R
- Status
C
CyberAngel
Guest
Did that new teaching go to the latest D&C?
Was it on a journal?
When did you notice that it was changed?
C
CyberAngel
Guest
That’s how I read it
The Lamb of God has to be sacrificed on the Pass Over
Anything else does not fit
the Prophets of Satan excel in lying (starting with J “lustful” Smith
and as a non-denominational
I’m NOT talking about doctrinal differences between Catholics and other Christians
I’m talking about LDS Church (Jesus=brother of Satan)
and the Watch Tower Cults (Jesus=Angel only, not The True God)
People in them need to find the Truth=Jesus in their lives
as well as Jews (Yeshua=prophet) [who could understand the Lamb of God as a concept]
and Muslims (Isa=sinless prophet)
I’m not politically correct
neither was Jesus or Apostle Peter
When a Leader leads into Eternal Death then one must stand up
NOT to mock someones beliefs
BUT to warn them about the Lies of Satan
May the Holy Spirit drive away the “burning of the bosom” spirit of deception
Amen
E
EllieH
Guest
Rebecca, such a funny girl…while I can understand your opinion and it makes a humorous point, it tends to deflect a significant issue. I will push and shove and cajole and invite and encourage in any way I can to get people, of any religion, to become students of scripture and religious writings of worth. I encourage anyone to test their doctrine against the scriptures. What I find is people form opinions, they grasp some dogma and then they quit trying to get a personal understanding and just take someones word on it. I am not excluding the LDS from this list as well.
A religious organization is not Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ must be known for who he is and not what religious organizations claim him to be and you can know him from the pew you sit in if your heart is open to his receipt. Even the organization of which he was a member, Judaism, failed the test and he was ever exhorting them:
I have researched many of your posts of the recent past. I couldn’t find a one where you made the honest effort to use the scriptures to validate your point. You are full of opinion and vitriol and it is obvious that you carry an awful lot of baggage from either your LDS past or it sounds like it began at a much younger age before you could have even understood what LDS meant judging from your comments.
I’m sorry for that. I wish whatever had burdened you so had been less impacting. Still you practically become giddy with delight in doing smackdowns of any LDS contributors you can find. You appear afraid to engage in an intelligent exchange and as best as I can tell you practically never appeal to scripture to address any point you ever made. You, tease and snark and play the part of the bitter rival but there is no substance. I am sure that somewhere beyond all of your posturing and strutting about that there is a wonderful person in there who has the capacity to exhibit love and caring and can illustrate her love of God by appeals to his word.
Do I think I am going to reach you? Judging by your references to your “ignore” list that is probably the best I can hope for. However, regardless, if it is by their fruits that we shall know them, the sour grapes you keep foisting about inform of a few things. Certainly, one can deduce that even your Catholic membership has not been adequately embraced to cause you to be brought to Jesus Christ that you could be healed of the pain and anguish that is manifest.
Stay right where you are, please. You seem to think I am here to attack Catholicism. I haven’t once yet disparaged it in any way. I don’t care if you are Catholic. What is important to me and what I have encouraged in my efforts is summed up by stating that if you are going to be Catholic be a good Catholic. I am convinced that you can find Jesus Christ as well there as anywhere. Search him out, read his scriptures, pray his direction, seek his healing and then, only then will the bitterness, and the biting angst of your heart be softened enough that you can actually love as Christ would love.
The topic at hand is that of Christ marriage and I have pushed, shoved, cajoled, “passive aggressived” or whatever you wish to call it all over the place in hopes of finding one sincere person who is willing to open the pages of their bibles and discover the challenge of really knowing, really understanding what is stated on the subject. You don’t even have to agree with me, I would be excited just to see a real effort at understanding the full subject completely as it is illustrated in the scriptures, because if enough of those kinds of efforts take place on enough different subjects, the scriptures will become your friend and you will have the best chance to come to know Jesus Christ by his word and truly partake of the change of heart that he offers.
I’m am sure you have gone part way on this journey and I do not mean to imply that you are wholly without a knowledge of your Savior but the fruits indicate you have a ways to journey before your heart is softened and the full healing can be felt and reflected in your life. Be a Catholic, be LDS, heck, go be the drummer in some Holy Roller congregation, but in all of your being, be like Jesus Christ and to do that you will need to start with his word. - Go for it, he’s waiting…
H
HonoraDominum
Guest
Ellie: You and I discussed a few posts back about the automatic defensive posturing of Mormons. This would be a very good example of said posturing.
