God has a wife in heaven???


yellows23
 Share

Recommended Posts

KFD = King Follet Discourse. At King Follett's funeral, Joseph Smith was asked to speak. Instead of talking about King Follett, he discussed the nature of God. You can read it here: King Follett Discourse

In the talk, Joseph Smith explained concepts such as, where does one have a father that was not first a son. And he discusses how God once was mortal and came to earth as we do, in order to obtain full godhood.

Here are some key points he made at the beginning of the discourse:

First, God himself, who sits enthroned in yonder heaven, is a man like one of you. That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today and you were to see the great God who holds this world in its orbit and upholds all things by his power, you would see him in the image and very form of a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion and image of God. He received instruction from and walked, talked, and conversed with him as one man talks and communes with another.

In order to understand the subject of the dead for the consolation of those who mourn for the loss of their friends, it is necessary they should understand the character and being of God; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. [That he was not is an idea] incomprehensible to some. But it is the simple and first principle of the gospel-to know for a certainty the character of God, that we may converse with him as one man with another. God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth the same as Jesus Christ himself did, and I will show it from the Bible.

I wish I had the trump of an archangel; I could tell the story in such a manner that persecution would cease forever. What did Jesus say? (Mark it, elder Rigdon!) Jesus said, "As the Father hath power in himself, even so hath the Son power." To do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious--in a manner to lay down his body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again. If you do not believe it, you do not believe the Bible. The scriptures say it, and I defy all the learning and wisdom, all the combined powers of earth and hell together, to refute it.

Here, then, is eternal life--to know the only wise and true God. And you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves--to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done--by going from a small degree to another, from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you are able to sit in glory as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power.

And I want you to know that in the last days, while certain individuals are proclaiming his name, God is not trifling with you or me; it is the first principle of consolation. How consoling to the mourner when he is called to part with a husband, wife, father, mother, child, or dear relative, to know that although the earthly tabernacle shall be dissolved that dear one shall rise in immortal glory, not to sorrow, suffer, or die any more but shall be God's heirs and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? It is to inherit the same glory, the same power, and the same exaltation until you ascend the throne of eternal power the same as those who are gone before. What did Jesus do? Why, I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence. I saw my Father work out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom I shall present it to my Father so that he obtains kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt his glory. And so Jesus treads in his tracks to inherit what God did before. It is plain beyond disputation.

Thus you learn some of the first principles of the gospel, about which so much hath been said. When you climb a ladder, you must begin at the bottom and go on until you learn the last principle; it will be a great while before you have learned the last. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it is a great thing to learn salvation beyond the grave. I suppose I am not allowed to go into an investigation of anything that is not contained in the Bible. And I think there are many "wise men" here who would put me to death for treason; so I shall turn commentator today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[slaps himself] Thanks

Yes...Yes...long term memory issues between those 'deeper core' neurons couldn't find the statement. I need to fire those GODs of each neuron [universe] for not providing the answer. [humor]

Curious though, do you know where it is spoken or hear the phrase: "...the earth was rolled here [paraphrase it to read - present solar location] after the fall."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the other forum someone said that there is a mother who is married to God the father-wife.They have spirit children.What is the name of the mother and wife of God the Father??? The difference between LDS and NON_lds is the nature of God.In LDS,God the Father is flesh and bones.Non -Lds,God the father is a spirit-Trinity. Did Joseph Smith say that God was a man-motral first who become a God??? Both LDS and non-LDS believe Mary was born a virgin.

Mary was born a virgin? What's so strange about that? Weren't we all? :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

KFD? That abbreviation escapes me.

It is a self-interest on what transpired with FATHER and his mortality. As with the term or title Jesus Christ.

The King Follett Discourse is one reason why non-LDS Christians don't recognize many of Mormonism's doctrines as "Christian". God the Father was once a mortal man, like us? :confused:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People need to understand that those are not directly the words of Joseph Smith. It was recorded by four different men who came together and compared notes and came to a "unified text." The King Follett Discourse is one read in principle and not for details and specifics. The nature and kind of being God is. That is attained through the gaining of knowledge. Which is revealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise. Not by men.

When a prophet speaks by the Spirit. We still have to feel the Spirit testify of the truth. Otherwise we don't know, for ourselves, that they speak truth.

