Is Mormonism a Polytheistic religion?

[catholic-rcia]

QUOTE:

In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods**;** and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it . . .

Now, I ask all who hear me, why the learned men who are preaching salvation, say that God created the heavens and the earth out of nothing? The reason is that they are unlearned in the things of God, and have not the gift of the Holy Ghost; they account it blasphemy in any one to contradict their idea. If you tell them that God made the world out of something, they will call you a fool. But I am learned, and know more than all the world put together. The Holy Ghost does, anyhow, and He is within me, and comprehends more than all the world and I will associate myself with Him.

END QUOTE

From Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, cited previously, pp. 349-350

Megalomania?

Smith goes on to say that God didn’t create out of nothing**;** He “organized elements” which are matter**;** everything, including the Spirit, is matter. We just can’t see it at this time. (For more on this, see my thread on “All Spirit is Matter,” currently active.)

Yes, Mormonism is a polytheistic religion. They claim not**;** there are other Gods, but they are only concerned with the Earth God, so that makes them monotheists. It makes them henotheists at best.

They redefine words, and deny old doctrines and invent new ones, to make their religion appear Christian.

Jim Dandy

Jim
Does the following seem to have the same tone? Does it sound like the same person to you? For me,…… gives me chills.

Genesis:

“Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the animals that the LORD God had made. The serpent asked the woman, “Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?”

The woman answered the serpent: "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden;

it is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, ‘You shall not eat it or even touch it, lest you die.’"

But the serpent said to the woman: "You certainly will not die!

(But I am learned, and know more than all the world put together).

No, God knows well that the moment you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods who know what is good and what is bad."

(But I am learned, and know more than all the world put together.)

 

[ParkerD]

Shouldn’t you also add “as far as this earth or this earth’s universe is concerned”? I don’t think He could be omnipotent over another god’s universe, because that would not be omnipotent. He would be sharing his omnipotence with another god.

True Christians believe that God is omnipotent over ALL, everything that ever was and ever will be, period. No exceptions.

Rainman10,

I can’t help it if you don’t understand the concept of Oneness or the concept of being entrusted. Sorry–'can’t help. I already tried.

I have agreed that God is omnipotent over ALL, everything that ever was and ever will be (from our vantage point, which is the only basis we have to say that). As far as Oneness and being entrusted, there are no exceptions, period. There is only one Way–no other.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Rainman10,

I can’t help it if you don’t understand the concept of Oneness or the concept of being entrusted. Sorry–'can’t help. I already tried.

I have agreed that God is omnipotent over ALL, everything that ever was and ever will be (from our vantage point, which is the only basis we have to say that). As far as Oneness and being entrusted, there are no exceptions, period. There is only one Way–no other.

Thus the Holy Trinity
I myself have already been helped by the Catholic Church so all is well…I know Jesus.

There are different kinds of spiritual gifts but the same Spirit;

there are different forms of service but the same Lord; there are different workings but the same God who produces all of them in everyone. To each individual the manifestation of the Spirit is given for some benefit. To one is given through the Spirit the expression of wisdom; to another the expression of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit; to another mighty deeds; to another prophecy; to another discernment of spirits; to another varieties of tongues; to another interpretation of tongues. But one and the same Spirit produces all of these, distributing them individually to each person as he wishes. As a body is one though it has many parts, and all the parts of the body, though many, are one body, so also Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free persons, and we were all given to drink of one Spirit. Now the body is not a single part, but many. If a foot should say, “Because I am not a hand I do not belong to the body,” it does not for this reason belong any less to the body. Or if an ear should say, “Because I am not an eye I do not belong to the body,” it does not for this reason belong any less to the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? But as it is, God placed the parts, each one of them, in the body as he intended. If they were all one part, where would the body be? But as it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, “I do not need you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I do not need you.” Indeed, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are all the more necessary, and those parts of the body that we consider less honorable we surround with greater honor, and our less presentable parts are treated with greater propriety, whereas our more presentable parts do not need this. But God has so constructed the body as to give greater honor to a part that is without it, so that there may be no division in the body, but that the parts may have the same concern for one another. If (one) part suffers, all the parts suffer with it; if one part is honored, all the parts share its joy. **Now you are Christ’s body, and individually parts of it. **

---

---

(TRINITY)

 

[zach_dunn]

Zach,

I felt like I had answered those questions in my conversation. For us to arrive at gaining exaltation through what Christ offered us, means at some point being granted “omniscience” and “omnipotence” but only after we have proven ourselves completely, absolutely trustworthy and “at one” with Heavenly Father and the Savior. It means being in complete agreement at all times forever, meaning of course no “power struggle” or any sense of comparison about “power” or “knowledge” or “who loves the most”. It is reaching the pinnacle that is obtainable–there is nothing beyond that pinnacle. It means the “power” (omnipotence) is jointly held because of being entrusted with it by Them and being in complete agreement at all times about its use, purposes, and the love that it embraces and holds as its source and its effects.

