Joseph Smith's changing doctrine of deity

[evanfaust]

I had a very powerful spiritual manifestation and confirmation of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon and the LDS Church; and every time I tell or write that story I seem to leave some details off. I seem to never be able to capture exactly what I felt and what I experienced.

Ya know, if I tell a story about my graduation from law school, I am likely to leave a few details out now and then. I doubt I would have differences like how old I was, or who gave me my diploma, or what of my friends were there…but I might skip a detail now and then. But, if GOD visited me, and spoke to me. I believe I would never forget how old I was, who was present, or what was said to me.

You must have a prodigious memory, because I cannot tell you most of the things I did when I was a teenager. If you ask me to tell some of the things I experienced during that time, I could not point out if I was 12, 13, 14, or 15. I may not even remember the house I was living at the time or the grade I was in. I have had some impressive experiences, but I cannot tell exactly my age when I had those experiences. To be very honest with you, I know I joined the Mormon Church when I was 21, but I do not recall for certain if my spiritual experience happened when I was 21 or 22. Honestly, I cannot say for sure! My birthday was a couple of months after I was baptized, but I don’t remember if the experience was before or after my birthday. This is such an insignificant detail. You get hung up on something so minor. You expect perfection out of human beings when they claim to be of God. I am sorry, but imperfection is so evident in the Bible and yet you expect perfection from a true prophet of God. I bet if Joseph was in the Bible you would believe everything he said. Moses was imperfect and disobedient and was punished for his disobedience. Abraham lied about his wife, or omitted that she was his wife. But I bet you don’t condemn Abraham for that lie! Peter denied Christ 3 times…and the list goes on and on.

The only way for you to know for sure is to ask God and He will tell you if Joseph had a first vision or not. He will tell you whether Joseph was a prophet of God or not. If you are truly and sincerely interested in knowing I know He will tell you. But, I don’t really think you want to know…You already made up your mind because you don’t think it is worth it. To me was worth it…because it was my salvation that was at risk. I am glad I received that confirmation! Joseph Smith and the restored gospel is a force for good for mankind and whether people accept our message or not, our message is to keep God’s commandments, to help one another, to serve our fellowman. This is a message of hope, love and happiness.

You assume too much. First, I was LDS. I loved the Church. I found out things about the Church and went inactive. Things happened and I left the Church. Recently, I wanted to go back. I felt called to go back. I bought a new Triple and attended Sac Meetings. I carried around General Conferences on my Iphone and listened to them. I would go to the temple (though I could not go “into” the temple, I could sit in the foyer) and read and prayed. I studied. I read, and I prayed. I was wanting to get baptized again. I wanted to go to my missionary reunion. I really wanted it to be true. I prayed all the time. The Answer was the same every time. Joseph Smith was not a prophet and the Book of Mormon was not true. I did not like answer. I kept trying. I had missionaries give me blessings. I tried so hard for it to be true. But God was very clear. The Catholic Church was the Church Christ started and the LDS Church was not true. I finally gave up and listened to God. I got the message from God that I was fooled once before, but that the LDS Church was not a true church.

Well…At least you made some effort! I commend you for that! However, I think I may know why you did not receive the confirmation. One side of you wanted to find the truth, but there is another side that had serious doubts. They both cannot coexist! This reminds me of Martin Harris when went to pray in the grove with Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Joseph Smith. The angel would not visit them, because of Martin Harris. As soon as Martin left to pray at another location, the angel appeared to the other 3 men. Martin had doubts and had to pray to reconcile with God in order to see the angel, which he saw later. The message you got from God that the Mormon Church was not true…could you describe it? Was it really a voice from God or was it from your own head? Interesting, I had been Catholic all my life till 21, but I never felt the Spirit of God there. The Catholic Church was the first church of my list of churches that I crossed out. I also investigated the Jehovah Witness’s, the Adventist of the 7th Day, Spiritualism and Mormonism. Mormonism was what I was looking for all my life!

