The Goal Of Our Faith

[Ray]

Originally posted by Red+Nov 14 2005, 11:51 AM-->

You know the gospel I've been preaching; what holds you back?

←

...the gospel I know. You believe you have the correct understanding of the gospel, and I believe I have the correct understanding of the gospel, yet we both disagree about certain aspects of the gospel.

And probably also like you, I believe we should only listen to God.

So how on Earth are we ever going to learn the truth?!?!?

<!--QuoteBegin-Red@Nov 14 2005, 11:51 AM

I ask God all the time about your church and the answer is always no, it is not true. Once I even opened myself up to the possibility that all my prayers were really just going to a figment of my imagination or something worse. So I prayed, in a Mormon church, along with two LDS missionaries and I addressed what I called "the God I haven't prayed to--the LDS God" if by chance I had not actually addressed Him and if He were actually the true God. The answer was silence. Not that the answer never came and I got impatient, but it was silence. Then the voice of the Shepard I know spoke again, not in words or burning bosoms, but in the simple, quiet and steady assertion of truth He said, "See Red, he has no authority over you. You can even cast him out in My name."

I believe I know that certain things are true because God has given me His assurance that certain things are true, and while I also receive revelation which assures me that certain things are not true, I do not consider that revelation to be from God, because I believe God only wants to assure me of things that are true.

Or in other words, I believe God assures me that certain things are true, instead of assuring me that certain things are not true, because by knowing what is true I can instantly know that anything contrary is not true, and knowing what is not true doesn't teach me the truth.

And btw, while you seem to realize the fact there are many spirits on this Earth, and some will even intentionally try to deceive us, or try to get us to think like they do, you seem to be unaware of the fact that not all revelation comes from God. Satan and his followers will even acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ, or tell us something else that is true... to get us to more easily believe things which are not true, as evidenced by how Satan beguiled Eve to partake of the forbidden fruit, stating something which was true as well as something which was not true.

Anyway, the search for truth involves more than simply trying to understand a book or set of books, just as receiving revelation from God involves more than simply receiving some revelation. It's a matter of faith and trying to learn from our experiences, the goal being to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He sent.

[prisonchaplain]

Red,

I'd just like to offer a warning by saying that it would not be wise to base your understanding of official Church teachings on anything Snow says, or on anything ApostleKnight says, or even on anything I say, because while we may honestly believe we do know the truth or the teachings as taught by the Church, we may have an incorrect understanding of at least some of the doctrines, and you would then be building your foundation upon what we have said which may not be correct.

Most LDS people are well aware that there are numerous books written by evangelicals about Mormonism. Some of you may have had the unpleasant experience of having a non-Mormon tell you what you believe. You respond, "No I don't." They answer, "Yes you do. I read it in this book. You're problem is that you don't even know what your own church teaches." Were you not angry? Did you not complain that nobody should tell you what you believe?

One of my reasons for visiting this site is that I want to understand Mormon beliefs as explained by Mormon lay-people. Granted, I may mishear, and you may offer an incomplete explanation. However, what you say to us guests is far more 'real' than what we may read in some official publications.

So, while Red may do well to compare what he has heard with official Scripture and pronouncements, he also does well to hear, digest and respond to how everyday adherents explain their faith.

[Ray]

Originally posted by prisonchaplain@Nov 14 2005, 01:52 PM

One of my reasons for visiting this site is that I want to understand Mormon beliefs as explained by Mormon lay-people.  Granted, I may mishear, and you may offer an incomplete explanation.  However, what you say to us guests is far more 'real' than what we may read in some official publications.

Real, Yes, but what we say does not make the truth true.

Or in other words, while you can learn something about the beliefs of members of the Church through what we say, you can not learn the truth of the message which is taught in the Church by listening to us. You are simply learning about us and what we have to say, instead of learning about God from what God has to say in the scriptures and through His living prophets.

Or in other words, I think it's best to study doctrine as it comes directly from God and His prophets, instead of studying people who believe or declare what God has to say, because what should matter most to you is whether or not the doctrine came from God, whether or not anyone else believes it.

[Ray]

Originally posted by Jason+Nov 14 2005, 11:17 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Josie@Nov 14 2005, 12:14 PM

If I believe he is a prophet, then I can and do believe whatever he says...

←

Spoken like a true Mormon Polygamist. That's just the argument they use...

Well done!

←

Have you noticed how often Jason uses this tactic, diversion?

Hmm, I wonder if Jason is even aware that he does this.

Anyway, it's a way of throwing up roadblocks, keeping us from focusing on an issue. Be aware and try to stay on track.

[Josie]

Originally posted by Ray@Nov 14 2005, 03:15 PM

while you can learn something about the beliefs of members of the Church through what we say, you can not learn the truth of the message which is taught in the Church by listening to us.  You are simply learning about us and what we have to say, instead of learning about God from what God has to say in the scriptures and through His living prophets.

Or in other words, I think it's best to study doctrine as it comes directly from God and His prophets, instead of studying people who believe or declare what God has to say, because what should matter most to you is whether or not the doctrine came from God, whether or not anyone else believes it.

