As Todd Requested...LDS Teachings God was once a Man

[lax16]

As do I…but it is wrong and deceitful to claim that “Mormons teach XYZ” based on quotes from their leadership that were never received by the whole church as truth and that were never incorporated into their scriptures or official church teachings.

I** do not believe it is wrong and deceitful to print quotes of LDS prophets. I think it is deceitful not** to discuss the history of the LDS (or any religion for that matter).

I have no reference to quote that the statements of JS or BY were only speculation other than what the LDS themselves have said…since THEY should be able to define their stance on such quotes…and have…why then deny they are “speculations” and insist that they are “doctrine” when the LDS church as a whole reject Adam-God, Mary having sexual intercourse with God the Father to beget Jesus and other “beliefs” most Christians find objectionable?

**The reason you have no quotes is that JS was/is considered a prophet and was the “mouthpiece of the Lord.” At the time, no one thought he was speculating. They followed him. They did as he said. **

If the LDS church does not believe such doctrine, why claim they do?

Posting quotes from LDS prophets is not a claim to anything - their words speak for themselves. I am not sure where I claimed they do???

Again, Catholics don’t like it when a passage is pulled from a distinctive Catholic source which says something along the thought that “Mary is worshipped(adored).” I always smile at the response from Catholics…"We don’t worship Mary, the word “worship” we used really means “adore”, “venerate” not “worship” as defined in modern English…

**Why do you smile at the response from Catholics?
It doesn’t matter what people “say” about Catholics and Mary. It is spelled out for everyone to read. See CCC 971. **

Honesty concerning other faith traditions is important from my perspective…claiming “Mormons believe that Adam was really God.”…then go on to quote BY as proof…when the LDS church has stated “We do not believe Adam was God.” to me is wrong. BY may have actually said something like that…he was wrong…and the LDS church admits that…why claim otherwise?

**Brigham Young was/is a prophet. What he said matters. Mormons can back off of it today, but it still matters. If he wasn’t important, I don’t think they would have named the university after him.
My final comment: It is not deceitful or wrong to post quotes from a prophet. People can draw their own conclusions.
**

 

[Returning_Home]

I am re-posting in the hopes an LDS poster will respond.
It ties in to this thread so I will not start a new one.

Yes, it means exactly what you think it means: incest. They won’t tell you that nor do they believe it themselves, but that’s the ultimate result of the Mormon god having a physical body of flesh and bone, him being the literal, physical father of our spirits, and him having literal, physical sex with Mary to produce the Mormon jesus.

There’s really no way around this one.

 

[Returning_Home]

**Brigham Young was/is a prophet. What he said matters. Mormons can back off of it today, but it still matters. If he wasn’t important, I don’t think they would have named the university after him.
My final comment: It is not deceitful or wrong to post quotes from a prophet. People can draw their own conclusions.
**

The reason Mormons can’t and don’t put much stock in the Journal of Discourses is that it completely contradicts the church’s modern teaching of several important matters. Adam being God and blood atonement come immediately to mind but these are assigned the much less important role of being his mere opinion instead of inspired counsel; if only one person believed what he taught that isn’t in the church’s current opinion of itself and its position means that the clear teaching: “The Lord will never allow the President of the Church to lead us astray. (Gospel Principles, ,p 50, 1996 edition)” has been violated and the entire authority of the church has been rendered null and void.

The is but one example of the moral never, never land that Mormonism is indellibly connected to but has to ignore in order to sustain itself, its false teachings, and its basis for authority.

 

[ParkerD]

I am re-posting in the hopes an LDS poster will respond.
It ties in to this thread so I will not start a new one.