The problem in this situation is that you’ve basically turned this into a “Damned if you do, Damned if you don’t” scenario. Let me clarify - are you familiar with the concept of the Double-Bind? It’s one that, once I learned it, made Mormonism make a lot more sense to me.
Let me give you a common example of the Double-Bind in Mormon culture and apologetics. A Mormon gives me a copy of the Book of Mormon and challenges me to read it cover to cover. Then I am to pray about it, as discussed in Moroni 10: 4-5 - “And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.” So I take it home, and I read it cover to cover.
Then, after I read every word, every syllable, every “and it came to pass”, I set the book down and I pray. I pray devoutly, I pray perseveringly, I pray with as much love and sincerity as I can. One of two things will happen. One, I will get the “Burning in the Bosom” and believe that the words are true. Also, it’s entirely possible that I do not receive this physical manifestation as promised. I go to the Mormon and I say, I did what it said to do, and I did not get an answer. I do not believe it to be true." The Mormon says, “Well, you must not have prayed hard enough.” Or, “Well, you must not have prayed with a sincere heart.” Or, “Well, you must be living with sin, that sin is keeping you from God.” You get the idea.
The Double Bind site explains it better, but let me try to paraphrase. We are told that we must live in faith, in a supernatural (i.e. non-physical) way, and in a way exclusive of rational thought. Yet we are told by the Book of Mormon that there is a physical, sensual “burning in the bosom” evidence of the Book of Mormon’s authenticity. The twist is that it’s actually the reverse. A “burning in the bosom” sensation only happens to our bodies as a manifestation of a real, natural, perception of the brain and conscious which leads to a rational result. This sensation does not occur when our earthly perceptions and our mind are not active.
This is how this specific Double-Bind works:
- If you do have faith and relinquish your brain, you cannot, in reality, reach a confirmation of a truth. The means have been taken away.
- If you don’t have faith, and rely on your brain, you will not find the confirmation of the truth of something that is false.
PaulDupre brought out many different examples of the doctrines mentioned by others as not just being “some members have speculated that …”, but actually taught on the pulpit by early Mormon leaders. This is a tactic often used by ex-Mormons to show some of the reasons why they no longer believe; primarily, that the LDS doctrine is taught differently now than it was in the past, and this inconsistency is proof enough for us that Joseph Smith is not the prophet of God that he claimed to be and that the church is not the true religion of God as it claims to be. In showing this evidence, your defense, among other things, is that you have research and discussed, whereas PaulDupre is on a “different level” (read: not at your “advanced level”), said that he was bringing up “meat” of doctrine out of context and that the information was “material that exceeds [the reader’s] current level of understanding” (read: the Catholics on these boards are not at your “advanced level” either), and then accused him of violating the Milk before Meat doctrine as taught in the New Testament.
This is why this type of argument is a Double-Bind:
- If PaulDupre chooses to admit that these teachings about the plural marriage of Jesus were only “speculative” even though he knows they were more, and he chooses to stay out of the argument by not doing the research, he is going against Self in both his own knowledge and in the knowledge that he knows that exists without research. The lie stands.
- If PaulDupre chooses to show the research, he is obviously not at the “advanced level” you are at because you believe and he does not, he is judged as “twisting meaning” and being “less-than-charitable”, and he has thinly veiled threats made to him about not understanding knowledge that will “ultimately going to cost you your reward”.
H
HonoraDominum
Guest
Okay, now that I’ve got that Double-Bind bit out of my system, let me get to my actual point.
While many doctrines, like the Married Jesus doctrines, are not essential for salvation in the Mormon religion (any more than, say, believing in the personal revelations of Catholic Saints are required as essentials for the salvation of Catholics), there are many older doctrines that were considered doctrines essential for salvation that have changed.
D&C 132 as currently published in the LDS Scripture Canon teaches Celestial Marriage being essential for salvation. Current members say that “Celestial Marriage” is just Temple Marriage and has always been taught as such, but there is much too much evidence to show that “Celestial Marriage” originally meant polygamy when it was revealed to Joseph Smith, not simply Temple Marriage. To see specific historical evidence and discussion about this doctrine as such, please read through to these posts unpacking that chapter of the D&C, Emma’s severely negative reaction to the doctrine, and the First Presidency and the Apostles of the church testifying to the United States Senate of the teaching of “polygamy or Celestial Marriage”.