←

I agree with this very much so. WE all mean well and our testimony is vital too us. But to learn the Church doctrine either go to the doctrine itself or to the missionaries, who are called of God to teach. You can go to www.lds.org and you will find all the scriptures, talks by General Authorities of the Church, our magazines, and many other helps in learning about the church and there is also a place there that you can request for the missionaries to call on you, if you like.

And I personally want to thank you for coming to someone that is a member of the church to learn about our beliefs. If I want to learn to do accounting, I am not going to go to a construction worker to teach me, nor am I going to go to someone that I know has just been fired for embezzling from his firm. When you go to someone that has left the church in anger, or someone that is not even a member that is drawing their own conclusions, you are going to get a tainted picture. If I wanted to learn to type I would not go to someone that has never done it before themselves to learn.

[Ray]

While I agree that speaking to members of the Church to understand the doctrine of the Church is a step in the right direction, I will also say that that step doesn't take a person far enough, because a member of the Church can be wrong about Church doctrine, even while having the best of intentions.

Or in other words, someone who has taken that step still needs to take another step, by speaking and listening to people who truly know the doctrine of the Church, such as the people who wrote the scriptures in former days, or the people who write the scriptures in these latter days, namely the members of the First Presidency and Quorum of Twelves Apostles and other General Authorities.

And btw, while the missionaries can also give you some good information, or find some people or some quotes from people who can provide some good information, the best information comes only after taking a step closer to Jesus Christ by praying to our heavenly Father and receiving an assurance of the truth through the power of the Holy Ghost.

[Red]

(I haven't read the posts since my last one, no time just now)

response the ApostleKnight continued:

“At the end of the day, what y'all are really saying is, ‘(1) You have to believe in Jesus to be saved, that's it. (2) Oh, but you can't believe in living prophets. (3) Oooh, yeah, and you can't believe in new scripture. (4) Then there's the troublesome belief in mandatory obedience to specific ordinances, (5) not to mention the corollary and equally troublesome belief that only certain people can administer those ordinance,’ and so on, ad infinitum.”

1: Yes, you’ve got it! And you’ll be responsible for it on the last day. Hopefully you’ll have accepted it before then.

2: Actually we have no problem with living prophets at all, only false ones. The issue is not that we do not believe in modern prophets and consider anyone who does to be a heretic, but that we will not accept false prophets as the scriptures instruct us. One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy, is it not? Most Bible professors that I talk to (i.e. mine) say that gifts like speaking in tongues and prophecy were given specifically to just that first generation of believers; yet they’ll readily admit that, “who am I to say God couldn’t bring it back?” So again, our issue is not with prophets, but with false prophets (1 John 4:1).

3: Of course not. The Bible took at least 1500 years to complete, possibly even since creation if Adam and the patriarchs wrote their stories. If God did not endorse a policy of continuing revelation then the Bible would only be a paragraph long! If God had more to say we’d be glad to hear it—heck, a God-breathed bible commentary would be awesome! Many (myself included) would even say that the book of Acts is still being written every day (have you ever read Fox’s Book of Martyrs or Jesus Freaks Vol. 1 & 2?). Yes, for us the canon is closed because we have all we need to know—actually a whole lot more then we need to know! Really, all you would to know God would be any book of the Bible, you can find the message of the Almighty God who saves in any Bible book, especially in John or Romans. Many in this world are lucky if they can smuggle a hand written page past their guards and memorize it—and that would be the only scripture they get for a long time if ever. Yet, who are we to say that God cannot reopen the canon? We are nobody! Our issue is not with new scripture but with false scripture. If anything new were to come then we measure it by what we already have (that is a Biblical principle, remember the where Paul commended the bereans for measuring his words against scripture; I couldn’t track down that verse, perhaps you know it).

4: Troublesome belief? Obedience is a joy!!! However, if I start telling God that I need to supplement His work on the cross then I am out of line. If I try to have some control over my salvation in any then I am not trusting Jesus as John 3:16-21 instructs me (salvation hinges on belief). To think that anything I could do could determine whether or not I spent the rest of eternity with by Abba is to rebel against, as if I didn’t wholly trust Him to save me. On the other hand, knowing that my works have no bearing on my salvation, but that I am in God’s hands 100% I can have a solid hope in being with Him some day and our relationship is pure and open—as it should be between a Father and a Son. You’ve read this I’m sure, Ephesians 2:8-10 sums up the position very well:

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph 2:8-10, KJV).

5: No, don’t worry we’ve got plenty people gifted for that kind of thing (I was anointed and healed wasn’t I?). And technically, the original 12 are still alive and Jesus is the Head of the Church right here and now—they left behind their words for us. They are still in charge, so what are your prophets and apostles doing, presuming to sit in their seats?

[Ray]

Originally posted by Red@Nov 14 2005, 03:39 PM

4. ...“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.  For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph 2:8-10, KJV).