No, it definitely does not mean what you “think it means.” Here is a link to the set of statements you cited by reference:

lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/godhead/heavenly_mother.html

Here is the final sentence of that set of statements:

"by Elder John A. Widsoe

“In accordance with Gospel philosophy there are males and females in heaven. Since we have a Father, who is our God, we must also have a mother, who possesses the attributes of Godhood. This simply carries onward the logic of things earthly, and conforms with the doctrine that whatever is on this earth is simply a representation of spiritual conditions of deeper meaning than we can here fathom.” (A Rational Theology, p.69)"

He wrote “deeper meaning than we can here fathom”. We as rationale beings can speculate, make assumptions, make inferences, and someone can be as “insistent” as they want to be that “x” means “y”–but knowing that Joseph Smith taught that intelligences (including the intelligence that was formed into the spirit of each and every person) have always existed before they were spirits would mean that there is a spiritual meaning to the word “procreation” whenever it is used talking about spirit birth that we are not going to “fathom” and if we speculate about it, no doubt we are wrong.

 

[scipio337]

…The Catholic Catechism also clearly states that Man may become God, which is their way of saying they become one with Jesus and can share in his divine nature…

Not quite, Todd. There are VERY large and distinct differences between the Catholic doctrine of deification, and the LDS doctrine of “eternal progression”/exaltation.

St. Thomas Aquinas likened this change as to an iron placed in fire. The iron acquires certain accidents common to the nature of fire ( it sheds light, it burns ). But at no point does the iron actually become fire. It’s substance never changes.

 

[lax16]

No, it definitely does not mean what you “think it means.” Here is a link to the set of statements you cited by reference:

lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/godhead/heavenly_mother.html

Here is the final sentence of that set of statements:

"by Elder John A. Widsoe

“In accordance with Gospel philosophy there are males and females in heaven. Since we have a Father, who is our God, we must also have a mother, who possesses the attributes of Godhood. This simply carries onward the logic of things earthly, and conforms with the doctrine that whatever is on this earth is simply a representation of spiritual conditions of deeper meaning than we can here fathom.” (A Rational Theology, p.69)"

He wrote “deeper meaning than we can here fathom”. We as rationale beings can speculate, make assumptions, make inferences, and someone can be as “insistent” as they want to be that “x” means “y”–but knowing that Joseph Smith taught that intelligences (including the intelligence that was formed into the spirit of each and every person) have always existed before they were spirits would mean that there is a spiritual meaning to the word “procreation” whenever it is used talking about spirit birth that we are not going to “fathom” and if we speculate about it, no doubt we are wrong.

Hi Parker - I already read the definition from light planet. In fact, that is where I copied my post from.
I re-read it. It does not answer my question. You say “it does not mean what you think” but then don’t explain to me what it does mean.
From what I am reading, it means that we (you, me, and everyone else) were conceived by God the Father and Heavenly Mother through “marital relations” in Heaven prior to our coming down to earth in humanly form.
Is that right?

 

[lax16]

Yes, it means exactly what you think it means: incest. They won’t tell you that nor do they believe it themselves, but that’s the ultimate result of the Mormon god having a physical body of flesh and bone, him being the literal, physical father of our spirits, and him having literal, physical sex with Mary to produce the Mormon jesus.

There’s really no way around this one.

Returning Home - It also seems to mean that WE were produced through the physical act between Heavenly Father and Mother prior to our earthly existence.

Is that right?

 

[Todd520]

Not quite, Todd. There are VERY large and distinct differences between the Catholic doctrine of deification, and the LDS doctrine of “eternal progression”/exaltation.

St. Thomas Aquinas likened this change as to an iron placed in fire. The iron acquires certain accidents common to the nature of fire ( it sheds light, it burns ). But at no point does the iron actually become fire. It’s substance never changes.

The hot iron is a great analogy, and I believe also applies to the LDS view - we are there by the grace of God

 

[ParkerD]

Hi Parker - I already read the definition from light planet. In fact, that is where I copied my post from.
I re-read it. It does not answer my question. You say “it does not mean what you think” but then don’t explain to me what it does mean.
From what I am reading, it means that we (you, me, and everyone else) were conceived by God the Father and Heavenly Mother through “marital relations” in Heaven prior to our coming down to earth in humanly form.
Is that right?