 

[evanfaust]

President Hinckley said it very eloquently and better than anyone:

“I am not worried that the Prophet Joseph Smith gave a number of versions of the first vision anymore than I am worried that there are four different writers of the gospels in the New Testament, each with his own perceptions, each telling the events to meet his own purpose for writing at the time. I am more concerned with the fact that God has revealed in this dispensation a great and marvelous and beautiful plan that motivates men and women to love their Creator and their Redeemer, to appreciate and serve one another, to walk in faith on the road that leads to immortality and eternal life.”
—Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, October 1984

First, I am not surprised Hinckley said that. First, if he WAS concerned, he would have been out of a nice job and a nice house and all the praise and stuff he received. Second, I am surprised that an alleged prophet does not see the differences between four people giving 4 different versions and 1 person giving nine different versions. I had alwaus given him more credit than that. Finally, I lost respect for Gordon B. Hinnckley when he was dishonest about Mark Hoffman.

*President Hinckley was deceived by Mark Hoffman as well as many others. Your interpretation is always on the negative side! It is either dishonest or a liar. No wonder you cannot receive a confirmation like I did. *

For more detail of the First Vision I recommend you read this material.

en.fairmormon.org/First_Vision_accounts

I have already read that. Nothiong is more humorous than LDS apologetics trying to explain away stuff.

With that kind of attitude, how can you expect to receive a revelation from God? You mock the explanations. That does not seem to demonstrate a sincere desire to know if Joseph was a prophet of God. On the contrary, you doubt anyone can explain away your personal doubts. But, I wish you well! At least the Mormon belief does not say you go to hell for not accepting the true gospel (three degrees of glory), but on the other hand Protestants and Catholic do, since they only believe in two rewards…Heaven or Hell!

 

[evanfaust]

one of the things that has always baffled is me is that Mormons MUST believe that somehow, the Apostles and their successors were the only people in history who did not know how to ordain to keep the chain going. In the OT, they knew. They brought on successors all the time. And then, somehow, the Apostles and their successors completely forgot how to, then, suddenly, in the 1800s, people rememebred how again when the LDS Church started.

That is hogwash. The Apostles knew. They knew they were starting something that needed to go on. They knew it would go on, else why teach at all? They traveled starting Churches. Of COURSE they knew how to ordain and keep it going.

And so it was.

The LDS line of authority of a priesthood holder is very very short. It has pretty good stuff from today till the 1820s, then it skips from the 1820s back to 33 AD

A Catholic Priest can show a line of authority unbroken from today back to Christ. There is no 2000-year gap.

Question,

If Judas Iscariots had ordained someone a bishop after his betrayal of Jesus, would his ordination be valid? Would it be acceptable to Jesus?

You see, the ordination by someone holding the Priesthood is not necessarily accepted by God. If an Apostle or a Priest is sinfull, imoral or not in good standing before God, that ordination has no power. Your claim that you can trace your line of authority all the way to Peter does not mean it has been validated by the Lord. If in this line of authority there is an apostasy, evidently that line has been broken at a certain point.

“That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.” D & C 131:36-37

 

[lax16]

Question,

If **Judas Iscariots **had ordained someone a bishop after his betrayal of Jesus, would his ordination be valid? Would it be acceptable to Jesus?

You see, the ordination by someone holding the Priesthood is not necessarily accepted by God. If an Apostle or a Priest is sinfull, imoral or not in good standing before God, that ordination has no power. Your claim that you can trace your line of authority all the way to Peter does not mean it has been validated by the Lord. If in this line of authority there is an apostasy, evidently that line has been broken at a certain point.

“That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.” D & C 131:36-37

evanfaust - Please be specific about who in the succession of priests/popes/bishops etc in the Catholic Church was in apostasy. Also, who was/is like Judas? Exactly where was the line of authority broken? Can you give names and dates?

Aren’t all Mormon men priests in the Mormon religion? Are they perfect? If a Mormon man who is practicing his faith on the outside, but is not sure if his religion is true, is he apostate?
What about the “devout” Mormon man (returned missionary, etc) that drinks alcohol when he’s out of town but then plays the part when he’s home? What about devout Mormons who con money out of fellow church members?

Seems to me if we are judging churches based on their priests, then Mormonism is in apostasy.

 

[AtticusFinch]

I have already read that. Nothiong is more humorous than LDS apologetics trying to explain away stuff.

