LDS Faith Monotheistic?

[Hemidakota]

Do you have the 'knowledge' of such to prove your case?

[lattelady]

Snow...are you avoiding me? I posted some scripture "proof" that you asked for, and you have yet to respond.

[lattelady]

Hemidakota, are you directing your question to me? If so, what exactly are you referring to?

[pam]

If someone has a problem with a post, then use the "report a post" option available to you.

I will not address these things in a public forum.

[Snow]

Snow, men becoming gods is contrary to the teachings of Christ.

Could you post them please?

I have a New Testament right here in front of me with all of Christ's known sayings. I would like to review them.

I can direct you to passages in the Bible that show a biblical view that there is one God.

That's true. Mormons believe that too. We believe that God, capital G, the God of Israel, is our one true God.

I did not address anywhere on this thread that early Christians believed there were multiple gods, because that would be incorrect.

That is untrue. Early Christians did in fact believe in deification. I posted evidence to support it. I can post much, much more.

You've mentioned various quotes to try and substantiate that, but I don't consider those men to be Christians in the sense that they believe the true Gospel.

Seriously? You believe that Clement, Athanasius and Augustine were not Christians?

How long have you believed that?

I believe in the Bible, that it is the inerrant Word of God.

How then do you explain all the errors?

For example: The sequence of Christ's final days is a matter of contradiction between the Gospels.

The author of John believes that Christ's cleansing of the temple was two years prior to the last week of His life with no connection to His triumphal entry or his arrest. John's author also believes that the last supper was not a Passover seder. That is all contradicted in the Synoptics.

Which of the conflicting version is correct?

As such, I believe these passages that I'm about to show you teach that there is ONE GOD. ONLY ONE. That He has always existed, and that He is eternal and that He did not progress to the station He is at. He is eternally God.

Isaiah 43:10 "Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was not God formed, neither shall there be after me."

Isaiah 44:6,8 "Thus saith the Lord the Kind of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God...Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? Ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no god; I know not any."

These are just two of MANY.

Yes - I am familiar with Isaiah. We can talk that later if you like, but please, let's address your claim that exaltation or deification contradicts the teachings of Christ... do you have any evidence for your claims?

How have I belittled you, Snow?

Does the word irony mean anything to you lattelady?

[Snow]

I would also like to know why people like Snow and Vort are allowed to criticize and bully at will but still believe they deserve our respect anyway.

And I'd like to know why Lstinthwrld is: 1. so hard to spell, and 2. allowed to criticize me?

Oh, I'd also like to know how the Egyptians built the pyramids but that's probably another thread.

... and by the way, if you can point me to the parts or post #s you find so distressful, I'll be happy to edit them.

[Lstinthwrld]

Lstinthewrld,

They ARE Old Testament verses, but since the God of the Bible is Eternal, it doesn't really matter if the verse is Old Testament or New. It's speaking of the same ETERNAL God and saying that there was no God formed before or after Him. That doesn't change. The new gospel that Christ fulfilled was one of grace as opposed to law (Old testament/New testament--but had nothing to do with who God is. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. The truths of God's Word ARE absolute.

"Before you believe the bible as the inerrant word of god look into the history of the bible. It will change your mind on that fact." I have looked into the history of the Bible. I've studied it all my life. It's where my faith comes from. I haven't changed my mind yet!

Who was the first person to compile the bible with the new testament as we have it today?

[pam]

That's true. Mormons believe that too. We believe that God, capital G, the God of Israel, is our one true God.

I believe John Doe also mentioned this. He used big G little g to make a determination as to who is the one true God.

[Snow]

Lattelady...are you avoiding me? I posted some a response, and you have yet to respond.

[Lstinthwrld]

And I'd like to know why Lstinthwrld is: 1. so hard to spell, and 2. allowed to criticize me?

Oh, I'd also like to know how the Egyptians built the pyramids but that's probably another thread.

... and by the way, if you can point me to the parts or post #s you find so distressful, I'll be happy to edit them.

I would like to meet you in person. It has been my experience that no matter how educated or arrogant in the anonymous environment of the internet the person is they are usually decent humble people face to face. The internet gives a false sense of authority. And almost always brings the worst out of a persons personality. I think in person we would have many deep and profitable conversations. I respect your depth of knowledge just not the way you present your self in these forums.