"I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves" -Joseph Smith

Edit: The text most likely has little error but it is not perfect. Taking it word for word literally is not a wise course of study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did God the father who was mortal,went from mortal man to immortal man???? When God the father was a mortal man,was there anybody else there too??? any other mortal men???Before God the father created the earth-immortal body,where did he live as a mortal man??? another solar system??? or planet??? Non-LDS believe God was always immortal male who is a spirit-god head of the trinity-never a mortal man as us.We as a mortal man or human are imperfect-weakness-sin,Even Paul,Peter,and Moses,others,are not perfect.Peter deny Jesus three times.

well technically we are not mortal - we have existed before this Earth and will continue to exist after it its just our view that is mortal. As far as I am aware non LDS Christians don't try to explain much about WHO God is - but you are wrong that all who are non-LDS teach differntly for example its very similar to the Greek Myths and the way Zeus came about, Hindu Gods have parents.

-Charley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People need to understand that those are not directly the words of Joseph Smith. It was recorded by four different men who came together and compared notes and came to a "unified text." The King Follett Discourse is one read in principle and not for details and specifics. The nature and kind of being God is. That is attained through the gaining of knowledge. Which is revealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise. Not by men.

When a prophet speaks by the Spirit. We still have to feel the Spirit testify of the truth. Otherwise we don't know, for ourselves, that they speak truth.

"I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves" -Joseph Smith

Edit: The text most likely has little error but it is not perfect. Taking it word for word literally is not a wise course of study.

If the LDS church quotes from the King Follett Discourse and views it as reliable then why shouldn't the rest of us? Can you show me where the LDS Church has officially denounced and rejected that sermon?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The LDS Church rarely quotes from the KFD. President Hinckley in a recent interview stated we do not know enough on the subject to really establish any particular doctrine. And that's the catch, we know Joseph taught some stuff, but we do not have enough revelation on it to clarify it beyond the many speculations that come from it.

BTW, the Church does have this official announcement regarding doctrine:

SALT LAKE CITY 4 May 2007 Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine. The news media is increasingly asking what distinguishes the Church from other faiths, and reporters like to contrast one set of beliefs with another.

The Church welcomes inquisitiveness, but the challenge of understanding Mormon doctrine is not merely a matter of accessing the abundant information available. Rather, it is a matter of how this information is approached and examined.

The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context (see here and here), and thoughtful analysis is required to understand them. News reporters pressed by daily deadlines often find that problematic. Therefore, as the Church continues to grow throughout the world and receive increasing media attention, a few simple principles that facilitate a better understanding may be helpful:

* Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.

* Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine.

Based on the scriptures, Joseph Smith declared: “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”

* Because different times present different challenges, modern-day prophets receive revelation relevant to the circumstances of their day. This follows the biblical pattern (Amos 3:7), in which God communicated messages and warnings to His people through prophets in order to secure their well-being. In our day, President Gordon B. Hinckley has repeatedly emphasized the importance of the family in our increasingly fractional society. In addition, the Church does not preclude future additions or changes to its teachings or practices. This living, dynamic aspect of the Church provides flexibility in meeting those challenges. According to the Articles of Faith, “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.”

LDS Newsroom - Approaching Mormon Doctrine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ask yourself, why would the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr. raise the 'eyebrows' of those in attendance on this subject? Hints perhaps?

We can clearly see, not only in the scriptures, not every living prophet will have the same privilege of seeing the same as the one who opened the dispensation or even to speak on those subjects, unless it is the will of Lord. As we can see each of these prophets have a particular agenda from the Lord to bring to the Saints; noting prior callings or training preparation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the LDS church quotes from the King Follett Discourse and views it as reliable then why shouldn't the rest of us? Can you show me where the LDS Church has officially denounced and rejected that sermon?

Is it the LDS Church or is it the members that view it as reliable? I think a lot of gospel scholars view it as reliable. But as official scriptural canon by the Church, it is not.

The LDS Church also doesn't go around denouncing every false doctrine or opinion or speculation. Has the Adam-God theory(probably shouldn't bring this up) been denounced? I don't think so, but it is largely understood to be false doctrine.

Again like I said though every word should not be taken literally. By and large part, all it clarifies(when looking at the principles) is our position in our progression to exaltation. This is done by exemplifying our need to undergo a process of gaining knowledge. I have some other posts that explain this, which I am not going to rewrite.

Those principles we know, but the details we don't. We don't know the origin of God.(How can we even comprehend infinities to there full infinite capacity if we are finite? We can comprehend certain aspects of it. but not all of it.) A specific opinion is given in the KFD. But the principle is that for men, to become Gods, we have to gain knowledge by principles and therefore become exalted and in this process we further exalt our Heavenly Father.

D&C 130:18-19

18 Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection.

19 And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.

D&C 132:5

5 For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Noting prior past conferences, the King Follett Sermon was considered 'OK' to be used by the First Presidency.

Wasn't the original published version of the discourse first appear in Journal of Discourses 6:1-11?