Lax16,
Answer is “no”. Background for the answer is:

1. Intelligences (yours, mine, everyone’s) always existed. (“Intelligence” can be thought of as a form of “higher energy” or “degree of light”.
2. Your body didn’t always exist. (Not saying you don’t already know that.) It had a beginning through “marital relations” of your parents. Your spirit was placed into your body through a means Heavenly Father knows about, but we don’t. Your spirit existed before your body existed.
3. Your intelligence was placed into your spirit through a means Heavenly Father knows about, but we don’t. It was definitely not by the same “marital relations” process whereby your physical body was formed. When Elder Widstoe said “deeper meaning than we can fathom” I would think that those who read those words are aware that they mean that to speculate about the process is to wander into a subject matter that we wouldn’t be able to “fathom” and therefore wouldn’t understand even if it was explained to us by a divine messenger (but hasn’t been explained).

 

[RebeccaJ]

The hot iron is a great analogy, and I believe also applies to the LDS view - we are there by the grace of God

Except LDS believe in progressing from being a hot iron that glows by the grace of God to being the fire of a god. This is heretical to Christianity.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Except LDS believe in progressing from being a hot iron that glows by the grace of God to being the fire of a god. This is heretical to Christianity.

Well put! The difference is **black **and white. One is very Christian while the other is very anti Christian. The attempt, even the thought of progressing into a god is the very reason we have sin in the entire world. We are here to learn that only God matters. The rest falls into place.

Here is a bit from Saint Augustine, the message he sends here helped bring me closer to Jesus and further away from me. Further away from Mormonism into the Catholic Church. I feel it is appropriate

The Eternal Wisdom
When I was just twenty it gave me great satisfaction that I managed to read, and understand, the Ten Categories of Aristotle without a teacher. I would mention the book at every opportunity, slipping the title in with a touch of awe, smiling to myself when lecturers would comment how difficult it had been for them to answer it.

And much good it did me! Indeed, it was harmful, because it encouraged me to think of You, O Lord, as if you were part of what you had made, instead of being its essence and origin. Sadly, I had my back toward the light and my eyes fixed on the darkness. I could understand without difficulty logic, rhetoric, geometry, music, and arithmetic, but I did not see that my intelligence itself was a gift of God and that all the true things I learned came from him, their source. What advantage was it to me that I had a nimble wit when all the while I turned from good and clung to evil? Little did I realize then how much better off were all those (as I saw them) “simple” souls who lacked my native intelligence but put their trust in God.

www.utahmission.com

 

[Returning_Home]

Regardless of what they say publically…you believe they are lying? Just trying to get a feel of what the consensus among the Catholics and Protestants on this board think…trying to wrap my head around it I guess.

When the LDS officially says one thing…do you and others actually believe they are lying?

The church has lied consistantly about polygamy. Smith was likely practicing polygamy as early as 1833, but he always publicly denounced it. Not only that, the Doctrines and Covenants (D&C hereafter) also refuted the practice.

If the church and its leader both say that something isn’t so when it really is, wouldn’t you call that lying?

Not only that, but when the church finally gave in and ‘gave up’ polygamy, they were *still *practicing it. This is proven by the fact that Joseph F. Smith, Hyrum Smith’s son and Joseph’s nephew, plead guilty to violating Utah’s anti-polygamy statues in 1904 because he fathered 11 children within the confines of polygamy.

This is the thumbnail sketch of Mormon polygamy and its lies about it. There’s a lot more to it, but you get the idea.

Polygamy was also one of the things that resulted in Joseph Smith’s murder.

Funny, though, how the church won’t tell you these things.

 

[Todd520]

Well put! The difference is **black **and white. One is very Christian while the other is very anti Christian. The attempt, even the thought of progressing into a god is the very reason we have sin in the entire world. We are here to learn that only God matters. The rest falls into place.

