Conversion to Mormonism?

[twopekinguys]

So let me see if I understand this. The context of the discussion being resurrection of the dead, means Paul didn’t say Jesus was the second Adam?

Alma

Read the entire chapter, and you tell me.

Context is everything.

ETA: Trust me, it doesn’t say what you want it to.

 

[Stephen168]

If he says, “Thus saith the Lord” it qualifies.

And if he doesn’t say it, it also qualifies

Is it really that difficult to follow along?

It is easy to follow along but you didn’t answer the question
Ezra Taft Benson:

Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.

God’s revelation to Adam did not instruct Noah how to build the Ark. Noah needed his own revelation. Therefore the most important prophet so far as you and I are concerned is the one living in our day and age to whom the Lord is currently revealing His will for us. Therefore the most important reading we can do is any of the words of the prophet contained each month in our Church Magazines. Our instructions about what we should do for each six months are found in the General Conference addresses which are printed in the Church magazine.

Beware of those who would set up the dead prophets against the living prophets, for the living prophets always take precedence.

God can be whatever the current ‘prophet’ says he is.

 

[Alma147]

So, the ban on blacks was evidently a “Thus saith the Lord” moment, and the reversal evidently was also.

Actually, neither was. They both were concerned with policy rather than doctrine. As Brigham Young noted, “With regard to the Bible, we frequently say we believe the Bible; but circumstances alter cases, for what is now required of the people may not be required of a people that may live a hundred years hence.”

Which prophet was right, and which one is under the bus?

Circumstances altered cases–enabling both to be right.

God doesn’t change his mind, he is the same now as he was, and will be the same always. At least the Christian God.

“And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything? …Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip:” (Luke 22:35-36)

Hmmmm.

Alma

 

[Stephen168]

1 Corinthians 15:45-47
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; **the last Adam **was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

Is this what Brigham Young meant when he said Adam was God?

 

[Alma147]

Is this what Brigham Young meant when he said Adam was God?

I think it may be related.

Alma

 

[Stephen168]

I think it may be related.

You think?

 

[LivingWaters7]

Actually, neither was. They both were concerned with policy rather than doctrine.

"The attitude of the Church with reference to the Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the Priesthood at the present time.-Letter of the First Presidency, 1949
signaturebookslibrary.org/?p=457

 

[Stephen168]

Circumstances altered cases–enabling both to be right.

What changed in regard to the curse of Canaan?

 

[TexanKnight]

There are a couple of ways: When he says, “Thus saith the Lord,” when he submits his teaching to the Church to be canonized, and third, when his words are witnessed to us by the Holy Spirit.

Alma

except other prophets have said that phrase is not needed.

Oops!

 

[twopekinguys]

Actually, neither was. They both were concerned with policy rather than doctrine. As Brigham Young noted, “With regard to the Bible, we frequently say we believe the Bible; but circumstances alter cases, for what is now required of the people may not be required of a people that may live a hundred years hence.”

Circumstances altered cases–enabling both to be right.

“And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything? …Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip:” (Luke 22:35-36)

Hmmmm.

Alma

Now there is some convoluted reasoning.

See LW7’s response. I think it is much more reasoned. (and substantiated)

 

[TexanKnight]

Do you have problems with dyslexia? If you’ll read what I actually wrote, you’ll see that I said, that Paul said “God was Adam.” When asked to cite a chapter and verse I did so. That passage validates what I claimed–even though people want to disregard it. In that passage, does Paul refer to Jesus as Adam? In case you might really be struggling with dyslexia, I’ll help you: The last Adam = the second man is the Lord from heaven.

Is the Lord from heaven Jesus Christ? Is Jesus Christ God?

If your answer to those two questions is “Yes,” then Paul called God “the last Adam.”

Second Adam = Lord from heaven
Lord from heaven = Jesus Christ
Jesus Christ = God
God = Second Adam

Paul called Jesus Christ “the second Adam.” Therefore, Paul called God Adam. It’s really not that hard.

Alma

Only if you do gymnastics. It does NOT say what you need it to say, despite your insults.

And, if you read the whole chapter, you will understand that.