The doctrine of Celestial Marriage relates very closely to the Married Jesus doctrine. Yes, the Married Jesus doctrine is relatively insignificant in the big picture of things. But this doctrine was taught as evidence of the correctness and necessity of Celestial Marriage for exaltation to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom. When Celestial Marriage was first taught, it was very clearly understood that a) it was necessary for exaltation, and b) it was polygamy. The Married Jesus story says, look, see, Jesus had plural marriages, because he too was bound by the laws that have now been revealed to us. Celestial (polygamous) Marriage is essential for exaltation, which is why Christ got married to multiple wives.
Remember, in D&C 132 it is said that Celestial (polygamous) marriage is the “new and everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.” But now polygamy is no longer considered an essential part of a Celestial Marriage, and is no longer a requirement for salvation in the LDS church. While the concept of polygamy is practiced to this day in temples throughout the world (men being sealed to second wives after their first has passed, etc.), it is no longer taught as being essential for salvation.
Catholics on this board believe that God is the I Am - He does not change, His laws do not change, His nature does not change. Not one of the seven sacraments in the Catholic church has changed since Christ - baptism, communion, confession, etc. There have been multiple liturgical changes, but never a change to the sacraments essential for the salvation of man since Christ taught them to his apostles. And yet, in the Mormon church, many of the doctrines taught as essential for salvation by the original prophets of the church are no longer taught as essential for salvation. According to Mormonism, God can change, and His laws can change. This is completely contradictory to the foundations of Christianity.
While many doctrines, like the Married Jesus doctrines, are not essential for salvation in the Mormon religion (any more than, say, believing in the personal revelations of Catholic Saints are required as essentials for the salvation of Catholics), there are many older doctrines that were considered doctrines essential for salvation that have changed.
D&C 132 as currently published in the LDS Scripture Canon teaches Celestial Marriage being essential for salvation. Current members say that “Celestial Marriage” is just Temple Marriage and has always been taught as such, but there is much too much evidence to show that “Celestial Marriage” originally meant polygamy when it was revealed to Joseph Smith, not simply Temple Marriage. To see specific historical evidence and discussion about this doctrine as such, please read through to these posts unpacking that chapter of the D&C, Emma’s severely negative reaction to the doctrine, and the First Presidency and the Apostles of the church testifying to the United States Senate of the teaching of “polygamy or Celestial Marriage”.
The doctrine of Celestial Marriage relates very closely to the Married Jesus doctrine. Yes, the Married Jesus doctrine is relatively insignificant in the big picture of things. But this doctrine was taught as evidence of the correctness and necessity of Celestial Marriage for exaltation to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom. When Celestial Marriage was first taught, it was very clearly understood that a) it was necessary for exaltation, and b) it was polygamy. The Married Jesus story says, look, see, Jesus had plural marriages, because he too was bound by the laws that have now been revealed to us. Celestial (polygamous) Marriage is essential for exaltation, which is why Christ got married to multiple wives.
Remember, in D&C 132 it is said that Celestial (polygamous) marriage is the “new and everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.” But now polygamy is no longer considered an essential part of a Celestial Marriage, and is no longer a requirement for salvation in the LDS church. While the concept of polygamy is practiced to this day in temples throughout the world (men being sealed to second wives after their first has passed, etc.), it is no longer taught as being essential for salvation.
Catholics on this board believe that God is the I Am - He does not change, His laws do not change, His nature does not change. Not one of the seven sacraments in the Catholic church has changed since Christ - baptism, communion, confession, etc. There have been multiple liturgical changes, but never a change to the sacraments essential for the salvation of man since Christ taught them to his apostles. And yet, in the Mormon church, many of the doctrines taught as essential for salvation by the original prophets of the church are no longer taught as essential for salvation. According to Mormonism, God can change, and His laws can change. This is completely contradictory to the foundations of Christianity.
J
Jerusha
Guest
Wait!! There is more!! There were also teachings that Jesus and the Apostles were polygamists. And there is even more!! …
E
EllieH
Guest
Fabulous…this is a responsible well reasoned post and I appreciate your well thought presentation. This weekend is time tight for me but come Monday and if the ban warnings don’t get me before then I’ll address your observations. Again, excellent, excellent response.
C
Chris-WA
Guest
Thus far the only biblical argument made by LDS posters on this thread in support of their belief that Jesus was married can be summarized as this:
There is no commandment from God that every man and woman ever born must get married and have children. Most do, as is their vocation in life, but not all. Not even every LDS person gets married. Does this mean they are breaking God’s commandments?