Catholic-rcia
And here is what the Catholics believe (anyone who studies their Catechism at least)

• Jesus visited earth so that man might become god

Section 460

• The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”:
• “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.”
• "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.
• "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Catholic-rcia
And here is what the Catholics believe (anyone who studies their Catechism at least)

• Jesus visited earth so that man might become god

Todd its all in the translation. I know what Catholics believe and I know what this means. There is a difference between sharing and in being. God will always be my creator, I will always be His creation.
Yes I will be like Christ, but I will never be Christ. I would want this no other way. I know my place in Creation and I am very much content with this place.

Does love come from you Todd? Does love originate from you? Do you posses love? When you do a good dead does this good dead originate from you?

It all comes from Jesus to us as a gift. The gift of being alive. If you make an honest study of what you are quoting you will find that I am right, only because I have been taught well by other Catholics who love their faith, who are in love with Jesus. I get to share in what Jesus has always had within the Holy Trinity. I am adopted into it. Perfection is all about passing Christ’s love on to others giving Him all praise and Glory for the ability to be a part in this. Its His body Todd, we are all parts of it. Without Jesus we would not exist. There is only One God Todd and there will always be one God. Anything else is falling off a cliff. I will come back with more when I get some time. I would stick with what you have posted from the catechism and make sure you get it right. I will help
God Bless
Rich

Father Raoul Plus, S.J. (1882-1958)
Adopted sons and daughters

"This is the campaign that is most urgently needed: to help each and every one to Realize fully, perhaps for the first time, the divine dignity that Baptism confers by engrafting us upon Christ Himself "

Our Lord did not come for the sake of those who are well, but for those who are in need. The soul that is lost interest Him far more than the ninety-nine that are just; the venturesome lamb that has fallen into the pit, far more that the flock that has returned dutifully home; the coin that has rolled behind the furniture, far more than the fortune of the cash-box.

His interest is in the prodigals: Mary Magdalene, the women taken in adultery, Zacchaeus the publican, Simon the Pharisee, Barabbas, and His companions on the cross. The preferences of all Christians should be of the same kind. But what integrity this demands, what moral beauty, what sanctity! Some, perhaps, may be tempted to escape the corrosive or weakening effect of such surroundings by avoiding to much contact with the masses, by seeking only the company of their friends, of those who think like them and to whom they feel more readily attracted. It is so much more pleasant to consort with those who are like you, and with whom you have ideals and interest in common.

Such a method is disastrous. If the leaven is to act upon the mass, it must be mingled with it. If it is separate from the mass, it forgets its proper task. It is a leading axiom in Catholic action not to remove good elements from the surroundings in which they exist, but rather to sanctify them so that they may serve to elevate and improve their fellows. In order to act effectively upon one’s surroundings, one must live in those surroundings; and, given the necessary virtue and power of action, the closer the contact, the greater the influence will be.

It is not literally true that is has been said of us: “You are gods,” and that we are to become “sons of God”? Let us give to these expressions their full Christian meaning. First and foremost, the baptized must learn to appreciate the incomparable privileges they have received by the sacrament which, in making them Christians, has brought the Blessed Trinity to dwell in their souls, and given them power to live the divine life, if only they will, and so long as they will. Let us lift up our heads and bear proudly the proud dignity of our Baptism.

How few of the baptized appreciate the essence of all revelations: that God dwells in the man who is in the state of grace? This is the campaign that is most urgently needed: to help each and every one to Realize fully, perhaps for the first time, the divine dignity that Baptism confers by engrafting us upon Christ Himself making us a living member of the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, communicating to us the very life of the Blessed Trinity, making us partners in the royal priesthood of Christ and His Church, uniting us in a common kinship with all our baptized brethren by this spiritual solidarity, which is the Communion of Saints, consecrating us as living chalices, as living temples to the personal and social worship of the true God.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Lest we forget the silly stuff they said:

