LDS Faith Monotheistic?

[Justice]

1 And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

The wording in the KJV is slightly different, but delivers much the same message.

This is going to be very hard to explain.

One of our Articles of Faith states "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly..."

Do you believe the Bible is translated perfectly?

I'm going to assume your answer is yes.

I'd like to propose 2 scriptures.

Exodus 32:4 and Isaiah 8:1.

Exodus 32:

4 And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.

Isaiah 8:

1 Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man’s pen concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz.

Graving Tool and Man's Pen are taken from the same Hebrew word heret. A heret was a graving tool. So, why did they translate it man's pen in Isaiah? Because in 1611 they didn't know that people who lived in ancient Mesopotamia used wood, or writing boards, to write on. They assumed they used paper (papyrus) to write on so they mistakenly called a carving tool a man's pen.

My point? The translation isn't perfect. Not only did they mess things up, but they removed things of significance that they wanted to hide or didn't understand. Who is they? The people who were in control of the Bible for generations who did not let the puplic read it. In fact, they executed those who did. They didn't translate it to a language they could read it in until a century later.

For what it's worth, here are those verses as they originally were written in the Bible before they were edited.

Exodus 32:

1 And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two other tables of stone, like unto the first, and I will write upon them also, the words of the law, according as they were written at the first on the tables which thou brakest; but it shall not be according to the first, for I will take away the priesthood out of their midst; therefore my holy order, and the ordinances thereof, shall not go before them; for my presence shall not go up in their midst, lest I destroy them.

2 But I will give unto them the law as at the first, but it shall be after the law of a carnal commandment; for I have sworn in my wrath, that they shall not enter into my presence, into my rest, in the days of their pilgrimage. Therefore do as I have commanded thee, and be ready in the morning, and come up in the morning unto mount Sinai,

You know, it only makes sense. The people were just delivered from bondage by some remarkable signs and wonders. This is something they had been praying for for 700 years... deliverance. Now that it happens, they make a golden calf and want to worship gods like the Egyptians worshipped. Those gods were proven inferior in every way, in a very miraculous way.

It only makes sense that God would give them a lesser law to live by with fewer blessings afforded them.

However, as it stands in the Bible today, you are correct. It most certainly reads as if the tablets were the same. However, knowing the Book of Mormon is scripture also, and that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, I know that many plain and precious parts of the Bible were changed or removed.

I hope you can take this in the spirit it was offered. The spirit offered was that, according to the Bible as it stands, you are correct. However, the Bible has not been translated correctly and misleads many in some areas.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Justice

[Moksha]

Moksha, "We don't really know much about that"? There's been much written, hasn't there?

There has been much speculation.

[Justice]

1 Corinthians 10:

1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

This is evidence that they were under a higher law before Moses came down from the monutain the second time.

They practiced baptism up until that time.

I know some think this is an allegory to baptism, claiming they passed through the water and that was baptism. That's just because they don't believe it or have no other evidence of it. However, it makes what Joseph Smith taught make much more sense.

The Gospel, or higher law, was taught to them before they made the golden calf. They were not baptized after the golden calf, but were required to offer sacrifice of flesh and blood (ironically enough of the animal they made), and no longer a broken heart and a contrite spirit.

[Kawazu]

“When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is] the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him” (Deut. 18:22).

I thought they only needed to speak the name of the Lord. I didn't realize that there was any more to it... :S

Having the Spirit of God move you from time to time does not make you perfect. Being a chosen and ordained prophet does not make every opinion true, nor does it make one superior in every area of knowledge. Reverend J.R. Dummelow (not LDS) described the authors of the Bible in terms that ought to be applied, in all fairness, to Joseph Smith [and other modern-day prophets] as well (J.R. Dummelow, One Volume Bible Commentary, p. 85):

Though purified and ennobled by the influence of the His Holy Spirit, these men each had his own peculiarities of manner and disposition - each with his own education or want of education - each with his own way of looking at things - each influenced differently from one another by the different experiences and disciplines of his life. Their inspiration did not involve a suspension of their natural faculties; it did not make them free from earthly passion; it did not make them into machines - it left them men.