Yes it is in the JoD. However, that does not make it doctrine. Given Adam-God and the requirement for polygamy to be exalted that also are in the JoD, but not considered correct by current GAs, I'd say we need to do as the Church asks and separate out doctrine from sporadic teachings.

As for it being taught in General Conference, I'd be careful on that, as well. Up until the last 25 years, a lot of speculative teachings came over the pulpit. In the last 25 years, however, the First Presidency has regulated the teachings at General Conference so that they solely "teach the doctrines" as Pres Packer insists. I think you'd find it difficult to find anything on the KFD in General Conference in the last 25 years. This isn't to repudiate it, but as Pres Hinckley stated, we just don't have a lot of information on the teachings in it, and so it is an outlier in understanding the specifics.

How many members speculate about God having sex, God's Father having a father, etc., simply because we have two discourses that brush lightly on the topics? There's more speculation involved than what is actually taught by Joseph Smith. Of course, we also have the issue of whether it was recorded accurately.

So, while I think it is valuable for my personal study, it is definitely not a core doctrine of the Church. And until the Prophet begins to actively teach it, we should walk circumspectly in our use of the KFD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it is in the JoD. However, that does not make it doctrine. Given Adam-God and the requirement for polygamy to be exalted that also are in the JoD, but not considered correct by current GAs, I'd say we need to do as the Church asks and separate out doctrine from sporadic teachings.

Agreed. Some teachings and sermons, without further revelation from the council of the brethren [church], will have to remain close.

As for it being taught in General Conference, I'd be careful on that, as well. Up until the last 25 years, a lot of speculative teachings came over the pulpit. In the last 25 years, however, the First Presidency has regulated the teachings at General Conference so that they solely "teach the doctrines" as Pres Packer insists. I think you'd find it difficult to find anything on the KFD in General Conference in the last 25 years. This isn't to repudiate it, but as Pres Hinckley stated, we just don't have a lot of information on the teachings in it, and so it is an outlier in understanding the specifics.

Looking again at those conferences, the last usage was in 69 by Apostle Harold B. Lee; I stand corrected.

How many members speculate about God having sex, God's Father having a father, etc., simply because we have two discourses that brush lightly on the topics? There's more speculation involved than what is actually taught by Joseph Smith. Of course, we also have the issue of whether it was recorded accurately.

Some subjects are mere patterns of what is; making that assumption as it continues in the next state [or actually originated from that source]. Nothing is required to assume on the first line. Seeking added clarity to the topic, the answer given is for ones edification since the church has not officially published it - or merely brushed over it [laughter]. Post anything beyond that, most are not ready to hear it.

Accuracy in any scribe recording is an issue. Without the aid of voice recorders, we stand at the mercy of the scribe and the author to make correction. Thomas Bullock account of this sermon was the longest in length and noting indication it was written during the prophet’s speech [April 1844]. I believe he learned a special short hand writing technique that enables him to do so. I think if anything was missing, Clayton recording was used for a backup. Now, I do know it was Jonathan Grimshaw, who tried to make sense of the differences between each account found in 1855 and was thus published in Times and Seasons [1857]. What we see today [1978] and his first printed version, there are notable differences.

We must always understand, even the earlier apostles accounts [NT] had flaws also. This did not stop those earlier clerics from not canonizing the scrolls.

So, while I think it is valuable for my personal study, it is definitely not a core doctrine of the Church. And until the Prophet begins to actively teach it, we should walk circumspectly in our use of the KFD.

Again, it goes back to my earlier remark on another thread, not all latter-day prophets will have the opportunity to see what the prophet JS seen. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Man where do you guys get this stuff? It appears that you are constantly trying to give God your finite minds. Is is that you want to pull God off His throne or is it because you want to elevate yourselves? I cant tell but this stuff is about as God filled as Star Wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man where do you guys get this stuff? It appears that you are constantly trying to give God your finite minds. Is is that you want to pull God off His throne or is it because you want to elevate yourselves? I cant tell but this stuff is about as God filled as Star Wars.

Are you really reopening up discussions that were done months ago? Wow, you must be bored.

We do not give God our "finite minds." But we are expected by God to seek him out, even through our finite capabilities. D&C 93 tells us that we follow the same path as Christ, going from grace to grace, receiving grace for grace, until we receive a fullness of God.

God has much to reveal to us, both as a Church and as individuals. And we will receive such as 1) we are ready for it, and 2) God wishes to give it to us.

Joseph Smith received new revelation as he was ready and as he asked. Not before. The same occurs with us. D&C 9 teaches us that we must search things out with our minds (though finite), so that the Spirit can guide us to greater truth.

That is the blessing and the struggle with continuing revelation. Previous prophets have received revelation through their weaknesses and beliefs, and so do we. As we gain greater truth, we are able to greater understand the spiritual messages God wishes us to have. And it is important to understand ancient scripture, both according to their original understanding, but also from our standpoint of knowing more things today.