A good quote from the scriptures, which we use too. :)

[Ray]

Originally posted by Red@Nov 14 2005, 03:39 PM

5:  No, don’t worry we’ve got plenty people gifted for that kind of thing (I was anointed and healed wasn’t I?).  And technically, the original 12 are still alive and Jesus is the Head of the Church right here and now—they left behind their words for us.  They are still in charge, so what are your prophets and apostles doing, presuming to sit in their seats?

Why are you presuming that there are never to be any more apostles, when the scriptures give evidence to show that seats were filled by former apostles, and our Lord is just as capable of appointing and sustaining apostles now as He ever was?

[Ray]

Originally posted by Red@Nov 14 2005, 03:39 PM

3:  The Bible took at least 1500 years to complete, possibly even since creation if Adam and the patriarchs wrote their stories.  If God did not endorse a policy of continuing revelation then the Bible would only be a paragraph long! If God had more to say we’d be glad to hear it—heck, a God-breathed bible commentary would be awesome!  Many (myself included) would even say that the book of Acts is still being written every day (have you ever read Fox’s Book of Martyrs or Jesus Freaks Vol. 1 & 2?).  Yes, for us the canon is closed because we have all we need to know—actually a whole lot more then we need to know!  Really, all you would to know God would be any book of the Bible, you can find the message of the Almighty God who saves in any Bible book, especially in John or Romans.  Many in this world are lucky if they can smuggle a hand written page past their guards and memorize it—and that would be the only scripture they get for a long time if ever.  Yet, who are we to say that God cannot reopen the canon?  We are nobody!  Our issue is not with new scripture but with false scripture.  If anything new were to come then we measure it by what we already have (that is a Biblical principle, remember the where Paul commended the bereans for measuring his words against scripture; I couldn’t track down that verse, perhaps you know it).

Surely you're familiar enough with us [LDS] to have heard us say that God has spoken to prophets in these latter days, and continues to speak through prophets in these latter days, but if you haven't heard that before, I'll be happy to tell you:

Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and we have revelation through him in the Doctrine & Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price, as well as some writings which did not make it into the "standard" works but which I still consider to be influenced by revelation from God. Brigham Young also wrote many things, just as many other prophets and apostles did after Joseph Smith, and continue to do to this day, which can also be verified as truth through the power of the Holy Ghost.

For instance, President Gordon B. Hinckley is a prophet and apostle of God, as well a seer and revelator, and the only person on Earth through whom we [anyone] can now have authority to act and say things in the name of Jesus Christ.

And btw, I'll understand if you don't accept my testimony to be true, but I will still state that these things are true nonetheless.

Oh, and I also suggest that you read and study our Topical Guide and Bible Dictionary, considering how much you seem to want a "God-breathed Bible commentary". I've seen quite a few others, but these are among the best from what I believe to have been written by inspiration from God.

[Ray]

Originally posted by Red@Nov 14 2005, 03:39 PM

2:  Actually we have no problem with living prophets at all, only false ones.  The issue is not that we do not believe in modern prophets and consider anyone who does to be a heretic, but that we will not accept false prophets as the scriptures instruct us.  One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy, is it not?  Most Bible professors that I talk to (i.e. mine) say that gifts like speaking in tongues and prophecy were given specifically to just that first generation of believers; yet they’ll readily admit that, “who am I to say God couldn’t bring it back?”  So again, our issue is not with prophets, but with false prophets (1 John 4:1).

I also have no problem with living prophets at all, and I also see no sense in believing in false prophets. The issue is simply how to determine whether or not a prophet is a true prophet of God, which I believe can only be done with guidance from the same Holy Ghost who guided and continues to guide all other true prophets of God.

And btw, a simple misunderstanding can keep someone from simply understanding the truth.

[Ray]

Originally posted by Red@Nov 14 2005, 03:39 PM

“At the end of the day, what y'all are really saying is, ‘(1) You have to believe in Jesus to be saved, that's it. (2) Oh, but you can't believe in living prophets. (3) Oooh, yeah, and you can't believe in new scripture. (4) Then there's the troublesome belief in mandatory obedience to specific ordinances, (5) not to mention the corollary and equally troublesome belief that only certain people can administer those ordinance,’ and so on, ad infinitum.”

1:  Yes, you’ve got it!  And you’ll be responsible for it on the last day.  Hopefully you’ll have accepted it before then.

To what extent do you believe we need to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved?

Do you believe a belief in Him would necessarily be followed by good works... and that if good works do not follow, then there is no belief in Him?

Or do you believe we simply need to "say" that Jesus is the Christ, and the Lord of our life, without any further action or belief on our part being necessary for our salvation?

Are you familiar with what He said concerning how we would be judged by our works, and that some would come unto Him at the last day saying, "Lord, Lord, we did [such and such] in your name..." while then being cast out because they never knew Him? And btw, the correct translation according to Joseph Smith is that "they" never knew "Him", because He knows every single one of us, from the least to the greatest.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Ray+Nov 14 2005, 06:00 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Red@Nov 14 2005, 03:39 PM

“At the end of the day, what y'all are really saying is, ‘(1) You have to believe in Jesus to be saved, that's it. (2) Oh, but you can't believe in living prophets. (3) Oooh, yeah, and you can't believe in new scripture. (4) Then there's the troublesome belief in mandatory obedience to specific ordinances, (5) not to mention the corollary and equally troublesome belief that only certain people can administer those ordinance,’ and so on, ad infinitum.”

