father was NEVER a mere man like you and I:eek: ( I tremble to even type that !!)

Peace,

Ceeboo

Edited February 26, 2009 by ceeboo

[Guest ceeboo]

Instead of tossing bombs indiscriminately, could you bring some references to the table so that we have something to base the conversation on?

Hello again john,

Not sure if you noticed but I provided your request of references several posts ago :)

I can't help but notice that you have not replied as you suggested you wanted to.

Is it possible that your post to me ( please see your contention in above post to me ) was not in good faith???

Peace,

Ceeboo

[pam]

I think sometimes the phrase a mere man makes sense. Sense in the fact that he came to this world just as you and I. He was born just as you and I.

He had to learn things just as you and I. He had to learn all the childhood things, just as you and I. I'm sure he even played childhood games just as you and I.

Now the difference is, he had a special calling in coming to earth. He came also as our Savior. But his life started as an ordinary man.

[beefche]

Fair enough back at you ( In a cowly way :))

Looks like we may enter a " way off topic " part of our conversation :lol:

No Mam, Jesus was NEVER a mere man, Jesus was and is GOD himself ( The Savior and Lord ) in human form. Jesus took on human flesh to come and teach and pay the ultimate price of cleansing, for ALL OF US, out of pure love.

Sadly, I must suggest to you that God the Father was NEVER a mere man like you and I:eek: ( I tremble to even type that !!)

Peace,

Ceeboo

I completely agree with you. Father and Jesus were not "mere" men like you or I. They are God. So is the wording offensive? That "He was once a man like us"? Does that suggest to you that He is viewed as I view my brother or neighbor or cashier at Walmart?

I like Pam's explanation.

he came to this world just as you and I. He was born just as you and I.

But his life started as an ordinary man.

Because this is how I view Jesus. He obviously was not like you or I--He made perfect choices and lived a completely perfect life. He is the Son of God. But He was also a mortal man--He was born of a woman, blood, water, and spirit as you and I were born. He lived and worked as an ordinary man--His field of work was carpentry. He ate, slept, cried, laughed, banged His thumbed (but didn't curse like you or I). Yet He was God.

I have no problems viewing God the Father in the same light. I'm having difficulty understanding how viewing God as a man (like Jesus was a man) diminishes His Glory, Power, and Goodness.

[JohnnyRudick]

I've never attended Gospel principles, so I looked up the manual online. This is what it says:

What Kind of Being Is God?

Because we are made in his image (see Moses 6:9), we know that God has a body that looks like ours. His eternal spirit is housed in a tangible body of flesh and bones (see D&C 130:22). God’s body, however, is perfected and glorified, with a glory beyond all description.

I reviewed our current RS/Priesthood manual and didn't see anything that said God was like us before He became God.

Hordak, can you be more specific and show me what you are thinking of? If I've been taught that, then I wasn't paying attention. I view God as man in the sense that He is male and has a manly body. That I've been taught. But I seriously don't recall ever being taught that he was once like you or I. The only "lesson" with which I'm familiar is from the King Follett discourse, which is not necessarily doctrine (otherwise it would be cannonized).

What Kind of Being Is God?

Because we are made in his image (see Moses 6:9), we know that God has a body that looks like ours. His eternal spirit is housed in a tangible body of flesh and bones (see D&C 130:22). God’s body, however, is perfected and glorified, with a glory beyond all description.

Sometimes subtle things get past us.

No problem, we just get in a hurry sometimes and we do not diligently study.

By all means that really includes me;-(

But

for God to be perfected and for Him to have been glorified, He would first have to be not "perfected" nor full of "glory".

It is a hard thing for us to swallow, us who have been raised up with man's interpretation of the Scripture but. . .

Bro. Rudick

Edited February 26, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Spelling Correction:-(

[JohnnyRudick]

Fair enough back at you ( In a cowly way :))

Looks like we may enter a " way off topic " part of our conversation :lol:

No Mam, Jesus was NEVER a mere man, Jesus was and is GOD himself ( The Savior and Lord ) in human form. Jesus took on human flesh to come and teach and pay the ultimate price of cleansing, for ALL OF US, out of pure love.