[lattelady]

Pam, where is the "report a post" option you mentioned? I can't find it.

[Snow]

I would like to meet you in person. It has been my experience that no matter how educated or arrogant in the anonymous environment of the internet the person is they are usually decent humble people face to face. The internet gives a false sense of authority. And almost always brings the worst out of a persons personality. I think in person we would have many deep and profitable conversations. I respect your depth of knowledge just not the way you present your self in these forums.

Well that's way to nice of a post - I demand a recount.

Thanks

[Snow]

By the way Gator, I don't really mean to belittle you (too much :)). I apologize if I got too personal. I'll trim up the posts.

[pam]

Pam, where is the "report a post" option you mentioned? I can't find it.

In the right hand corner of each post there is a little red triangle with a line down the middle of it.

[pam]

I would like to meet you in person. It has been my experience that no matter how educated or arrogant in the anonymous environment of the internet the person is they are usually decent humble people face to face. The internet gives a false sense of authority. And almost always brings the worst out of a persons personality. I think in person we would have many deep and profitable conversations. I respect your depth of knowledge just not the way you present your self in these forums.

Snow is one I would really like to meet in person as well.

[Kawazu]

Hi,

This is just a suggestion but could we split the Exaltation/Divine Potential of Mankind discussion into a different thread?

On the subject of Heavenly Father giving worship to another entity, Snow is being overly aggressive. Nonetheless, I am sympathetic to the case he presents. So far as personal evidence stands, I have never been thought that God worships another deity. Is there Scriptural evidence which indicates that this is so? Or that it is taught in an official capacity in the lesson manuals?

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Cheers,

Kawazu

[Snow]

Hi,

This is just a suggestion but could we split the Exaltation/Divine Potential of Mankind discussion into a different thread?

On the subject of Heavenly Father giving worship to another entity, Snow is being overly aggressive. Nonetheless, I am sympathetic to the case he presents. [/quote

That's so pejorative. Can we settle on "underly gracious?"

So far as personal evidence stands, I have never been thought that God worships another deity. Is there Scriptural evidence which indicates that this is so? Or that it is taught in an official capacity in the lesson manuals?

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Cheers,

Kawazu

After a week of asking, I'm thinking not.

[Snow]

Well lattelady?

After 25 minutes you were antsy for a reply. Now it's over an hour and still nothing back from you.

How about a little what's good for the goosey being good for the ganderer.

[Connie]

I can not find the material for Gospel Principle online yet.

Is this what you're looking for?: LDS.org - Sunday School Table of Contents - Gospel Principles

[Snow]

Is this what you're looking for?: LDS.org - Sunday School Table of Contents - Gospel Principles

Alas no.

That is actually what the Church DOES teach (page 301). No mention in Gospel Principles of what the poster erroneously claimed was taught... that God worships another god.

Edited August 24, 2009 by Snow

[Connie]

That is actually what the Church DOES teach.

Exactly. And hopefully the link will help us all acknowledge what the church does teach and that everything else is speculation. And, yes, speculation is unfortunately sometimes taught as doctrine in Sunday School classes. I remember the last ward we lived in. I was so glad when they put me on the piano in primary so i didn't have to attend Gospel Doctrine. It was anything but doctrinal.

[ruthiechan]

It is my opinion that people take the King Follet Sermon and make their own conclusions on what it took for our Heavenly Father to become an exalted man. Such persons suppose that it must have been the same as us, and therefore conclude that God worships his God who worships his God who worships his God and so on and so forth in infinite number, with no beginning and no end. I have known people who believe this, and I was even taught this in a seminary lesson. I asked, so then what started it? Of course, my teacher was unable to answer that question. It didn't make sense because it sounded like one infinite linear line as opposed to a circle or round. It didn't make sense because our God is supposed to be the Most High God with no other God BEFORE him. There was a God after him, Jesus Christ, who was a god before he came to earth and was exalted afterwards. There is also another God, the Holy Ghost who is a part of the Godhead. If one is not a god then how can you be a part of the Godhead?