1:  Yes, you’ve got it!  And you’ll be responsible for it on the last day.  Hopefully you’ll have accepted it before then.

To what extent do you believe we need to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved?

Do you believe a belief in Him would necessarily be followed by good works... and that if good works do not follow, then there is no belief in Him?

Or do you believe we simply need to "say" that Jesus is the Christ, and the Lord of our life, without any further action or belief on our part being necessary for our salvation?

Are you familiar with what He said concerning how we would be judged by our works, and that some would come unto Him at the last day saying, "Lord, Lord, we did [such and such] in your name..." while then being cast out because they never knew Him? And btw, the correct translation according to Joseph Smith is that "they" never knew "Him", because He knows every single one of us, from the least to the greatest.

←

I agree, of course with JS's translation of 'They never knew Him." But you know... God does "know us" in the bibical sense of intimacy when we allow Him into our hearts... more than He would know someone who was blocking Him out...

So if we understand...knowing Him and Him knowing us is receiving Him in a born again sense... then we can take it from either scripture... and get what we need to know from it.

[Jason]

Originally posted by Ray+Nov 14 2005, 04:07 PM-->

Originally posted by Jason@Nov 14 2005, 11:17 AM

<!--QuoteBegin-Josie@Nov 14 2005, 12:14 PM

If I believe he is a prophet, then I can and do believe whatever he says...

←

Spoken like a true Mormon Polygamist. That's just the argument they use...

Well done!

←

Have you noticed how often Jason uses this tactic, diversion?

Hmm, I wonder if Jason is even aware that he does this.

Anyway, it's a way of throwing up roadblocks, keeping us from focusing on an issue. Be aware and try to stay on track.

←

It's not a "tactic". It's a way of helping readers understand the broader picture. That your truth is no different from someone else's truth. That you all have the same devotion, the same "visions, revelations" and other experiences of a supernatural nature.

It's my way of saying: "Hey, you're not that unique."

[Jason]

Originally posted by Please@Nov 14 2005, 06:09 PM

But you know... God does "know us" in the bibical sense of intimacy when we allow Him into our hearts... more than He would know someone who was blocking Him out...

I've never heard anyone use the term "knows us biblically" without the association of sexual intercourse before. Unless you think of yourself as a Mary without child?

[Ray]

Originally posted by Jason+Nov 14 2005, 05:31 PM-->

Originally posted by Ray@Nov 14 2005, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by Jason@Nov 14 2005, 11:17 AM

<!--QuoteBegin-Josie@Nov 14 2005, 12:14 PM

If I believe he is a prophet, then I can and do believe whatever he says...

←

Spoken like a true Mormon Polygamist. That's just the argument they use...

Well done!

←

Have you noticed how often Jason uses this tactic, diversion?

Hmm, I wonder if Jason is even aware that he does this.

Anyway, it's a way of throwing up roadblocks, keeping us from focusing on an issue. Be aware and try to stay on track.

←

It's not a "tactic". It's a way of helping readers understand the broader picture. That your truth is no different from someone else's truth. That you all have the same devotion, the same "visions, revelations" and other experiences of a supernatural nature.

It's my way of saying: "Hey, you're not that unique."

←

Heh, well, since we don't all have [or accept] the same visions and revelations, then I'd say that we're all different according to what we have [or accept] as truth.

Or in other words, we're all unique, except for what we agree on.

And btw, I do not "possess" the truth, and nobody else does either. The best we can hope for is to "know" the truth, because by knowing the truth we can be set free [from the other prevailing opinions in the world].

[Red]

Please:

DO YOU KNOW THAT APOSTLEKNIGHT MAY NOT BE HERE FOR SOME TIME TO RESPOND TO YOU? HIS FATHER HAD AN ACCIDENT AND IT WAS VERY SERIOUS.

No, I didn't know at all! I'll get the other guys in my dorm to pray for his dad and for his family, for strength and comfort and competent doctors. I take it you must know him well, please let me know how things go. I'll start praying now.

[prisonchaplain]

Originally posted by Josie+Nov 14 2005, 03:21 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Ray@Nov 14 2005, 03:15 PM

while you can learn something about the beliefs of members of the Church through what we say, you can not learn the truth of the message which is taught in the Church by listening to us.  You are simply learning about us and what we have to say, instead of learning about God from what God has to say in the scriptures and through His living prophets.

Points well taken.  I have visited lds.org, have access to copies of the standard works, and will certainly consult them in gaining my working knowledge of doctrine.  I suppose more of what I learn here is how LDS people translate those teachings into short, conversational nuggets for the occasional off-the-cuff inquiry.  Additionally, I get to see how the beliefs translate into every day conversation about other topics.  So, this site serves to translate the theology into a everyday living format.