AtticusFinch,

The same goes to you: Intellectual Honesty please! The other versions of Joseph Smith’s first vision are not scripture and they mainly differ in additional details like Paul’s Vision.

That is simply untrue. Please! I beg you to be honest. Luke has TWO stories about Paul. TWO. And we do not even know who told Luke the story. Whereas, with Joseph, we KNOW who told the story. It was Joseph. Every time. And differences in how many people were there, who was there, what was said, how old he was, etc, are NOT slight additional details. They are MAJOR differences. He lied. And when you lie, you have trouble remembering what you lied about, so the story changes.

**But it was Luke (ONE person) recording all the discrepancies. One person recording a story presenting many inconsistencies. That just tells me that even the person who had the experience may choose to record certain aspects of the experiences or may use different terms to describe what he saw or heard. That person may even make mistakes telling the story. No prophet is perfect; the only perfect man to step on the earth was Jesus Christ. You interpret these variances as lies, I don’t see lies and many more millions do not see them as lies. An Atheist may also say that the variances in the 4 gospels are also evidence of lies and even the discrepancies in Paul’s story to be lies. Do you think they are right? **

Are you for real? Are you truly saying that one person who hears stories from we don;t know who and writes them down is worse than one man who tells nine different stories? Are you really that brainwashed? Wow. That is all I can say. Wow.

I know the First Vision to be true!

No, you don’t. That is another untruth. You BELIEVE it to be true. The only way you can “know” is if you actually witnessed it. You didn’t. You can onlt believe it is true.

*You don’t tell me what I know. Evidently you never experienced a strong manifestation of the spirit as I did.

Silly boy. If you "KNOW something, you can prove it. And you can’t. You did not see it, you did not even talk to someone who saw it. You can say all day long that you “know it”, but I “know” that you don;t. You believe it.*

Otherwise you would not doubt my words. You don’t have to be there to know something. Do you have to go to Japan to know that Japan exists?

Nope. But, I have seen it on television and talked to my brother-in-law who lives there, and to a girl in my office who from there. Did you talk to someone who saw the FV? Did you see it on TV? I can point you to millions of people who have seen Japan…can you point to millions who saw the FV? Didn;t think so. Horrible analogy

Joseph Smith was a truthful boy and remained truthful throughout his life.

No, he wasn;t. He told people he could find trasure with looking stones. He was convicted for that. He lied about that. He was a con artist. He cheated people in the bank scandle then ran from the debt, never paying it off. He said there were people on the moon dressed like quakers. He was NOT truthful.

*Joseph lost about 100 thousand of his own money in that investment (more than anyone else).

If a thief also loses money in a scam, is he less of a thief? Nope. *

Joseph was a prophet and not a business man. He made many mistakes as a business man.

Con is not a mistake.

Joseph never claimed to find treasury

Nope, he just lied to people that he could

,
I studied Joseph Smith and I know his character.

I have studied him, too. Both as a member and as a non-member. I have read several books about including Rough Stone Rolling. I have read his Journal. I have read his writings.

We both have read many books on Joseph and yet we arrive to very different conclusions. I feel as if I know him personally. He is a man of God! I have no question in my mind. To me his is one of the greatest men to live on earth.

Yeah…lots of folks said the same about Jim Jones…and?

I don’t think the first of vision is true, I KNOW it to be true! There is a big difference! I know it by the power of God, who made it known to me.

No, you BELIEVE it to be true.

*I already responded this question.

So have I.*

 

[AtticusFinch]

EF- I had a very powerful spiritual manifestation and confirmation of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon and the LDS Church; and every time I tell or write that story I seem to leave some details off. I seem to never be able to capture exactly what I felt and what I experienced.

Me- Ya know, if I tell a story about my graduation from law school, I am likely to leave a few details out now and then. I doubt I would have differences like how old I was, or who gave me my diploma, or what of my friends were there…but I might skip a detail now and then. But, if GOD visited me, and spoke to me. I believe I would never forget how old I was, who was present, or what was said to me.

EF- You must have a prodigious memory, because I cannot tell you most of the things I did when I was a teenager.