It is my opinion that matter is infinite, as well as nothing, since the two are opposites. One can not exist without the other. But the idea of an infinite number of higher Gods than ours in one infinite linear line makes no sense to me. I find it illogical. I have not found any shred of evidence that our God worships a higher God. I have simply found conjecture, speculation, various interpretations on the words of the Prophets, but nothing official from the church.

Is it possible I am wrong? Yes. Afterall, ideally a child turns to his/her father and mother on matters and they are the ones that are revered and honored, not someone elses father which is why our God is the Most High God, but only to US. Maybe we do have a Heavenly Grandfather and a Heavenly Grandmother. I do not know. The Spirit has not confirmed to me that God worships his God, though I have asked about the matter. I simply get a stupor of thought, yet someone else claimed that the Spirit told them the opposite.

Whatever the case may be, we all need to be flexible until further revelation reveals to us how it actually is. If I am right then those who disagree must be humble and accept that they were wrong in their speculations. If I am wrong I must do the same.

The simple answer is, it is not canon belief that God worships a higher God. It is not official. Until then, we need to make due with what we have, and be respectful of the fact that not everyone will come to the same conclusions whilst reading the same material.

[Gatorman]

ruthie - You must be lying. You were never taught such a thing in seminary, unless you can provide hard evidence. No, it is not true. It was never taught. You are foolish to think so. *rolls eyes*

Sorry ruthie, but, you just made my point again. Snow has been mistaken to say this was not taught. I have never argued that it was taught as doctrine. I have clearly stated, as you just did, that it was taught in Sunday school for me, as you got it in seminary. But, Snow does not seem to understand that just because we can not provide hard proof that it was taught, does not mean that it never was. I believe you, for one. It seems like this is not an uncommon thing to be taught or discussed.

It is my opinion that people take the King Follet Sermon and make their own conclusions on what it took for our Heavenly Father to become an exalted man. Such persons suppose that it must have been the same as us, and therefore conclude that God worships his God who worships his God who worships his God and so on and so forth in infinite number, with no beginning and no end. I have known people who believe this, and I was even taught this in a seminary lesson. I asked, so then what started it? Of course, my teacher was unable to answer that question. It didn't make sense because it sounded like one infinite linear line as opposed to a circle or round. It didn't make sense because our God is supposed to be the Most High God with no other God BEFORE him. There was a God after him, Jesus Christ, who was a god before he came to earth and was exalted afterwards. There is also another God, the Holy Ghost who is a part of the Godhead. If one is not a god then how can you be a part of the Godhead?

It is my opinion that matter is infinite, as well as nothing, since the two are opposites. One can not exist without the other. But the idea of an infinite number of higher Gods than ours in one infinite linear line makes no sense to me. I find it illogical. I have not found any shred of evidence that our God worships a higher God. I have simply found conjecture, speculation, various interpretations on the words of the Prophets, but nothing official from the church.

Is it possible I am wrong? Yes. Afterall, ideally a child turns to his/her father and mother on matters and they are the ones that are revered and honored, not someone elses father which is why our God is the Most High God, but only to US. Maybe we do have a Heavenly Grandfather and a Heavenly Grandmother. I do not know. The Spirit has not confirmed to me that God worships his God, though I have asked about the matter. I simply get a stupor of thought, yet someone else claimed that the Spirit told them the opposite.

Whatever the case may be, we all need to be flexible until further revelation reveals to us how it actually is. If I am right then those who disagree must be humble and accept that they were wrong in their speculations. If I am wrong I must do the same.

The simple answer is, it is not canon belief that God worships a higher God. It is not official. Until then, we need to make due with what we have, and be respectful of the fact that not everyone will come to the same conclusions whilst reading the same material.

[Gatorman]

Alas no.

That is actually what the Church DOES teach (page 301). No mention in Gospel Principles of what the poster erroneously claimed was taught... that God worships another god.

Hmmm...Maybe reading chapter 47, I think it was:

LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Exaltation

This is the way our Heavenly Father became God. Joseph Smith taught: “It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. … He was once a man like us; … God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345–46).

[Gatorman]

Sorry, hit post. But, it does appear that it can be taught that Heavenly Father lived just as Jesus did. As such, he had a Father. As such, he had to live a life on 'earth'. Now, maybe it is one interpretation of what is taught, but, it is taught and it is in the manuals. Thank you Connie for finding that.