“We believe in a God who is Himself progressive, whose majesty is intelligence; whose perfection consists in eternal advancement – a Being who has attained His exalted state by a path which now His children are permitted to follow, whose glory it is their heritage to share. In spite of the opposition of the sects, in the face of direct charges of blasphemy, the Church proclaims the eternal truth: ‘As man is, God once was; as God is, man may be.’” (LDS Apostle James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith, Ch.24, p.430 - p.431, LDS Collectors Library '97 CD-ROM)

" ‘It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God,’ the inspired word continues, ‘and to know that we may converse with Him as one man converses with another, and that He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did.’ The Father is a glorified, perfected, resurrected, exalted man who worked out his salvation by obedience to the same laws he has given to us so that we may do the same." (LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith, p.64, LDS Collectors Library '97 CD-ROM)

“The idea that the Lord our God is not a personage of tabernacle is entirely a mistaken notion. He was once a man. Brother Kimball quoted a saying of Joseph the Prophet, that he would not worship a God who had not a Father; and I do not know that he would if be had not a mother; the one would be as absurd as the other. If he had a Father, he was made in his likeness. And if he is our Father we are made after his image and likeness. He once possessed a body, as we now do; and our bodies are as much to us, as his body to him. Every iota of this organization is necessary to secure for us an exaltation with the Gods.”

• Prophet Brigham Young, True Character of God, Salt Lake Tabernacle, February 23, 1862, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 9, p.286

"What, is it possible that the Father of Heights, the Father of our spirits, could reduce himself and come forth like a man? Yes, he was once a man like you and I are and was once on an earth like this, passed through the ordeal you and I pass through. He had his father and his mother and he has been exalted through his faithfulness, and he is become Lord of all. He is the God pertaining to this earth. He is our Father. He begot our spirits in the spirit world. They have come forth and our earthly parents have organized tabernacles for our spirits and here we are today. That is the way we came.

• Prophet Brigham Young, 14 July 1861, Recorded in “The Essential Brigham Young”, p.138

“That exalted position was made manifest to me at a very early day. I had a direct revelation of this. It was most perfect and complete. If there ever was a thing revealed to man perfectly, clearly, so that there could be no doubt or dubiety, this was revealed to me, and it came in these words: “As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be.” This may appear to some minds as something very strange and remarkable, but it is in perfect harmony with the teachings of Jesus Christ and with His promises.”

• Prophet Lorenzo R. Snow, Unchangeable Love of God, Sunday, September 18, 1898.

 

[SirThomasMore]

“We all know that like begets like and that for the offspring to grow to the stature of his parent is a process infinitely repeated in nature. We can therefore understand that for a son of God to grow to the likeness of his Father in heaven is in harmony with natural law. We see this law demonstrated every few years in our own experience. Sons born to mortal fathers grow up to be like their fathers in the flesh. This is the way it will be with spirit sons of God. They will grow up to be like their Father in heaven. Joseph taught this obvious truth. As a matter of fact, he taught that through this process God himself attained perfection. From President Snow’s understanding of the teachings of the Prophet on this doctrinal point, he coined the familiar couplet: “As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.” This teaching is peculiar to the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.”

• Elder Marion G. Romney, General Conference, October 1964

“Mormonism be it true or false, holds out to men the greatest inducements that the human mind can grasp. And so it does… It teaches men that they can become divine, that man is God in embryo, that God was once man in mortality, and that the only difference between Gods, angels and men is a difference in education and development. Is such a religion to be sneered at? It teaches that the worlds on high, the stars that glitter in the blue vault of heaven, are kingdoms of God, that they were once earths like this, that they have been redeemed and glorified by the same laws, the same principles that are applied to this planet, and by which it will ascend to a perfected and glorified state. It teaches that these worlds are peopled with human beings, God’s sons and daughters, and that every husband and father, may become an Adam, and every wife and mother an Eve, to some future planet.”

• Orson F. Whitney, Divine Evidences of Truthfulness, Y.M.M.I.A. Annual Conference, June 9th, 1895.