Sadly, I must suggest to you that God the Father was NEVER a mere man like you and I:eek: ( I tremble to even type that !!)

Peace,

Ceeboo

I have to admit thatit is true.

Jesus was NEVER a mere man as you and I.

Jesus was the Son of God.

Born of a woman but the Son of God.

Only that truth made it possible for Him to overcome all that He had to take upon Himself and get through and over it.

You and I could NEVER have fit the bill.

I must also add at this point that Jesus only did that which He knew His Father had done.

Soooo, it follows that His Father never was only mere man Himself.

We are His children.

Yet we are descended from multiple generations, maybe beyond count, from a mortal man and a mortal woman.

Bro. Rudick

Edited February 26, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Spelling:-(

[Madriglace]

For me the gospel is very simple ... Jesus Christ is the Son of God spiritually and physically, Jesus Christ is the God of this world. He is the one who was chosen to create, redeem and love everyone and everything on it, under the direction of His Father to whom the glory is given.

So having said that ... how did He (the Savior) know how to do the things he did? Because it had been done before. God (Father in Heaven) to me is not some mysterious, enourmous, hell fire and brim stone, randon entity ... He loves us and he knows us because like His Son He lived it. The Savior came here in mortal form so he could understand us and what we would deal with and to save us from the things that being mortal would subject us to. He was mortal but no less God for it ... as a young child He told his mother he needed to be about His fathers business ... he knew who he was ... but as a mortal he grew "line upon line, precept upon precept". We do the same but between the lines and precepts there is a whole lot of stumbling and repentance (hopefully).

With all due respect to everyones beliefs ... our children learn from us ... why wouldn't the Savior learn from his Father? The concept also gives me the hope that this is not all for nothing because personally sitting on a cloud strumming a harp for eternity does nothing for me. I am so very very thankful for the willingness of my Father and my Savior to do what they needed to do, to know what I need and how to help me.

[Guest Ceeboos_Boss]

I completely agree with you. Father and Jesus were not "mere" men like you or I. They are God. So is the wording offensive? That "He was once a man like us"?

Beefche,

You are sounding very Catholic :)

I am not offended by the wording ???:confused: RATHER THE MESSAGE ITSELF!!

I take enormous exception to the TEACHING from the pulpit as a prophet of God.

I will try this one more time :)

Joseph Smith CLEARLY taught that God was once a mere man on AN EARTH before he became God of our Earth.

He also teaches that we can become Gods of our own Earths.

Don't know what else to say other than simply say again that it has nothing to do with the " wording " but everything to do with the lesson.

Peace,

Ceeboo

[john doe]

Hello again john,

Not sure if you noticed but I provided your request of references several posts ago :)

I can't help but notice that you have not replied as you suggested you wanted to.

Is it possible that your post to me ( please see your contention in above post to me ) was not in good faith???

Peace,

Ceeboo

Let's see, today is a work day, and it has been only an hour since you posted the link (from an anti-Mormon website BTW). Surprisingly, I have better things to do today than sit here waiting for you to post. And the rest of my week and this weekend are going to be very busy for me as well, so I may not be here very much. But thanks for baiting me.

You want my response? Yes, I believe that we are literally sons and daughters of God, that is why we call Him our Father in heaven. The King Follett Discourse, while it probably does contain a lot of truth in it, is not part of our canonized scripture. That means that we as LDS are not bound to it or by it. Jesus Himself declared that He was only doing what He saw His Father do. What does that mean? I don't know, I can only speculate.

That being said, it stands to reason to me that a child naturally grows up to be somewhat like their parent. That does not mean that I believe that I will ever stop worshipping God or obeying His commandments and become my own God, large 'G'. But I personally believe that if I am obedient, eventually it is possible that God may ask me to participate in His work. After all, that is why we are here on earth, it is not, to help God in His work? If that means having a small part in the organization of some corner of the universe to fulfill His purposes, then I believe that I would do so happily. Is that hugely different than what general Christianity believes that angels will be doing in the afterlife? Don't Catholics believe in angels?