Or in other words, I think it's best to study doctrine as it comes directly from God and His prophets, instead of studying people who believe or declare what God has to say, because what should matter most to you is whether or not the doctrine came from God, whether or not anyone else believes it.

←

:) Okay...balance the official theology with practical, unofficial comments I gain here. Good advice.

And I personally want to thank you for coming to someone that is a member of the church to learn about our beliefs. If I want to learn to do accounting, I am not going to go to a construction worker to teach me, nor am I going to go to someone that I know has just been fired for embezzling from his firm. When you go to someone that has left the church in anger, or someone that is not even a member that is drawing their own conclusions, you are going to get a tainted picture. If I wanted to learn to type I would not go to someone that has never done it before themselves to learn.

←

People who go to EX-anything for advice are looking for ammunition, not data or authoritative information.

[Ray]

Originally posted by prisonchaplain+Nov 14 2005, 09:13 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Ray@Nov 14 2005, 03:15 PM

...I think it's best to study doctrine as it comes directly from God and His prophets, instead of studying people who believe or declare what God has to say, because what should matter most to you is whether or not the doctrine came from God, whether or not anyone else believes it.

:) Okay...balance the official theology with practical, unofficial comments I gain here. Good advice.

Don't do that!!!

In other words, please adjust your balance to tilt more toward the "official theology" of our Lord and His prophets, instead of giving equal weight to any of the "practical, unofficial comments" you gain here.

Heh, if I thought members of this website were considering the "practical, unofficial comments" from other members of this website to be as valuable or "weighty" as the teachings of our Lord and His prophets, I'd probably try to say what I'm trying to say now by saying that what we say isn't necessarily from God, while what the Lord and His prophets officially say must be.

[Serg]

Originally posted by Snow+Nov 9 2005, 11:18 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Serg@Nov 9 2005, 04:47 AM

I still cant reconcile the WAY some members EXPRESS what they think. Not that expressing it is worse than thinking it first, but it sure leaves a bitter aftertaste in most of their posts. Why brothers would we speak so harsh to each other? We  tend to act as if we know all, and are not humble enough to recognize when not.

         Its not to you Ray or Apostleknight, you i think are pretty councious people, and Please, and many more, but some seem to be SO different in behavior than what it would be a member, and the big part is that they "ARE" members...This not meant to JUDGE but as a constructive criticism if accepted humbly.   :)

         Best regards,

←

You mean me, Snow, don't you Serg. You are not talking abouit some nameless entitiy Why not say what you mean?

What on earth makes you think that I think I "know all?" I certainly don't and never pretend to. I am silent on a good many things - often because I have no knowledge of them. I always am ready to learn something new.

In this case, to which you are passively-agressively referring, I have correctly observed that Ray has made a statement that when challenged he cannot/will not support, obfuscates all over the place, won't admit he made it up and plays dumbs about it. Now you would have me ignore it and act like his doing so is not a poor example but why should I do that? So you can feel like we are all warm and fuzzy towards each other? Wouldn't it be better for him to post honestly like I have called for? Then none of this bluster you don't like would have been even been thought of.

I'll take honesty and correctness over faux sweetness anytime.

←

Snow, i was not speaking of you ONLY. But yet to the whole attitudes of members that fight too much. But now that you ask, i just consider you a very conversational person, but yet i see in your profile that you are a member, and this contradicts(at least in my mind-not better than any one), the way you speak about the church and our beliefs. About plural marriage which you stated that no good came from it...and many other concepts that members are often "obligated to accept", and now, i dont mean that i dont apreciate you not being totally subordinated to the church attitudes or doctrines(because you have a mind of your own), but it just makes me wonder how can you freely treat the prophets' decisions in tha past as not likely to your understanding instead of supporting them . For such things as BY's statement of the black men to never hold the priesthood(no prophecy)...we are not suggested to accept, but the concept of the whole plural marriage, something that even until now all the prophets allude as a real revelation from the Lord and good for that time, you find too bad for the saints of such period...

Best regards brother, B)

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Red@Nov 14 2005, 09:28 PM

Please:

DO YOU KNOW THAT APOSTLEKNIGHT MAY NOT BE HERE FOR SOME TIME TO RESPOND TO YOU? HIS FATHER HAD AN ACCIDENT AND IT WAS VERY SERIOUS.

No, I didn't know at all!  I'll get the other guys in my dorm to pray for his dad and for his family, for strength and comfort and competent doctors.  I take it you must know him well, please let me know how things go.  I'll start praying now.

←

I don't really know him better than anyone else...I just know what he told us... I am sure he will be thankful for any prayers. We haven't heard how things have gone... that worries me.

Thanks for your prayers.

[Red]

Originally posted by Please+Nov 17 2005, 12:45 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Red@Nov 14 2005, 09:28 PM

Please:

DO YOU KNOW THAT APOSTLEKNIGHT MAY NOT BE HERE FOR SOME TIME TO RESPOND TO YOU? HIS FATHER HAD AN ACCIDENT AND IT WAS VERY SERIOUS.