Therefore we find their knowledge sometimes no higher than that of their contemporaries....

Mormon Prophets, Called of God but Fallible: Why the Church of Jesus Christ Is and Can Be True even though Church Leaders and Other Mormons Make Mistakes

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Kawazu

Edited August 20, 2009 by Kawazu

[Dr T]

I was trying to have a discussion with Snow, since he accused me of making up false doctrine. I never claimed it was canonized just clearly widely held belief amoung members of the LDS church.

Snow knows that to answer my question in the affirmative means I am correct in my assertion. That is why he finally gave a non-sensical wishy-washy answer that he believes HF "might or might not have lived a mortality." If Heavenly Father went through a mortality, He of necessity has a Heavenly Father of His own, which He would, in fact, worship, because we never cease worshipping our God.

I could care less what people believe today, but to say the belief in a HF who passed through a mortality and progressed to Godhood was NOT widely held by LDS people is disingenuous and borders on the realm of being a blatant lie.

So what do you do with God saying He knows of no other God if he doesn't have a God of his own then? Thanks

[Dr T]

Good question. Why did Moses destroy the original Commandments when he came down from Sinai? Because he saw that the people could not live by them. So God gave him the second set of Commandments which were easier for the people to live by. If the people had been given the first set of Commandments, they would have lived under the condemnation of not being able to live by them. Instead, they were given a lower law. Then Christ gave us a New Law when He lived on earth. We have had 2,000 years to soak those in, and most of us still don't live by them. If all God's truths were to be revealed as doctrine, we would be on the hook for being obedient to those truths. We, as Natural Men, are not able to live by all of God's laws and truths at this time.

Hi John Doe,

So it looks like you are saying the first ones Moses brought down were not able to be followed so he brought down easier ones. It's interesting because I don't beleive that we can keep all of the ones we have now but they are just show us our sin and need to salvation through Christ.

[Maureen]

No lattelady - let's keep our posts honest shall we? I don't think that God is self-centered and shallow. I think YOUR idea of God is so self-centered and shallow that, as you say, the point of His existence is that we might worship Him.

I haven't read all the posts yet, (I'm posting this after reading up to page 5) so not sure if anyone has pointed this out but actually lattelady did not infer that. She has said in Post #10 that we (mankind) were created to worship God. She is not the one who brought up what the point of God's existence is, that was Snow. There doesn't have to be a reason for God's existence, he is afterall our Creator. Who are we to need to a reason for God's existence?

[Kawazu]

I haven't read all the posts yet, (I'm posting this after reading up to page 5) so not sure if anyone has pointed this out but actually lattelady did not infer that. She has said in Post #10 that we (mankind) were created to worship God. She is not the one who brought up what the point of God's existence is, that was Snow. There doesn't have to be a reason for God's existence, he is afterall our Creator. Who are we to need to a reason for God's existence?

Hi,

The reason God created people is the most pertinent detail, at least for determining the purpose of existence.

Cheers,

Kawazu

[Gatorman]

Dr T - We believe that such an event has occurred again. The Law of Consecration. It was given and then removed, because we could not live it.

[bytebear]

I disagree, bytebear, FWIW. And further, I don't care whether someone uses "Thus sayeth the Lord" in their comments. I think it's WAY too simplistic to use that as proof or even indication of anything.

HiJolly

I agree that it's not that simplistic. In fact, nothing is so simple that we should just take it for granted. We must study it out in our mind, and ask God if it is right, and receive a witness from the Holy Ghost. But, we cannot simply take every word of Joseph Smith and assume that the entirety of the church believes it. It is up to us as individuals to find our own truth. But it is easy to know canon from non-canon. One is in the Scriptures, and the other is not. All of the quotes I have seen explaining LDS doctrine are from non-canonized sources, and therefore have no binding authority.

But, I think it is fair to say if Smith says, "I, the Lord" or "Thus sayeth the Lord" it can be assumed that God is speaking.