So the above answers your last question also.

OK, I understand what you mean a little better. But the fact remains: there cannot, by the laws of logic and common sense, be two wholly omnipotent beings. Even if they did always agree, it’s simply not possible because the definition of omnipotence is “having unlimited power”; you cannot have two beings with unlimited power. Period.

Also, for some reason I linked to my post #146 incorrectly. So I’ll ask you directly here: if Jesus was not made but begotten, why are we not considered begotten, too? Jesus is begotten by sexual relations between the Father and His goddess wife, right? And if we are too, why are we considered “created” and not “begotten”?

Also, I’m still not getting a direct answer out of you, ParkerD. I want a clear “yes” or “no” because this has a direct relation to the question of the thread: does Mormonism teach that there are more gods than the Father, Jesus, and the Spirit? Yes or no.

 

[1voice]

1Voice,

If you read the conversation about this with “Cradle2Grave”, then see the long quote I posted from the King Follett Discourse by Joseph Smith (but a transcription from notes, so not necessarily word perfect of what he said).

“Multiverses” is a term used in some writings by scientists. I don’t have the scientific background to understand the ramifications, but simply put it is about either “string theory” for universes or about “black holes” and what they might be, or the conclusion that energy equations dealing with our universe don’t make sense unless there is some hidden entity and force field or gravitational pull or super-orbit energy relationship that makes the equations balance.

That term isn’t used as a part of “LDS theology”. I think it can be used, based on current scientific inquiry about our universe, to understand in our thought processes how it could be possible that there could be enough “space” in the universes that there could be millions of “earths” that are habitable like our earth, and that the possibility of being entrusted with “rule over the nations” as John was inspired to write in Revelation, and “ruler over many things” as the Savior said in His parable of the talents, could relate to other universes besides this one we are familiar with.

It is a foreign concept to me that God the Father or “Heavenly Father” as you call him would himself have a Father. Is that belief part of LDS theology?

 

[KathleenGee]

We Catholics already have voiced your concern many times, 1voice…

 

[ParkerD]

It is a foreign concept to me that God the Father or “Heavenly Father” as you call him would himself have a Father. Is that belief part of LDS theology?

1voice,

It can be inferred, or it can be left out of being speculated about. It is not “part of LDS theology” because it is not a defined teaching one way or the other. Here is a great statement by Elder Bruce R McConkie in 1969:

"So if we are going to speak of the condescension of God, meaning that of our Eternal Father, we must first know the nature and kind of being he is. We must come to know the dignity and majesty and glory that attend him, of the things that he had and is doing for us and for all his children and in all eternity among all his creations.

Now we have had revealed to us knowledge about God and his work and his ministry. We understand that he is a personal being in whose image man is created; that he is glorified, perfected, and exalted; that he has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; that he has progressed and advanced through an infinite period until he has become the Creator of the universe and all things therein.

He has ordained the laws by which all things exist. He has established everything pertaining to this world and an infinite number of worlds that roll in space. In our finite and temporal condition, we have no way of measuring, no way of understanding, no way of comprehending the majesty and glory and dominion and might and power and exaltation that attend him. We can read the words of the revelations and get a slight understanding, as far as mortal man quickened by the Spirit can, of what is involved. But his might and his dominion, his status and his position, are so far above anything that we can comprehend or understand, that we can but envision it slightly. With it all he has acquired the fulness of every good and godly attribute. He is the embodiment of charity and knowledge, of faith and power, of integrity and uprightness, of every attribute that is righteous and edifying.