Me- yeah, as a teen, you never had God visit you, did you? Funny how you can compare regular teen things to a visit from God. Lets me know how important God is to you?

The only way for you to know for sure is to ask God and He will tell you if Joseph had a first vision or not. He will tell you whether Joseph was a prophet of God or not. If you are truly and sincerely interested in knowing I know He will tell you. But, I don’t really think you want to know…You already made up your mind because you don’t think it is worth it. To me was worth it…because it was my salvation that was at risk. I am glad I received that confirmation! Joseph Smith and the restored gospel is a force for good for mankind and whether people accept our message or not, our message is to keep God’s commandments, to help one another, to serve our fellowman. This is a message of hope, love and happiness.

You assume too much. First, I was LDS. I loved the Church. I found out things about the Church and went inactive. Things happened and I left the Church. Recently, I wanted to go back. I felt called to go back. I bought a new Triple and attended Sac Meetings. I carried around General Conferences on my Iphone and listened to them. I would go to the temple (though I could not go “into” the temple, I could sit in the foyer) and read and prayed. I studied. I read, and I prayed. I was wanting to get baptized again. I wanted to go to my missionary reunion. I really wanted it to be true. I prayed all the time. The Answer was the same every time. Joseph Smith was not a prophet and the Book of Mormon was not true. I did not like answer. I kept trying. I had missionaries give me blessings. I tried so hard for it to be true. But God was very clear. The Catholic Church was the Church Christ started and the LDS Church was not true. I finally gave up and listened to God. I got the message from God that I was fooled once before, but that the LDS Church was not a true church.

Well…At least you made some effort! I commend you for that! However, I think I may know why you did not receive the confirmation. One side of you wanted to find the truth, but there is another side that had serious doubts.

nope. I did not go into ti with doubts. I went into it thinking I was following what God wanted.

Bottom line, God told me the LDS Church was not true. I must listen to God, right?

 

[AtticusFinch]

“I am not worried that the Prophet Joseph Smith gave a number of versions of the first vision anymore than I am worried that there are four different writers of the gospels in the New Testament, each with his own perceptions, each telling the events to meet his own purpose for writing at the time. I am more concerned with the fact that God has revealed in this dispensation a great and marvelous and beautiful plan that motivates men and women to love their Creator and their Redeemer, to appreciate and serve one another, to walk in faith on the road that leads to immortality and eternal life.”
—Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, October 1984

First, I am not surprised Hinckley said that. First, if he WAS concerned, he would have been out of a nice job and a nice house and all the praise and stuff he received. Second, I am surprised that an alleged prophet does not see the differences between four people giving 4 different versions and 1 person giving nine different versions. I had alwaus given him more credit than that. Finally, I lost respect for Gordon B. Hinnckley when he was dishonest about Mark Hoffman.

President Hinckley was deceived by Mark Hoffman as well as many others. Your interpretation is always on the negative side! It is either dishonest or a liar. No wonder you cannot receive a confirmation like I did.

lol…how could Hinkley have been decieved? Wasn;t he an Apostle and close to “the prophet?” I was taught as LDS that the Prophet speaks to Christ. How could someone like Hinkley be decieved if the Church is true?

For more detail of the First Vision I recommend you read this material.

en.fairmormon.org/First_Vision_accounts

I have already read that. Nothiong is more humorous than LDS apologetics trying to explain away stuff.

With that kind of attitude, how can you expect to receive a revelation from God?

Silly, I RECEIVED revelation from God. That is why I can tell you you are wrong.

 

[AtticusFinch]

Question,

If Judas Iscariots had ordained someone a bishop after his betrayal of Jesus, would his ordination be valid? Would it be acceptable to Jesus?

Irrelevant smoke screen. Judas didn;t, so the question is moot. But I will say this, I know an LDS Bishop who was caught stealing and in an adulterous relationship. People wondered if people he ordained needed to be reordained and they were all told no. So, according to your beliefs, you already know that answer.

“That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.” D & C 131:36-37

Doesn;t matter what D&C says. The Apostles taught and those they taught also taught all the way down to today. So your point is moot.

 

[twopekinguys]

Is it me, or has anyone noticed that when a mormon gets backed into a corner on mormanism, they always bare their testimony about Joseph Smith?