[desirexnoel]

I agree that it's not that simplistic. In fact, nothing is so simple that we should just take it for granted. We must study it out in our mind, and ask God if it is right, and receive a witness from the Holy Ghost. But, we cannot simply take every word of Joseph Smith and assume that the entirety of the church believes it. It is up to us as individuals to find our own truth. But it is easy to know canon from non-canon. One is in the Scriptures, and the other is not. All of the quotes I have seen explaining LDS doctrine are from non-canonized sources, and therefore have no binding authority.

I am still a little confused about the articles of faith not actually being correct. That really should be fixed to actually represent what Mormons believe.

But, I think it is fair to say if Smith says, "I, the Lord" or "Thus sayeth the Lord" it can be assumed that God is speaking.

It HAS to be, otherwise the prophet is a false prophet, according to the bible.

[lattelady]

What is ABSOLUTE TRUTH in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints? It's not the words of the prophets, ABSOLUTELY, because if it hasn't been canonized you can't be held to it. It's not the Bible, because it's not been translated correctly. It's the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, part of the Doctrine and Covenants? I want to be sure which books I can reference and know that it's concretely trusted.

Edited August 21, 2009 by lattelady

[Guest Believer_1829]

So what do you do with God saying He knows of no other God if he doesn't have a God of his own then? Thanks

Slow down...

Have you seen anywhere where I have indicated that I believe in a Heavenly Father who lived a mortality and progressed to His current station?

Perhaps a review of my 3 basic beliefs is in order, it's on my profile.

[Kawazu]

I am still a little confused about the articles of faith not actually being correct. That really should be fixed to actually represent what Mormons believe.

Pardon me, ma'am, I did not see where you posted anything from the Articles of Faith. (I may be mistaken.) Just for reference, here are the Articles of Faith:

1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

5 We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

6 We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

7 We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

9 We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

10 We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

13 We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

[Source]

It HAS to be, otherwise the prophet is a false prophet, according to the bible.

Mormon/LDS Answers: Questions about LDS Prophets and the Mormons <-- This particular link addresses the question, "If any prophecy of a so-called prophet proves to be wrong, shouldn't we reject him? Isn't that the standard of Deut. 18:22?"

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Kawazu

Edited August 21, 2009 by Kawazu

[Kawazu]

What is ABSOLUTE TRUTH in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints? It's not the words of the prophets, ABSOLUTELY, because if it hasn't been canonized you can't be held to it. It's not the Bible, because it's not been translated correctly. It's the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, part of the Doctrine and Covenants? I want to be sure which books I can reference and know that it's concretely trusted.

Hello,

These are the Official Scriptures of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

Scriptures

Have a great day.

Cheers,

Kawazu

[john doe]

1 Corinthians 10:

1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

This is evidence that they were under a higher law before Moses came down from the monutain the second time.

They practiced baptism up until that time.

I know some think this is an allegory to baptism, claiming they passed through the water and that was baptism. That's just because they don't believe it or have no other evidence of it. However, it makes what Joseph Smith taught make much more sense.

The Gospel, or higher law, was taught to them before they made the golden calf. They were not baptized after the golden calf, but were required to offer sacrifice of flesh and blood (ironically enough of the animal they made), and no longer a broken heart and a contrite spirit.

Off-topic, I know, but John was baptizing before Jesus came to him to be baptized. I don't see how that meshes with your assertion. It implies to me that baptism was being practiced by at least some of the Jews.

[lattelady]

As I understood it, one of the things that sets the LDS church apart from other religions is that you have prophets who speak for God in these latter days. But so many of you are asserting that their words don't necessarily have binding authority because they're not included in "canonized scripture." I come from Utah, and I can tell you most assuredly that most members here hold the words of the prophets as "binding authority." So I am beyond suprised to find in this forum that many of you don't view the words of your prophets as such.

[Justice]

Off-topic, I know, but John was baptizing before Jesus came to him to be baptized. I don't see how that meshes with your assertion. It implies to me that baptism was being practiced by at least some of the Jews.

John was the prophet called to "prepare the way of the Lord." He is the one who instituted baptism again after it was taken away.

Mesh?

[Justice]

As I understood it, one of the things that sets the LDS church apart from other religions is that you have prophets who speak for God in these latter days. But so many of you are asserting that their words don't necessarily have binding authority because they're not included in "canonized scripture." I come from Utah, and I can tell you most assuredly that most members here hold the words of the prophets as "binding authority." So I am beyond suprised to find in this forum that many of you don't view the words of your prophets as such.