No, I didn't know at all!  I'll get the other guys in my dorm to pray for his dad and for his family, for strength and comfort and competent doctors.  I take it you must know him well, please let me know how things go.  I'll start praying now.

←

I don't really know him better than anyone else...I just know what he told us... I am sure he will be thankful for any prayers. We haven't heard how things have gone... that worries me.

Thanks for your prayers.

←

I guess he must've said so on another discussion, so I missed it. Anyway, since then I've put his name out there in a few prayer groups and at the beginning of some of my classes. So yeah, he and his family have some prayers coming his way.

I'll still write responses to his points though (they were good ones, and I still had few more to go), and Ray, I suppose you and I can continue with them as we seem to be doing. I

I'll probably post more over the weekend.

God bless.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Red+Nov 17 2005, 08:00 PM-->

Originally posted by Please@Nov 17 2005, 12:45 PM

<!--QuoteBegin-Red@Nov 14 2005, 09:28 PM

Please:

DO YOU KNOW THAT APOSTLEKNIGHT MAY NOT BE HERE FOR SOME TIME TO RESPOND TO YOU? HIS FATHER HAD AN ACCIDENT AND IT WAS VERY SERIOUS.

No, I didn't know at all!  I'll get the other guys in my dorm to pray for his dad and for his family, for strength and comfort and competent doctors.  I take it you must know him well, please let me know how things go.  I'll start praying now.

←

I don't really know him better than anyone else...I just know what he told us... I am sure he will be thankful for any prayers. We haven't heard how things have gone... that worries me.

Thanks for your prayers.

←

I guess he must've said so on another discussion, so I missed it. Anyway, since then I've put his name out there in a few prayer groups and at the beginning of some of my classes. So yeah, he and his family have some prayers coming his way.

I'll still write responses to his points though (they were good ones, and I still had few more to go), and Ray, I suppose you and I can continue with them as we seem to be doing. I

I'll probably post more over the weekend.

God bless.

←

I hope we hear from him soon... and I am sure he will be very appreciative of all the prayers.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Red@Nov 14 2005, 02:14 AM

Snow’s Question:

“Here's what you said that I am interested in you justifying:

And if you exceed all the others in righteousness you will go on to become a God of your own world and populate it with countless children. But the cycle repeats again doesn't it?”

The quotes on page 3 were meant to answer this.  I am familiar with the passages you recommended on page 2: D/C 76 and 132.  It would be interesting to see your interpretations of the Biblical passages you mentioned. I honestly do not want to misrepresent your church, and if you can make the case that your church does not teach what I’ve been warning about then I’ll be glad to stop saying what I’m saying.  However, the more I re-evaluate my position in light of the objections, and the more I review your scriptures and the words of the one you call a prophet, the more I am convinced that I am truly representing what these doctrines teach.  I am trying to tell you that they lead to a very bad conclusion. 

I see your question in two parts:

1.  And if you exceed all the others in righteousness you will go on to become a God… (I honestly thought it was a given that your church taught this, but here we’ll look at it in detail.)

2.  …of your own world and populate it with countless children. But the cycle repeats again… (I addressed this issue on page 4, but we’ll rehash it here.)

Answer to 1:

(Before I start, I realized that the word “all” might be a source of confusion.  Forget it’s there, I know LDS doctrine does not teach that only one Mormon will ever attain Celestial Glory and/or godhood!  Instead it would probably be more accurate to say “exceed many others…”  I hope that clarifies my position.)

I mostly get this idea from D/C 76.  Speaking of those who enter the Celestial Kingdom it says that they:

-“shall come forth in the resurrection of the just…” (v50),

-believed in Jesus and were baptized (v51),

-received the Holy Spirit by laying on of hands (v52),

-overcame by faith (v53). 

-They are kings and priests according to the order of Melchizedeck (v56-57),

-“they are gods, even the sons of God…” (v58),

-“all things are theirs, whether in life or death, or things present, or things to come…” (v59),

-“these shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever..” (v62),

-and they are “just men made perfect through Jesus…” (v69).

There is a whole lot “to do” in order to make it into the Celestial Kingdom.  Not all Mormons will achieve this as it says in v79: “they are not valiant in the testimony of Jesus…” and are a part of the Terrestrial Kingdom and only “receive of the presence of the Son, but not of the fullness of the Father” (v77).

Essentially, Mormons who enter the Celestial Kingdom succeed where other Mormons have failed.  Let’s explore this more, in the Book of Mormon for example:

“…this much I can tell you, that if ye do not watch yourselves, and your thoughts, and your words, and your deeds, and observe the commandments of God, and continue in the faith of what ye have heard concerning the coming of our Lord, even unto the end of your lives, ye must perish.  And now, O man, remember, and perish not” (Mosiah 4:30)

What does this say about the requirement for salvation (i.e. anything besides perishing)?  Watch your thoughts, words, deeds and observe God’s law (all of it apparently), and continue in this faith till the day you die and you won’t “perish.”  Your salvation as a Mormon depends on your performance.  As I understand LDS doctrine, “perishing” or “condemnation” does not necessarily mean burning in hell forever or being banished to outer darkness, but simply being kept from progressing (i.e. remaining in the Terrestrial or Telestial Kingdoms for all eternity).