God our Heavenly Father is still progressing. While He knows all that is, all that has been, and possibly all things that He designs for the future and what will be in the future, yet He is constantly adding to His dominion, constantly increasing His power, constantly developing in His resources and in His glorious aspirations. This, at least, is our understanding of the condition of our Father in heaven. The thought has been expressed and accepted as a truth, that as we are now, God has been, and as God is now we may be; and if we admit this to be a truth—and I have no disposition to dispute it—then I repeat that even God our Heavenly Father has not reached the ultimatum of His greatness, His power, or His capacity, but that He is continually increasing and expanding in power, in dominion, in glory and in greatness, if I may be permitted to use such terms as these which some people who know no better would call blasphemous, in connection with the Supreme Being, the Father of us all."

• Prophet Joseph F. Smith, Sustaining Each Other in the Gospel, Sunday, February 16, 1896.

---

 

[Todd520]

Todd its all in the translation. I know what Catholics believe and I know what this means. There is a difference between sharing and in being. God will always be my creator, I will always be His creation.

Catholic-rcia, I feel compelled to bring out this quote to remind Catholic readers that there can be a difference between what Doctrine clearly says to an outsider, and what a believer actually believes as official doctrine.

Does love come from you Todd? Does love originate from you? Do you posses love? When you do a good dead does this good dead originate from you?

My hope is that Catholics will become more aware and provide LDS the same courtesy in defining our beliefs. So many threads here are based on Catholics misquoting LDS leaders and doctrine, to their own purpose (mormon bashing)

 

[SirThomasMore]

Catholic-rcia, I feel compelled to bring out this quote to remind Catholic readers that there can be a difference between what Doctrine clearly says to an outsider, and what a believer actually believes as official doctrine.

My hope is that Catholics will become more aware and provide LDS the same courtesy in defining our beliefs. So many threads here are based on Catholics misquoting LDS leaders and doctrine, to their own purpose (mormon bashing)

no…the problem is, your alleged prophets spewed awful stuff so you doscolunt what hurts you and run away from it

I would hate to have prophets like that

 

[Stephen168]

Catholic-rcia, I feel compelled to bring out this quote to remind Catholic readers that there can be a difference between what Doctrine clearly says to an outsider, and what a believer actually believes as official doctrine.

My hope is that Catholics will become more aware and provide LDS the same courtesy in defining our beliefs. So many threads here are based on Catholics misquoting LDS leaders and doctrine, to their own purpose (mormon bashing)

Yes, you have shown that when a 21st century American reads an 1800 year old translation from another language; the 21st century American may not understand what he just read. And the translation may have to be explained to him.

What the non- Mormons assume is that reading a 50-150 year old quote in the same language from the same country would be self explanatory. If they are wrong in their assumption, I think it would be your job to explain the misunderstanding. Of course you also have to realize that many of the non-Mormons are also ex-Mormons and therefore, have a clear understanding of what they are reading.

As someone who has never been Mormon, I assume the ex-Mormons are correct in their understanding until a Mormon can explain a better more rational understanding. I don’t accept yelling “Mormon basher” as a rational counter explanation.

 

[lax16]

Catholic-rcia, I feel compelled to bring out this quote to remind Catholic readers that there can be a difference between what Doctrine clearly says to an outsider, and what a believer actually believes as official doctrine.

My hope is that Catholics will become more aware and provide LDS the same courtesy in defining our beliefs. So many threads here are based on Catholics misquoting LDS leaders and doctrine, to their own purpose (mormon bashing)

Hi Todd - So if I were to post, word for word, copied from an LDS website, quotes from your prophets - that would be *misquoting *LDS leaders and doctrine?
No, it is not misquoting - it is just that the current church is trying to redefine much of the doctrine and do not want to discuss what the founding members have said.
Let’s face it - that early stuff is waaaaay out there!
However, prophets are the mouthpiece of the Lord and JS and BY should be taken at their word.
Can you give an example of an OT prophet that said something that was later changed?