Is this standard practice? I’ve seen it on other threads, and I’ve even seen videos on youtube where missionaries do this.

Now, getting back to the original issue of Smith’s changing doctrine of Diety.

I found this:
*(Doctrine and Covenants Commentary, p. 440)

Parley P. Pratt says: “He [Joseph Smith] will continue holding those keys through all eternity, and will stand—yes, again in the flesh upon this Earth, as the head of the Latter-day Saints, under Jesus Christ, and under Peter, James and John. He will hold the keys to judge the generation to whom he was sent, and will judge my brethren that preside over me; and will judge me, together with the Apostles ordained by the word of the Lord through him and under his administration. When this is done, those Apostles will judge this generation and the Latter-day Saints; and they will judge them with that judgment which Jesus Christ will give unto them; and they will have the same spirit and the same mind as Jesus Christ, and their judgment will be His judgment, for they will be one * * * Brother Brigham, who now presides over us, will hold the keys under Brother Joseph; and he and his brethren, who hold the keys with him, or under his direction, will judge the people; for they will hold those keys to all eternity, worlds without end. By those keys they will have to judge this generation; and Peter, James, and John will hold the keys to preside over, and judge, and direct Brother Joseph to all eternity; and Jesus Christ will hold the keys over them and over us, under His Father, to whom be all the glory” (Journal of Dis., Vol. V., p. 196).*
Does this mean that JS and BY are judges of this world?

Since this is from a D&C commentary, I am assuming this is lds doctrine

Then you have this:

"Brigham Young said you can’t get to the highest heaven without Joseph Smith’s consent. “…no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 289 "
Don’t both of these qualify as a change in diety? Making JS equal to God?

As something totall off subject, and maybe another thread, I found this interesting quote from BY.

" I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually. In the days of Joseph, revelation was given and written, and the people were driven from city to city and place to place, until we were led into these mountains. Let this [discourse] go to the people with “Thus saith the Lord,” and if they do not obey it, you will see the chastening hand of the Lord upon them. But if they are plead with, and led along like children, we may come to understand the will of the Lord and He may preserve us as we desire." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, Page 95)"

Isn’t BY doing the same thing by saying his sermons are scripture?

 

[Javl]

What I have never understood, and will probably never understand, is how informed, knowledgable, intelligent people, such as some of these LDS posters, can accept and truly believe such drivel and obvious lies as promulgated by Joseph Smith and Mormon
“theology”. Mormonism has been proven false so many times and yet these people refuse to investigate with an open mind to find out for themselves the real truth.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Answersplease]

thank you. I will not grow tired.

"Answersplease:

Glad to hear that.

I’m not much of an evangelist, I just get tired and leave, I’ve left the forum twice before, and I think I will be leaving again perhaps soon, unless I get re-energized somehow.

Most of the Mormons have put me on ignore.

"Answersplease:

I would’nt worry about being put on ignore.

I’m sure all the Mormons will look at your posts, if for nothing else than to see if there is something new that they can report you for.

Also, I’ve made a lot of discussion topics about Mormonism and the Mormons look just to see whats in them, how can they not look? If they are here to set the record straight about Mormonism, then they have to look.

You should make more new discussion topics about Mormonism, they won’t ignore you, they probably won’t respond, but they will at least look.

Most of my topics get at least 100 views on average.

They love to argue with those who have never been Mormon and tell them they have no idea what they talk about, but when they meet someone who has been LDS, who served in a mission, who served in the Bishopric, who has been in several temples, they ignore them because they know I know. I even had one member call me a liar and say I never served a mission. When I posted pics of my mission, he got really quiet and refused to apologize for saying I lied.

"Answersplease:

That is sad to hear, but I am not surprised.

I’ve debated at least a couple Mormons to the point where they got upset, one guy got upset on almost a regular basis, so I try not to debate him anymore.

That is what the LDS Church is about. So, we need to pray for them, like the people who prayed for me when I was LDS. Prayer works on even the hardest of LDS hearts.

"Answersplease:

Yes, your right.

The main reason I debate Mormons is not to convert them, all you can do is plant a few seeds of knowledge and then see if they grow.