One more from D/C 132, talking about being sealed in the temple for time and eternity with your spouse, and all the glories, salvation into the Celestial Kingdom and godhood that goes with it, it says:

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory” (v21).

So attaining Glory in the Celestial Kingdom (full Salvation) depends on where your heart is (are you valiant or not) and how well you perform in fulfilling the Law.  And of course any failure in this area and your place in the Celestial kingdom is forfeit.  Though I am aware of D/C 132:26 where it says that only murdering an innocent can cause someone who was sealed for time and eternity to loose their place in the Celestial.  Still, the same principle is at work, your performance in this life determines whether or not you’ll spend eternity with your Heavenly Father.  Of course he is the judge of all this, and after you do all that you can do, his grace kicks in (2 Nephi 25:23)—essentially a just man who has been perfected.

Answer to 2:

I’ll quote Joseph Smith again, from his King Follet sermon where He seems to clearly imply that he is speaking the word of God, specifically words pertaining to the knowledge of God which is vital to salvation.  If any of you like, I have this saved as a word document (un-tampered with of course, only highlighted in some areas), and I’ll email it to you.

“…you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all gods have done before you. . . . . . they shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ.  What is it?  To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a god, and ascend the throne of eternal power, the same as those who have gone before" (King Follet sermon).

Before this passage he defines God as a being who was once a normal man but is now exalted and obviously ruling over our world.  Now here he describes how this process has always been going on, and that we are to follow in the footsteps of God and all those who have gone before.  When I consider the phrases “inherit the same power [as God],” “same glory [as God],” “same exaltation [as God],” and “arrive at the station of a god,” call me crazy, but somehow I am lead to the conclusion that ruling over a world with inhabitants on it is part of the package.

Another example:

“…and they [a man and woman who are both sealed together for time and eternity] shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.  Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them” (D/C 132:19-20).

Again, maybe the doctor dropped me once or twice (maybe that would explain a lot of things, woo-hoo), but if these two people, Mr. Jack and Mrs. Jill Mormon are to become gods, and part of being a god is having seeds (which I’ll go out on a not so shaky limb and guess that these are spirit children), then these “seeds” need to live on a world where they can have the same opportunities to grow just as their heavenly mom and dad did. 

Well, it’s not a guess at all, according to vv62-63 of the same section:

“And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified. But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfill the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified” (D/C 132:62-63).

 

These “souls of men” that are born to the women as a result of “exaltation in the eternal worlds” need to go somewhere don’t they?  I know about the doctrine of the pre-mortal life as well as you do, and part of that life was that you could progress no further until you lived out a life (a probation) on a sinful world.  If that is true then these “souls of men” yet to be born ought to certainly have the same opportunity as you have had.

Snow said:

“You seem to labor under the assumption that there is some repository of LDS doctrine that specifies not only what we believe, but also what we do not believe. That is an erroneous assumption. With a few exceptions we do not have negative doctrines - stating what we do not believe in.”

That is no excuse.  Try again.  If you can’t find some verse, or even words from one of your prophets that refute this idea categorically, then piece together your case from multiple sources—at least make a case!  And no, I am not laboring under an erroneous assumption in this regard; the Bible is full of material specifically written to refute false doctrines—especially the Prophets of the Old Testament and letters in the New Testament.  So why not also in the BoM, D/C or PGP if indeed these texts are “God-breathed.”  Your church has been around for about 200 years, and I’m sure this controversy we are duking out right now must have been around since the King Follet Sermon—somebody must’ve written something!  Surely there are recorded, constructive arguments for and against.  You seem to be a knowledgeable guy, you know better than to state what you believe to be truth, say the other person is wrong, then not support your position at all as if you didn’t have to. 

You’ve heard this I’m sure: “…be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ” (1 Peter 3:15, KJV).

←

Well Red,

You've just gone to some rather extensive lenghts to piece together an argument based on a little of this, a little of that, mixed with much inference and interpretation. I guess you could be right but if all that was our official belief, don't you think we would just say... 'Those that are deified will become Gods of their own world and populate it with countless spirit babies.'

Your INTERPRETATION is only one of the possiblities. JS is the only one that seems to know much about the topic and he didn't say much. We are mostly left in the dark about just exactly what it means to attain godhood. What I do know, as explicitly stated in John, is that we will become one with God just as Christ is one with God. That we do not deduce by philosophical argument, it is flatly stated in the bible (Jn 17:21-23), It makes just as much sense to me, as compared to your interpretation, that we might not be gods seperate from God at all, but rather share in his divinity as some sort of extended godhead (or trinity if you will). Again, that we will share in God's divinity, sit on his throne, and be joint heirs, along with Christ of ALL that God has (that would presumably include his divinity) is not an inference we make but is literally and explicitly stated in the Bible.

So, your conjecture could be better than my conjecture but it is not LDS official doctrine.