When we think of him, we think of the most noble and exalted being there is." (Source:
lds.org/new-era/1984/12/behold-the-condescension-of-god?lang=eng&query=Only+Begotten+Son+Bruce+R+McConkie+Brigham+Young+University

 

[RebeccaJ]

Joseph Smith taught that the god he called “heavenly father” has father. Modern Mormons know this teaching sets them outside of Christianity, so they choose to tell non-Mormons that “we don’t teach that”…which is a lie. Or, they might say something along the lines that it has a lesser importance in relationship to their other teachings.

 

[ParkerD]

OK, I understand what you mean a little better. But the fact remains: there cannot, by the laws of logic and common sense, be two wholly omnipotent beings. Even if they did always agree, it’s simply not possible because the definition of omnipotence is “having unlimited power”; you cannot have two beings with unlimited power. Period.

Zach,

I realize that it’s not possible according to the belief that two Beings cannot be in complete and total agreement on everything, but that then goes against what Jesus prayed about and taught about concerning being “One” with His Father and our being able to become “One” with Them. It is certainly not humanly possible, nor humanly thinkable because we just aren’t going to grasp that there can be that kind of unity within the hearts and minds and wills of more than One Being.

Omnipotence coupled with perfect love, if I think about those meanings, would logically proceed toward the omnipotence being shared, being entrusted to others, because the perfect love would absolutely mean there is a yearning to share, and a yearning to provide the fullness of joy.

…if Jesus was not made but begotten, why are we not considered begotten, too? Jesus is begotten by sexual relations between the Father and His goddess wife, right? And if we are too, why are we considered “created” and not “begotten”?

I really don’t like to re-post your question because of the disrespect in the words, but I left it as is.

Answer to question 2, "not right–wrong, completely. Jesus was the Only Begotten Son while in the spirit world and was in the “bosom of the Father”, and we simply don’t know the “how” of how He is the Only Begotten Son in that sphere, but know that He is the Only Begotten Son in this earthly sphere. There is no implication of “relations” that brought about a spirit body, for Him or for us. We don’t know what the organizing process was. We know that He is the Firstborn in the spirit and the preeminent One by an infinite magnitude of preeminence over all the other spirits.

Also, I’m still not getting a direct answer out of you, ParkerD. I want a clear “yes” or “no” because this has a direct relation to the question of the thread: does Mormonism teach that there are more gods than the Father, Jesus, and the Spirit? Yes or no.

I have said several times that there is at least a two paragraph answer to that question, so a “yes” or “no” answer doesn’t suffice–it doesn’t provide context and so it is absolutely misleading to answer with a “yes” or a “no”.

John had his vision where he knew for sure that there those who become joint heirs with Christ, who have “power over the nations” and inherit “all things”. To you, that can mean whatever it means within the connotation you give it. To me, it means that when Jesus prayed that we and all His disciples could be “one” with Him and with His Father, that He knew what He was praying about and knew what His mission was and knew that He had a specific mission to be our Advocate, so He was advocating for us at that time, that if we choose we could be “one” with Them. That means to inherit by being a “joint heir” that power, that glory, that He inherits by His perfection and by His being the Only Begotten Son. So with that, you fill in the blank of how you want to describe being “One” and having “power” and inheriting “all things”.

 

[stokemeister]

Pretty close to me. I joined the church at age 21 (1994), served a mission to California. Married in the temple. Mostly served in the EQ, 1st Counselor and President.

Im currently “stuck” in the church due to my wife and child.

Different than me. Joined the church at age 18, served a mission to Boston. Yet to be married. Mostly served in EQ.

Absolutely love being Mormon and being part of the community, warts and all. Have studied the history, difficult questions of Mormonism with great effort and has ultimately increased my faith that God’s hand is looking over it all but man is free as well to be stupid at times and then repent.

 

[stokemeister]

My answer to the original question and various conversations on this thread.

In the Mormon doctrine in this regard…

Different than traditional belief/doctrine of contemporary Judeo-Christian faiths…yes.

Absolutely without peers in Christian history or without compelling arguments by non-Mormon historians…not at all.

At complete odds with the Bible…no.

Was the Mormon belief based primarily on biblical passages…no.

Does this make Mormons un-Christian…no, clearly a Christ centered theology just different.

 

[RebeccaJ]

My answer to the original question and various conversations on this thread.

In the Mormon doctrine in this regard…

Different than traditional belief/doctrine of contemporary Judeo-Christian faiths…yes.

Absolutely without peers in Christian history or without compelling arguments by non-Mormon historians…not at all.