The main reason I debate Mormons is to keep Christians from falling into Mormonism.

In another post I showed that one Mormon clearly was here to proselytize and he came right out and said that people should become an LDS like him.

If we all put out the truth about Mormonism, they people who come to these forums will be inclined to be converted to Mormonism. And perhaps even a few Mormons might be enlightened and start to question Mormonism.

They can’t hear truth. All the better reason to not give up. You should keep posting, just, don’t get banned. The mormons are also quick on the report button…trying to get you silenced. That is what most of their posts, aimed at former members, are comprised of…they want us silenced.

Answersplease:

Yes, your right.

It is better to be more careful, than to be banned recklessly.

Then they really have silenced their opposition.

 

[ParkerD]

What I have never understood, and will probably never understand, is how informed, knowledgable, intelligent people, such as some of these LDS posters, can accept and truly believe such drivel and obvious lies as promulgated by Joseph Smith and Mormon
“theology”. Mormonism has been proven false so many times and yet these people refuse to investigate with an open mind to find out for themselves the real truth.

Shalom Aleichem

JAVL,
Isn’t that interesting that you have the same question in your mind that I vice versa have in my mind when I read some of the CE material I have read on this website? And especially when comparing with the Bible itself? I guess we’re both amazed.

Peace to you also.

 

[AtticusFinch]

Is it me, or has anyone noticed that when a mormon gets backed into a corner on mormanism, they always bare their testimony about Joseph Smith?

Is this standard practice? I’ve seen it on other threads, and I’ve even seen videos on youtube where missionaries do this.

Now, getting back to the original issue of Smith’s changing doctrine of Diety.

I found this:
*(Doctrine and Covenants Commentary, p. 440)

Parley P. Pratt says: “He [Joseph Smith] will continue holding those keys through all eternity, and will stand—yes, again in the flesh upon this Earth, as the head of the Latter-day Saints, under Jesus Christ, and under Peter, James and John. He will hold the keys to judge the generation to whom he was sent, and will judge my brethren that preside over me; and will judge me, together with the Apostles ordained by the word of the Lord through him and under his administration. When this is done, those Apostles will judge this generation and the Latter-day Saints; and they will judge them with that judgment which Jesus Christ will give unto them; and they will have the same spirit and the same mind as Jesus Christ, and their judgment will be His judgment, for they will be one * * * Brother Brigham, who now presides over us, will hold the keys under Brother Joseph; and he and his brethren, who hold the keys with him, or under his direction, will judge the people; for they will hold those keys to all eternity, worlds without end. By those keys they will have to judge this generation; and Peter, James, and John will hold the keys to preside over, and judge, and direct Brother Joseph to all eternity; and Jesus Christ will hold the keys over them and over us, under His Father, to whom be all the glory” (Journal of Dis., Vol. V., p. 196).*
Does this mean that JS and BY are judges of this world?

Since this is from a D&C commentary, I am assuming this is lds doctrine

Then you have this:

"Brigham Young said you can’t get to the highest heaven without Joseph Smith’s consent. “…no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 289 "
Don’t both of these qualify as a change in diety? Making JS equal to God?

As something totall off subject, and maybe another thread, I found this interesting quote from BY.

" I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually. In the days of Joseph, revelation was given and written, and the people were driven from city to city and place to place, until we were led into these mountains. Let this [discourse] go to the people with “Thus saith the Lord,” and if they do not obey it, you will see the chastening hand of the Lord upon them. But if they are plead with, and led along like children, we may come to understand the will of the Lord and He may preserve us as we desire." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, Page 95)"

Isn’t BY doing the same thing by saying his sermons are scripture?

Yep. In fact, BY said this when people questioned his prophetic doctrinal proclamation that Adam is our God

 

[ParkerD]

Yep. In fact, BY said this when people questioned his prophetic doctrinal proclamation that Adam is our God

The belief that Adam is Michael, the archangel who opposed Satan and supported Christ (Jehovah) in the pre-mortal world where we all lived, and will be the Ancient of Days prophesied by Daniel, who will sit in judgment over his posterity, is of course not going to be believed by Catholics who believe and teach that the Ancient of Days is God the Father. (What’s interesting is that the Ancient of Days obviously has a resurrected body when he appears among the people gathered as described in the Book of Daniel, so I don’t understand how the Catholic theologians put that together in their minds.)