The bottom line is this–if Jesus Christ was married to a woman or to mulitple women, it would have said so in scripture or at least in historical documents. There would be records. That information is just too important to have been omitted. I guess if you’re a conspiracy theorist you might argue that this information was purposefully hidden (any Da Vinci Coders out there?), but hiding that kind of important information would have been extremely difficult.
- God commanded Adam and Eve to be fruitfull and multiply.
- Chris was obedient to the Father, therefore He must have obeyed this command Himself by getting married.
There is no commandment from God that every man and woman ever born must get married and have children. Most do, as is their vocation in life, but not all. Not even every LDS person gets married. Does this mean they are breaking God’s commandments?
The bottom line is this–if Jesus Christ was married to a woman or to mulitple women, it would have said so in scripture or at least in historical documents. There would be records. That information is just too important to have been omitted. I guess if you’re a conspiracy theorist you might argue that this information was purposefully hidden (any Da Vinci Coders out there?), but hiding that kind of important information would have been extremely difficult.
C
campeador
Guest
I guess the Holy Spirit is outta luck?
P
Publisher
Guest
I believe there is some speculation that the Holy Spirit will eventually receive a body…perhaps in the resurrection…and there by continue as a member of the Godhead. It’s been a long time since I’ve studied LDS beliefs…but that’s what I remember…and that may be faulty.I guess the Holy Spirit is outta luck?
J
Janderich
Guest
While it is not LDS doctrine the Jesus was married I do think there are a few other pieces of evidence that may support the case.
One involves the laws and customs at the time. From Judaism 101:
There is also an interesting comment from Bruce R. McConkie about the marriage at Cana. He said:
It seems likely that Jesus and Mary were at least closely related to or knew very well the bride and/or groom.
Z
Zulfiqar
Guest
As a former Mormon, I hope I can clear this up.
There are MANY MANY gods. The main god is “Heavenly Father”. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are other gods, but lesser gods. To become a god, you must be married in a celestial marriage. So Jesus WAS married, but not on this planet. He was married on his original planet where he was originally born and earned exaltation (godhood).
You won’t find this outright preached. It’s one of those “deep doctrinal” issues that you only learn about when you go to the temple.
There are MANY MANY gods. The main god is “Heavenly Father”. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are other gods, but lesser gods. To become a god, you must be married in a celestial marriage. So Jesus WAS married, but not on this planet. He was married on his original planet where he was originally born and earned exaltation (godhood).
You won’t find this outright preached. It’s one of those “deep doctrinal” issues that you only learn about when you go to the temple.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
K
KathleenGee
Guest
As usual, thanks again to Paul DuPre for bringing to light documented Mormon beliefs.
C
campeador
Guest
Again, where does the Holy spirit fit in? He couldn’t have become a god because by definition he has no body and can’t be married.
C
campeador
Guest
But, to become a god, one must be married. And to be married one must have a body.
Z
Zulfiqar
Guest
Don’t ask me!Again, where does the Holy spirit fit in? He couldn’t have become a god because by definition he has no body and can’t be married.
I said I was a Mormon. That doesn’t mean I understood any of it! lol I was a kid . . . And I am so grateful that my family is not Mormon anymore. It’s crazy, man. And when you’re so brainwashed into it, you don’t realize how ridiculous it is until you look at it from an outside perspective.
L
lax16
Guest
Hi Janderich - Why would a Mormon do this if they didn’t feel strongly that it was true?
Jesus Christ was baptized and “sealed” to Mary Magdelene
By Helen Radkey © Copyright 2010, Helen Radkey June 1, 2010
Jesus of Nazareth, also known as Jesus Christ, or simply Jesus, is the central figure of Christianity. The life and sermons of Jesus form the basis of the Christian faith. Jesus Christ is recognized by believing Christians as God incarnate, the Son of God who was raised from the dead—the Redeemer of mankind—the most important figure in history.
According to Mormon doctrine, Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world. However, it seems that even the perceived Savior of the world is not exempt from LDS temple rituals. Proxy rites for Jesus Christ were performed in the Salt Lake (LDS) Temple in Utah, in April 2010. The Salt Lake Temple, located on Temple Square in the heart of Mormon-dominated Salt Lake City, was dedicated on April 6, 1893—three years before Utah became a state in 1896—and is one of the oldest of the 132 currently operating temples that are owned and maintained by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS.)
New FamilySearch is the online genealogy database of the LDS Church that contains updated details of LDS temple ordinances that have been done for dead people. There are multiple listings for Jesus Christ in New FamilySearch—under different versions of his identity—which have been submitted by individual Mormons. It is not known how many times Jesus has been subjected to LDS rites because all New FamilySearch records for him—including combined records—show LDS ordinance details as “Not Available.”