At complete odds with the Bible…no.

Was the Mormon belief based primarily on biblical passages…no.

Does this make Mormons un-Christian…no, clearly a Christ centered theology just different.

Yes, “a Christ”, but not Who Christians worship.

 

[1voice]

1voice,

It can be inferred, or it can be left out of being speculated about. It is not “part of LDS theology” because it is not a defined teaching one way or the other. Here is a great statement by Elder Bruce R McConkie in 1969:

"So if we are going to speak of the condescension of God, meaning that of our Eternal Father, we must first know the nature and kind of being he is. We must come to know the dignity and majesty and glory that attend him, of the things that he had and is doing for us and for all his children and in all eternity among all his creations.

Now we have had revealed to us knowledge about God and his work and his ministry. We understand that he is a personal being in whose image man is created; that he is glorified, perfected, and exalted; that he has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; that he has progressed and advanced through an infinite period until he has become the Creator of the universe and all things therein.

He has ordained the laws by which all things exist. He has established everything pertaining to this world and an infinite number of worlds that roll in space. In our finite and temporal condition, we have no way of measuring, no way of understanding, no way of comprehending the majesty and glory and dominion and might and power and exaltation that attend him. We can read the words of the revelations and get a slight understanding, as far as mortal man quickened by the Spirit can, of what is involved. But his might and his dominion, his status and his position, are so far above anything that we can comprehend or understand, that we can but envision it slightly. With it all he has acquired the fulness of every good and godly attribute. He is the embodiment of charity and knowledge, of faith and power, of integrity and uprightness, of every attribute that is righteous and edifying.

When we think of him, we think of the most noble and exalted being there is." (Source:
lds.org/new-era/1984/12/behold-the-condescension-of-god?lang=eng&query=Only+Begotten+Son+Bruce+R+McConkie+Brigham+Young+University

How does the above quote support the inference that “Heavenly Father” also has a Father.

 

[ParkerD]

How does the above quote support the inference that “Heavenly Father” also has a Father.

That was my point. It doesn’t, and it is a far more detailed statement than has ever been attributed to Joseph Smith.

 

[1voice]

That was my point. It doesn’t, and it is a far more detailed statement than has ever been attributed to Joseph Smith.

Which Mormon leaders first introduced the concept that … 'Heavenly Father" having a Father … can be inferred by faithful members of the LSD Faith?

 

[Jim_Dandy]

Index to Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (previously cited):

QUOTE:

*GOD *. . . our God has a father, 369, 373

Page 369:*

Sermon by the Prophet–The Christian Godhead–Plurality of Gods*

Meeting in the Grove, east of the Temple, June 16, 1844

President Joseph Smith read the 3rd chapter of Revelation, and took for his text 1st chapter, 6th verse – “And hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father: to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.” . . ." (emphasis mine). This seems to be an error in the KJV - a misplaced pronoun.

END QUOTE

St. John was writing about Jesus. The text refers to HIS (Jesus’) God and Father. By failing to include the prior verses or explaining who the pronouns referred to, Smith used this verse to teach his false doctrine that God has a father.

NIV: “. . . and he [Jesus] has made us to be a kingdom of priests to serve his God and Father, to him [Jesus] be glory and power forever and ever. Amen.”

RSV: “. . . and [Jesus} made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him [Jesus} be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”

**NAB “[Jesus] who has made us into a kingdom, priests for his [Jesus’] God and Father, to him [Jesus} be glory and power for ever [and ever]. Amen.”

Smith deliberately twisted the Scriptures!

P. 373:

QUOTE:

. . . If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and John discovered that God the Father of Jesus Christ Christ had a Father, you may suppose that He had a Father also. Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son? Whenever did a tree or anything spring into existence without a progenitor? And everything comes in this way. Paul says that which is earthly is in the likeness of that which is heavenly. Hence if Jesus had a Father, can we not believe that He had a father also? I despise the idea of being scared to death at such a doctrine, for the Bible is full of it. [italics in the original]

I want you to pay particular attention to what I am saying. Jesus said that the Father wrought preceisely in the same way as His Father had done before Him. As the Father had done before? He laid down His life, and took it up again the same as His Father had done before. He did as He was sent, to lay down his life and take it up again; and then was committed unto Him the keys. I know it is good reasoning.

END QUOTE

:whacky:

Christian? No, a thousand times NO.