I do.

But, it does make a difference where they are and what they're doing when they speak.

I'm sure all of Moses' words are not in the Bible.

[Moksha]

It's not the Bible, because it's not been translated correctly. It's the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, part of the Doctrine and Covenants? I want to be sure which books I can reference and know that it's concretely trusted.

Read them all, in and open and trusting manner, and use you wisdom to see where the truths you glean can be applied in your life.

What's up with the urge for concreteness?

:)

[Justice]

Hi John Doe,

So it looks like you are saying the first ones Moses brought down were not able to be followed so he brought down easier ones. It's interesting because I don't beleive that we can keep all of the ones we have now but they are just show us our sin and need to salvation through Christ.

We can.

We choose not to.

Do we not know good from evil?

Can we not choose one over the other?

What prevents us from keeping the commandments? Some hidden force that makes you sin? Temptation never forces you to sin.

Moroni quoted his father Mormon on this very topic.

Moroni 7:

16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

Is this true?

17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

Is this true?

18 And now, my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge ye shall also be judged.

19 Wherefore, I beseech of you, brethren, that ye should search diligently in the light of Christ that ye may know good from evil; and if ye will lay hold upon every good thing, and condemn it not, ye certainly will be a child of Christ.

Still?

20 And now, my brethren, how is it possible that ye can lay hold upon every good thing?

Here's the meat of the scripture. How is it we can lay hold on every good thing. Or, how is it we can become perfected in Christ and become a child of Christ through adoption?

21 And now I come to that faith, of which I said I would speak; and I will tell you the way whereby ye may lay hold on every good thing.

22 For behold, God knowing all things, being from everlasting to everlasting, behold, he sent angels to minister unto the children of men, to make manifest concerning the coming of Christ; and in Christ there should come every good thing.

23 And God also declared unto prophets, by his own mouth, that Christ should come.

24 And behold, there were divers ways that he did manifest things unto the children of men, which were good; and all things which are good cometh of Christ; otherwise men were fallen, and there could no good thing come unto them.

25 Wherefore, by the ministering of angels, and by every word which proceeded forth out of the mouth of God, men began to exercise faith in Christ; and thus by faith, they did lay hold upon every good thing; and thus it was until the coming of Christ.

26 And after that he came men also were saved by faith in his name; and by faith, they become the sons of God. And as surely as Christ liveth he spake these words unto our fathers, saying: Whatsoever thing ye shall ask the Father in my name, which is good, in faith believing that ye shall receive, behold, it shall be done unto you.

It is possible. With God, all things are possible. We can get to a point in our lives where we choose only the good things of Christ.

If you believe you can't, why does it even matter?

[desirexnoel]

"7 At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;

8 If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.

9 And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it;

10 If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them."

I am still reading but doesn't this say that if they turn from their wrong doings that any punishment they were going to receive would not then be received?

What if what was to come to pass not due to anyones wickedness? What if it is just something like civil war? That happens without Gods intervention, right?

[Justice]

I'll add that the prevailing understanding of faith in the world today cannot lead to every good gift offered by Christ.

The faith Christ taught is tried and tested through love, charity, and good works.

If you do not think works are necessary to have faith then you cannot obtain every good gift He offers.

[Justice]

desire, I don't recognize your Bible quotes and they're difficult for me to read. Would you also include where they are from so I can refer to the KJV?

I'm sure I understand your point or your question.

[lattelady]

Moksha, the "urge for concreteness" comes because of the original dilemma I brought up which is: If I mention the words of Church leaders, I'm told that not everyone holds to those because they're not "canonized." If I ask why you hold to certain laws that seem to have no scriptural basis, I'm told it's because Church leaders have taught that this is the way it should be done or what should be done. But if it's not canonized, it should be up to each man or woman to decide before God. Which is what I've mentioned in other posts, and MANY have disagreed with me, saying that the Church leaders, teachers, prophets are to be listened to and trusted. I just am trying to understand and am confused by it.