God does not deceive the earth by hiding things from us. Things are hidden from us, because we are not ready for them. This requires us to have an open mind towards the things of God, knowing that as he reveals them to us, we still "see through a glass darkly" as Paul would put it.

For me this is one of the "proofs" of the Restored Gospel. God works through man's weaknesses. Moses was not perfect, nor was Joseph Smith. But God still was able to work great things through them, and reveal great truths. But there are still great things to be revealed in our day.

One of the things both Joseph and Moses wanted to accomplish is to have each individual prepare him/herself to stand in the presence of God and be like Him. Moses tried this at Mt Sinai (D&C 84:19-25), and Joseph began his work with the Pentecost during the Kirtland Temple dedication, and it continues in the temples today. Joseph and Moses both wanted the people to be prophets to themselves. Moses proclaimed, "Oh that all could be prophets!"

This means we all need to not just look at scripture with a naive mind, but with the mind of God, allowing him to reveal himself to us through the scriptures, and understanding that the scriptures are not perfect themselves, but a foundation upon which to build a greater knowledge of truth and God. And truth comes from many places, including science. Brigham Young stated that the gospel encompasses all truth, regardless of where it comes from. We should keep our minds open, for how do we know it wasn't God that revealed these great scientific evidences to the scientists and others who studied them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the other forum someone said that there is a mother who is married to God the father-wife.They have spirit children.What is the name of the mother and wife of God the Father??? The difference between LDS and NON_lds is the nature of God.In LDS,God the Father is flesh and bones.Non -Lds,God the father is a spirit-Trinity. Did Joseph Smith say that God was a man-motral first who become a God??? Both LDS and non-LDS believe Mary was born a virgin.

Only a handful will receive a mortal testimony in this world concerning Heavenly Mother and this only happens if there is desire or a need for HER to be in there presence for a special purpose. There is no need for anyone outside of the few, who need to know HER name.

Creating Spirit children and having birth of a child are not on the same order. In comparison, even new worlds are not merely put together randomly but follow the same pattern of birth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her name is, "Mother." This is just the same as calling God, "Father."

For us, it helps us to understand our purpose here on earth, learning to be like our heavenly parents on a small scale, in order to inherit all that they have. This is taught in the parable of the talents, and in the parable of the Prodigal Son.

As for Hemidakota's thoughts, they are, of course, speculation. We do not know how earths are formed/created, but can only speculate. Nor do we know how spirit children are formed. The scriptures were written in a time when there was only one known method for birthing. Today, we can create life in a test tube, and understand that birth is the same, even if the methodology might differ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then you need to state - NOT DOCTRINAL vice speculation. If I state ASSUMPTION or SPECULATION, then it is but if I did not. But not stating this assumption, there is something that needs further investigation for oneself. What the members of the church needs to remember, NOT ALL DOCTRINES and PRINCIPLES will be given all at once as we learned from the last days of Joseph Smith and the amount of knowledge received.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you really know they are SPECULATIONS Ram?

I suspect Rameumptom was simply being charitable. Since the things you said are not publicly revealed truths, there are only three possibilities:

  • They are privately revealed truths.
  • They are lies.
  • They are speculation.

If #1 is true, that means you are guilty of a particularly nasty sin: That of revealing private revelation, thus proving yourself to be unreliable and unworthy of further revelations of the Spirit. If #2 is true, that means you are a liar. I'm guessing that Ram simply assumed the best of you and opted for #3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hidden

I suspect Rameumptom was simply being charitable. Since the things you said are not publicly revealed truths, there are only three possibilities:

  • They are privately revealed truths.
  • They are lies.
  • They are speculation.

If #1 is true, that means you are guilty of a particularly nasty sin: That of revealing private revelation, thus proving yourself to be unreliable and unworthy of further revelations of the Spirit. If #2 is true, that means you are a liar. I'm guessing that Ram simply assumed the best of you and opted for #3.

Disputing #1 being a nasty sin.. personal revelation != private revelation. Much like sacred != secret in regards to the Temples. It can be spoken of in the right locations and around the correct people. Unless I was fed faulty info :eek:

Link to comment

As far as secret in regards to the temple...what is your interpretation of the right locations and the right people?

That's on a need to know basis.. nah.. seriously? For certain items.. only in the temples (or at the very least in the presence of a priesthood holder). For the vast majority of the information most places would be acceptable as long as it is presented in the correct way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vast majority of the information most places would be acceptable as long as it is presented in the correct way.

Would you say that this would apply if talking to a member who had not yet attended the temple? Or how about to a non member as long as it is presented in the correct way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share