[Guest ceeboo]

I completely agree with you. Father and Jesus were not "mere" men like you or I. They are God. So is the wording offensive? That "He was once a man like us"?

Beefche,

I am getting confused by you ( perhaps I don't speak fluent cow :))

If you agree with me that Father were NOT " mere " men like you or I than all I can offer you is that you sound very Catholic and you do not follow the teachings of your first prophet's teachings regarding this. :confused:

I will try this once more :)

Joseph Smith CLEARLY taught ( from the pulpit as a prophet ) that GOD ( YOU REFER TO AS FATHER ) was once a mere man like you and I of AN EARTH before he became God of this Earth.

He also taught that we ( you and I ) CAN BECOME GODS of our own Earths.

SO, NO, It is not the " wording " that is offensive to me. IT IS THE TEACHING.

Peace,

Ceeboo

[john doe]

Not to sound like a refugee from the '60s, but try opening your mind for a minute before just running off in all caps.

[Elgama]

Surely what we say God is does not matter He/she is what they are and none of us will change that.

My own view of exaltation is we will become what we are capable of becoming and what Heavenly Father lets us become.

-Charley

[Guest ceeboo]

Not to sound like a refugee from the '60s, but try opening your mind for a minute before just running off in all caps.

Hello again john :)

I am starting to get the feeling that you do not care for Ceeboo all that much :)

Just in case you are wondering, Ceeboo likes you just fine :):)

Sorry for the Caps, It was just my way of emphasizing certain things to beefche.

BTW, your not beefche, are you??? I was just wondering why you would feel the need to SCOLD ( CAPS BY DESIGN ) me when the post was in reply to someone else.

Perhaps you are a well practiced SCOLDER ( CAPS BY DESIGN ):)

Peace,

Ceeboo

[beefche]

Ceebs and John, don't make me stop this car. You will not be happy with the result!

[beefche]

Beefche,

I am getting confused by you ( perhaps I don't speak fluent cow :))

If you agree with me that Father were NOT " mere " men like you or I than all I can offer you is that you sound very Catholic and you do not follow the teachings of your first prophet's teachings regarding this. :confused:

I will try this once more :)

Joseph Smith CLEARLY taught ( from the pulpit as a prophet ) that GOD ( YOU REFER TO AS FATHER ) was once a mere man like you and I of AN EARTH before he became God of this Earth.

He also taught that we ( you and I ) CAN BECOME GODS of our own Earths.

SO, NO, It is not the " wording " that is offensive to me. IT IS THE TEACHING.

Peace,

Ceeboo

You speak cow just fine. I was just thinking maybe you're more LDS than you think you are!

Can you accept that God the Father could (noticed I bolded rather than capped )have been like Jesus in the fact that Jesus lived on earth, had a body, became a Savior?

I guess that's the part I don't understand. Why can people accept Jesus as One who lived on earth, had a body, lived a life, but not the Father?

[JohnnyRudick]

Beefche,

I am getting confused by you ( perhaps I don't speak fluent cow :))

If you agree with me that Father were NOT " mere " men like you or I than all I can offer you is that you sound very Catholic and you do not follow the teachings of your first prophet's teachings regarding this. :confused:

I will try this once more :)

Joseph Smith CLEARLY taught ( from the pulpit as a prophet ) that GOD ( YOU REFER TO AS FATHER ) was once a mere man like you and I of AN EARTH before he became God of this Earth.

He also taught that we ( you and I ) CAN BECOME GODS of our own Earths.

SO, NO, It is not the " wording " that is offensive to me. IT IS THE TEACHING.

Peace,

Ceeboo

I know I am not part of this conversation here between you's guys, but. . .

We are getting hung up on the word "mere".

I have always believed that Bro. Joseph was only trying to make a point to offset the thinking of the day.

This is not scripture and I know you say he was speaking as Prophet, Seer and Revealator and all that, but you notice one thing?

It did not end up in the PofGP. did it?

The Doctrine is true.

His way of presenting it, very much on.

"mere" man?

Check the Scriptures.