 

[ParkerD]

Which Mormon leaders first introduced the concept that … 'Heavenly Father" having a Father … can be inferred by faithful members of the Latter-day Saint Faith?

1Voice,

The post that followed yours, by Jim D, contains the transcribed statement by Joseph Smith that infers that concept by asking a question during a sermon described as “meeting in the Grove, east of the temple”, which occurred in June, 1844. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, June 1844. (p. 373)

 

[1voice]

1Voice,

The post that followed yours, by Jim D, contains the transcribed statement by Joseph Smith that infers that concept by asking a question during a sermon described as “meeting in the Grove, east of the temple”, which occurred in June, 1844. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, June 1844. (p. 373)

“And hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father”

Assuming for the sake of discussion that Joseph Smith is correct in his position … It changes everything. It creates an entirely different concept of God the Father … unlike any other in any Christian Faith. According to Joseph Smith, God the Father (Heavenly Father) is one in a long line of “Heavenly Fathers”.

… It’s difficult to understand why the LDS leadership would allow this verse to be open to personal interpretation … allowing a… take it or leave it attitude … as you indicate above.

If something as foundational as the definition of LDS Godhead was preached with firm conviction by Joseph Smith himself … why is it not considered to be the correct interpretation without question?

 

[rainman10]

Rainman10,

I can’t help it if you don’t understand the concept of Oneness or the concept of being entrusted. Sorry–'can’t help. I already tried.

I have agreed that God is omnipotent over ALL, everything that ever was and ever will be (from our vantage point, which is the only basis we have to say that). As far as Oneness and being entrusted, there are no exceptions, period. There is only one Way–no other.

Yes, but you have to add, “as far as THIS earth or THIS universe is concerned”. The way you state this belief, it misleads one to think that Mormons believe the same as the vast majority of Christians, that there has been and always will be ONLY ONE GOD. God of ALL creation, no other God before Him or after Him. And this IS NOT your true belief. Mormons believe that there were other gods before Him, gods of other universes. The god of this earth progressed from plain and simple man into a god who now has his own universe to be a god of.

 

[ParkerD]

“And hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father”

Assuming for the sake of discussion that Joseph Smith is correct in his position … It changes everything. It creates an entirely different concept of God the Father … unlike any other in any Christian Faith. According to Joseph Smith, God the Father (Heavenly Father) is one in a long line of “Heavenly Fathers”.

… It’s difficult to understand why the LDS leadership would allow this verse to be open to personal interpretation … allowing a… take it or leave it attitude … as you indicate above.

If something as foundational as the definition of LDS Godhead was preached with firm conviction by Joseph Smith himself … why is it not considered to be the correct interpretation without question?

1Voice,

First, I should point out and clarify that although Jim D correctly quoted the transcription of the words attributed to Joseph Smith in that talk, the other text in that post incorrectly presented what Joseph Smith used the words “hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father” to illustrate. If one reads the entire talk, at that same point in the talk Joseph Smith shows that he is aware that “God” in that verse is talking about Jesus Christ, and “His Father” in that verse is talking about God the Father. So it was a mistake if someone thought that verse was being used by Joseph Smith to illustrate that Heavenly Father has a Father. That was not what he was using the verse for–he was using it to show that the words “made us kings and priests” means that John saw that there were crowns and glory that were being given to humankind as he saw in that vision, including eternal priesthood and eternal glory. This conveys the full sense of what it means to be a “joint heir” with Jesus Christ, which are also part of the Book of Revelation.

As far as how “God came to be God”, and what time we should spend thinking about that, I personally haven’t been in meetings or discussions where the words of Joseph Smith in that sermon at the very end of his life in June, 1844, were discussed as to whether that is doctrinally complete enough to have it taught, or whether “we don’t know enough about that” such that it just leads to unfruitful speculation and we should focus on what God has plentifully revealed for us to focus our energy, time, devotion, and faith on as we seek to grow in both knowledge and wisdom–applied knowledge.

I think another talk by Bruce R McConkie conveys what Latter-day Saints are encouraged to focus their thoughts, time, and energy on in their studies and their efforts to follow the Savior and worship Him and God the Father:

lds.org/ensign/1971/12/how-to-worship?lang=eng&query=god+father+came+Bruce+R+McConkie

A continuing wish of peace and deep joy to you and all who may chance to read this comment.