It is this kind of twisting of Scripture that led js astray in the first place

 

[TexanKnight]

"The attitude of the Church with reference to the Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the Priesthood at the present time.-Letter of the First Presidency, 1949
signaturebookslibrary.org/?p=457

darn! Facts are not helpful!

 

[twopekinguys]

Couple of quotes from the “gospel principles” manual. (emphasis mine)

“We should follow his inspired teachings completely.”

“Thou shalt give heed unto all his [the prophet’s] words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

So, does this only apply while they’re living? Then viola, new revelation comes, and things get changed?

Found it here.

 

[Porknpie]

Thanks LW! I’ve added two new books to my wish list. Brant Pitre’s book is already on my stack.

Brant Pitre’s book is outstanding.

A youtube link to a one hour talk on the subject of the book is here. He gives a great perspective as to why the Jewish converts to Christianity so readily believed in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

Highly recommend watching the video, then reading the book.

PnP

 

[Telstar]

So let me see if I understand this. The context of the discussion being resurrection of the dead, means Paul didn’t say Jesus was the second Adam?

Alma

Paul did say that Jesus was the “second Adam”. I think you know very well that Paul was not saying that Jesus was literally Adam. He was making an analogy. If you truly can’t understand the concept of an analogy, then perhaps that would explain why you can’t seem to understand what Paul really meant. But, my opinion is that you simply choose to feign ignorance while being fully aware of the truth. Sorry to disappoint you, but I don’t buy it. I don’t think you’re that ignorant, but I could be wrong.

 

[taylorf]

Actually, neither was. They both were concerned with policy rather than doctrine.

Just the response I expected. See LivingWaters7 response. Don’t you think the First Presidency would have been guided by the Holy Ghost when crafting an official statement?

Circumstances altered cases–enabling both to be right.

So blacks were not valiant spirits at one time but then later became valiant just because social views were changing? All prophets are right even though they contradict, or even, disavow another? Sounds like Christ has done a brilliant job revealing eternal truths to his “chosen” leaders.

Praise God I left this church.

 

[taylorf]

So let me see if I understand this. The context of the discussion being resurrection of the dead, means Paul didn’t say Jesus was the second Adam?

Alma

I think you’re the only one on the internet using these verses to claim that Paul is referring to Adam as God. Please provide a valid reference for this interpretation. I googled it but couldn’t find anything credible.

 

[TexanKnight]

Just the response I expected. See LivingWaters7 response. Don’t you think the First Presidency would have been guided by the Holy Ghost when crafting an official statement?

So blacks were not valiant spirits at one time but then later became valiant just because social views were changing? All prophets are right even though they contradict, or even, disavow another? Sounds like Christ has done a brilliant job revealing eternal truths to his “chosen” leaders.

Praise God I left this church.

All you have to remember is the LDS “god” makes decisions based on money.

cancelling polygamy and blacks getting the priesthood after lds prophets had made horribly racist comments for years are just two examples.

but there are other examples. One of my all-time favorites is the lds god telling mormons that they HAD to pay for and build a house for js.

Of course, js is the one who told them that god had ordered them to build his house.

I love that…

 

[zaffiroborant]

I already answered that question before…

I read your response which is nothing more than, I don’t like Catholic rituals I like Mormon rituals. Had to scramble away from your criticism of Catholic ritual when you realized that the Mormon church is hoisted on it’s own petard when it comes to rituals.

As to Mormon rituals being similar to Jewish temple rituals I’m afraid I can’t accept your simple assertion that this is the case. Until you are willing to accurately describe your rituals and show where they are similar to Jewish rituals you refer to your assertions are worthless.

 

[taylorf]

All you have to remember is the LDS “god” makes decisions based on money.

cancelling polygamy and blacks getting the priesthood after lds prophets had made horribly racist comments for years are just two examples.

but there are other examples. One of my all-time favorites is the lds god telling mormons that they HAD to pay for and build a house for js.

Of course, js is the one who told them that god had ordered them to build his house.

I love that…

Yep, I’m with you. Joseph didn’t invest a single penny into his own cause. Just made others sell their possessions to support him. Sounds like a true disciple of Christ.