Further, it is absurd to demand negative proof our our doctrine. Sure the bible may indeed have exclusionary statements but it hardly makes statements about all that it does not teach as positive truth. The bible is frustratingly ambiguous about the precise nature of God, about the question of faith and works in salvation, about a human pre-existence, etc. You can/could argue all day long about why you think your own personal view of the nature of God or faith and works in explicit in the bible but I could argue the opposite and the fact that there are so many conflicting Christian beliefs, families and denominations is proof enough the bible is less than explicit.

[Red]

Originally posted by Snow@Nov 17 2005, 10:33 PM

Well Red,

You've just gone to some rather extensive lenghts to piece together an argument based on a little of this, a little of that, mixed with much inference and interpretation.

←

Well Snow,

I'm sensing the end of the discussion from your end, and mine too. I feel that I've made the case and now anyone can read between our words and decide for themselves--which was and is my goal on this site. I thank-you for your replies and you definitely put me through my paces, bringing up points that I would never have considered as a non-Mormon. You seem to write me off a little though, but a "little of this and a little of that" should really show the research I've done to the best of my ability. Don't think for a second that I WANTED my position to be true! Instead, the more I looked into it (the more I attempted to ascertain the context in relation to the rest of LDS Scripture) the more I was lead to my conclusion.

Originally posted by Snow@Nov 17 2005, 10:33 PM

I guess you could be right but if all that was our official belief, don't you think we would just say... 'Those that are deified will become Gods of their own world and populate it with countless spirit babies.'

←

I don't think it is your church's official doctrine, but that many of the teachings point toward the conclusion I came to. I think the idea, "'Those that are deified will become Gods of their own world and populate it with countless spirit babies'" it is not official because of very risk that I have laid out, namely: that a Mormon who someday becomes a heavenly parent will have to send their spirit children into a sinful world, perpetuating a cycle which relies on the existence of sin and death for exaltation; this is an evil system and gives no hope, nor will it result in any lasting joy.

If I were a mormon, I would be very glad that this was not an official doctrine. But I am pleading with you: don't just take refuge in saying, "that's not official" because that's not the point.

The point is that I think I see something terrible sneeking up behind behind you all, and it can strike at any moment. Please turn around and take a good look at it, or better yet, run, because it might be to close already.

Originally posted by Snow+Nov 17 2005, 10:33 PM-->

So, your conjecture could be better than my conjecture but it is not LDS official doctrine.

←

I think mine is a better conjecture, I believe the weight of LDS scripture to be on it's side. Your conjucture from John 17:21-23 I find exceedes the intent of the request which I would argue was fulfilled at Pentacost. Also I believe that a believer is a sinful human being who has been grafted into and justified by God--one day to be raised incorruptle, though not to become God or a new person of the Godhead, but being a created being by nature (God being uncreated).

<!--QuoteBegin-Snow

@Nov 17 2005, 10:33 PM

Further, it is absurd to demand negative proof our our doctrine. Sure the bible may indeed have exclusionary statements but it hardly makes statements about all that it does not teach as positive truth.

←

I am not asking you to disprove your own doctrine, but if my conjecture based on your scriptures and the words of your prophets would "officially" be considered error (i.e. heresy) by your church then someone somewhere may very well have written to refute my position, as it likely has cropped up before. You would know better than me if there were anything refuting my idea as a mormon teaching. But if there is no LDS source to refute this, then that adds strength to my case.

Because if the passages I have read lead me in a certain direction of understanding and if there is no passage telling me not to go there then I have to conclude that your church's teachings do lead to the conclusion I found. (of course, this passage, if its out there, would need to say a little more than "it's just not official!")

Originally posted by Snow@Nov 17 2005, 10:33 PM

The bible is frustratingly ambiguous about the precise nature of God, about the question of faith and works in salvation, about a human pre-existence, etc. You can/could argue all day long about why you think your own personal view of the nature of God or faith and works in explicit in the bible but I could argue the opposite and the fact that there are so many conflicting Christian beliefs, families and denominations is proof enough the bible is less than explicit.

←

Actually I do find the Bible to be explicit in all these areas, though I suppose that's a whole new topic thread. Yes, people have slugged out many arguments like these for 2000 years, but that does not make the Word of God ambiguous (and so invalid as a revelation) and that does not make all arguments valid or invalid, or all true or all false.

Instead we have evidence of spiritual warfare against God's people. Satan's purpose is to deceive and divide us and so render us inaffective. The quickest way to do this is to inspire "alternate interpretations" of scripture and dedication to various theological "isms," all enforced by a good dose of infiltaters throuout history. He would only do this if indeed we are of God and thus a true threat. I am strangely comforted by the thought that Christiandom is so fractured today with 100s and 100s of different sects, while I can only think of 2 or 3 offshoots from Mormonism.

I am comforted by our apparent fractured weakness, because when we are weak he is strong, and will bring glory to Himself all the more by using unqualified subjects such as us.

Now before we move on from this thread I think there are still a few other Gospel subjects with loose ends waiting to be tied up, if I am not mistaken.......

until then, God bless