On May 27, 2010, there were two similar records for Jesus in New FamilySearch which had been submitted by the same person. One listing was titled “Jesus Christian,” and showed “Jesus Christian” was born “before 1500 Bethlehem, Israel,” and died “before 1550 Jerusalem, Israel.” LDS ordinances were tagged as “Not available” on this record. The other entry was for “Jesus Cristian,” who was born “before 1502 Bethlehem, Israel,” and died “before 1539 Jerusalem, Israel.” The entry for “Jesus Cristian” gave a description of LDS ordinances, along with the name of a spouse—“Maria Magdelena.”
“Jesus Cristian” was baptized and confirmed a member of the LDS Church by proxy on April 8, 2010 in the “Salt Lake City Utah Temple.” “Jesus Cristian” was also subjected to initiatory temple ordinances on April 8, 2010; an endowment ceremony on April 9, 2010; and a marriage “sealing” to “spouse” “Maria Magdelena” on April 9, 2010—all rites occurred in the “Salt Lake City Utah Temple.”
It appears the submissions for “Jesus Christian,” and “Jesus Cristian” were attempts to manipulate the identity of Jesus Christ through the LDS temple system. The misspelled “Cristian,” instead of “Christian,” could have been a typo, or a deliberate error. It may have been intentionally entered as “Cristian” to get around a computer program that automatically blocks submissions that contain the names “Jesus Christ.” That would explain why the entry for “Jesus Christian” shows LDS ordinances as “Not available.”
While both New FamilySearch records in question lack complete birth and death data, and give imprecise “before” years of these events—the first name “Jesus” combined with the surnames “Christian” and “Cristian” (both spins on the name of “Christ”) are signs that “Jesus Christian” and “Jesus Cristian” are pseudonyms for Jesus Christ.
Other indicators on the New FamilySearch records that point to Jesus Christ are the birth place, “Bethlehem,” and the death location, “Jerusalem.” (Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem and died outside the walls of old Jerusalem.) Another clue to the identity of “Jesus Cristian” is the name of his “spouse”—“Maria Magdelena,” a misspelled variant of Mary Magdalene. “Maria Magdelena” is not listed on the “Jesus Christian” record.
Because “Jesus Christian” and “Jesus Cristian” have similar names and identical birth and death locations—“Bethlehem” and “Jerusalem,” they are probably the same person. Their birth and death years are similar, but not the same. The estimated dates listed for these events look like they have been fabricated. According to their New FamilySearch records, “Jesus Christian” and “Jesus Cristian” were born and died in the 16th century. “Jesus Christian” lived roughly 50 years, while “Jesus Cristian” died in his thirties.
On May 27, 2010, “Maria Magdelena” was listed in New FamilySearch with her birth date as “1504 Israel,” and death date as “before 1540 Israel.” Both years are likely inventions. Along with “spouse” “Jesus Cristian,” “Maria Magdelena” was baptized and confirmed a member of the LDS Church by proxy on April 8, 2010 in the “Salt Lake City Utah Temple.” She was subjected to initiatory temple ordinances on April 8, 2010; an endowment ceremony on April 9, 2010; and the marriage “sealing” to “Jesus Cristian” on April 9, 2010—all rites were done in the “Salt Lake City Utah Temple.”
Mary Magdalene is described in the New Testament as a faithful follower of Jesus. Because the concept of marriage is strongly emphasized in LDS teachings, the notion that a spousal relationship existed between Jesus and Mary Magdalene is common among Mormons—although that belief is not formal LDS doctrine. There is no reliable historical evidence to indicate that Jesus was married—to Mary Magdalene, or anyone else.
LDS Church officials have publicly stated that the New FamilySearch program is a technological deterrent to improper submissions. Yet—under their very noses—on Temple Square in Salt Lake City, Jesus Christ—under a false name—two millennia after his birth, was offered Mormon salvation and an erroneous eternal marriage sealing.
Sometime late in the day on May 27, 2010, the individual entries for “Jesus Cristian” and “Maria Magdelena” were scrubbed from New FamilySearch—concealing the evidence that LDS rites had recently been performed for these two names in the Salt Lake Temple. The sudden disappearance of these records is a strong indication that “Jesus Cristian” and “Maria Magdelena” represent Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene.
© Copyright 2010, Helen Radkey—Permission is granted to reproduce, provided content is not changed and this copyright notice is included.
L
lax16
Guest
- Status