Bro. Rudick

Edited February 26, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Spell Correction:-(

[Guest Ceeboos_Boss]

Ceebs and John, don't make me stop this car. You will not be happy with the result!

you are 2 funny...

love it!

[john doe]

Hello again john :)

I am starting to get the feeling that you do not care for Ceeboo all that much :)

Just in case you are wondering, Ceeboo likes you just fine :):)

Sorry for the Caps, It was just my way of emphasizing certain things to beefche.

BTW, your not beefche, are you??? I was just wondering why you would feel the need to SCOLD ( CAPS BY DESIGN ) me when the post was in reply to someone else.

Perhaps you are a well practiced SCOLDER ( CAPS BY DESIGN ):)

Peace,

Ceeboo

After all those wondeful PM's you sent me a couple weeks ago? Aw, you're just trying to butter me up. You do undertsand that all caps, especially when basically repeating a previous post, is akin to yeilling, don't you? Also, this is a public forum, any member can see and reply to any post,whether it is aimed at them or not.

[Guest Ceeboos_Boss]

Ceeboo has been banned so he wanted me to say peace and love 2 all

Edited February 26, 2009 by Ceeboos_Boss

[JohnBirchSociety]

Ceebs, if I may be so bold and ask, if this is true, why is it disturbing? If the Catholic Church released a statement that said essentially the same thing, would it rock your faith? I'm not trying to be contentious...I want to understand why this disturbs so many people.

It greatly disturbs me and "so many people" because the Scriptures clearly, unambiguously declare that GOD has always been as he is now.

[Guest Ceeboos_Boss]

John Doe,

Why was ceeboo banned?

[beefche]

Ceebos Boss, that might be a better question for PM rather than for the whole board. I would suggest discussing it with more than 1 moderator.

[Guest Ceeboos_Boss]

Ceebos Boss, that might be a better question for PM rather than for the whole board. I would suggest discussing it with more than 1 moderator.

I will I just dont know how to PM them and I dont know who to PM.

[JohnBirchSociety]

Let's see, today is a work day, and it has been only an hour since you posted the link (from an anti-Mormon website BTW). Surprisingly, I have better things to do today than sit here waiting for you to post. And the rest of my week and this weekend are going to be very busy for me as well, so I may not be here very much. But thanks for baiting me.

You want my response? Yes, I believe that we are literally sons and daughters of God, that is why we call Him our Father in heaven. The King Follett Discourse, while it probably does contain a lot of truth in it, is not part of our canonized scripture. That means that we as LDS are not bound to it or by it. Jesus Himself declared that He was only doing what He saw His Father do. What does that mean? I don't know, I can only speculate.

That being said, it stands to reason to me that a child naturally grows up to be somewhat like their parent. That does not mean that I believe that I will ever stop worshipping God or obeying His commandments and become my own God, large 'G'. But I personally believe that if I am obedient, eventually it is possible that God may ask me to participate in His work. After all, that is why we are here on earth, it is not, to help God in His work? If that means having a small part in the organization of some corner of the universe to fulfill His purposes, then I believe that I would do so happily. Is that hugely different than what general Christianity believes that angels will be doing in the afterlife? Don't Catholics believe in angels?

Good post. I've a question though:

1) The King Follett Discourse (in its' entirety) is not cannonized or viewed as binding doctrine. However, when parts of it are quoted in authorative manuals used to teach the official position of the Church, then can we safely say those portions are "doctrine"?

2) Though I would HUGELY LOVE to have the Church be "Sola Scriptura", it isn't. We have authoratative teaching manuals that are indeed "binding" in that they present the official position of the Church on many matters. Isn't it a bit of a cop-out to say, "It's not in the Canon?"

Thanks!

[JohnBirchSociety]

You speak cow just fine. I was just thinking maybe you're more LDS than you think you are!

Can you accept that God the Father could (noticed I bolded rather than capped )have been like Jesus in the fact that Jesus lived on earth, had a body, became a Savior?

I guess that's the part I don't understand. Why can people accept Jesus as One who lived on earth, had a body, lived a life, but not the Father?

Because, the Scriptures say GOD has always been as he is now. This is one of the few teachings in Scripture that is unambiguous.