A contrasting belief about the judgment, but which contains an element of truth, is that Peter is the gate-keeper to heaven. But we know “the keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel, and He employeth no servant there.” The ultimate authority for judgment rests with Christ, who suffered the atonement so that people can gain the grace necessary to be judged without having to carry their own sins with them to judgment day. Yet Peter and the twelve apostles (less Judas Iscariot), will certainly have a role in helping to judge, as will the Ancient of Days, Adam who is Michael the Archangel, who fought so valiantly in the pre-mortal world and who believes fervently in the ability of his posterity to rally around Christ and live by His teachings.

 

[Javl]

JAVL,
Isn’t that interesting that you have the same question in your mind that I vice versa have in my mind when I read some of the CE material I have read on this website? And especially when comparing with the Bible itself? I guess we’re both amazed.

Peace to you also.

Yes, Parker. But we Christians accept and use the Bible only and no other spurious documents, books, etc. We heed the words of Paul and the Apostles to be wary of and not accept another Gospel, even if preached by angels, such as the LDS does.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[RebeccaJ]

                 Originally Posted by **Answersplease**

Yes, your right.

It is better to be more careful, than to be banned recklessly.

Then they really have silenced their opposition.

There is another aspect, as long as LDS keep posting the easier and easier for non-LDS to see how far they’ve gone off the rails. To me, it is like watching school children “play teacher”.

 

[ParkerD]

Yes, Parker. But we Christians accept and use the Bible only and no other spurious documents, books, etc. We heed the words of Paul and the Apostles to be wary of and not accept another Gospel, even if preached by angels, such as the LDS does.

Shalom Aleichem

Yes, I am aware that you don’t believe John saw the vision he wrote about, seeing “another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,…” (Revelation 14:6)

I’m also aware that you don’t make a distinction between the key of David that is so clearly born by Christ on His shoulder, and the keys of the kingdom that were given to the apostles as stated in the New Testament.

Perhaps you can explain the following for which I find no good explanation:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arandur

Fair enough. I don’t always have time to answer things, especially when topics heat up and I get overextended with responses.

Placing one’s own personal interpretation of Scripture up as an absolute, absent the appropriate authority of the Spirit guaranteed through an authoritative teaching body (the Church), is exactly what has lead to the many divisions of Christianity. It is a false method, one warned against in the Scriptures themselves. It is an example of pride, making oneself God by declaring one’s own interpretation as truth.

And I have not seen where John or anyone else has interpreted that passage the same way, reading so much into one short passage to the exclusion of its immediate context and excluding all other meanings rather than recognizing the deep, “both/and,” multi-layered nature of Scripture.

Of course Scripture contains truth. Peter was given the “Keys of the Kingdom.” This is the same as the Key of David. It takes nothing from a king’s (Christ’s) glory to delegate authority, nor does it put that king under the delegate’s authority. Isaiah is not primarily focused on the atonement of Christ in ch. 20. Unless you think Eliakim, the immediate referent of the passage, was our atoning savior.

Arandur, (Since no one showed up on the other thread, here is your answer):
The method you described in gaining an understanding of the Bible, leads of course to everyone in the world having to “accede” to the Pope and the College of Cardinals and say that they are the only ones who can really say what the Bible means. This gives them exactly the kind of power that it would seem the leaders at the time of the Nicene counsel perceived was necessary in order to take hold of the church doctrine and not keep having schisms.

The idea that any reading of the Bible that doesn’t accept what the early fathers had to say or what the pope has to say, is “prideful” is absolutely foreign to the Biblical teachings about seeking revealed knowledge. (See 1 Corinthians 2 and 3).

No wonder Luther pulled away from that kind of doctrinal infallibility as a foundation for gaining knowledge of the Bible. It is exactly why John had the vision he had that there was going to be a departure of the church into the wilderness, and that the dragon would be making war with those seeking to keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus. (Revelation 12:16-17)

Having a testimony of Jesus is the focal point of the Bible. The idea that the words “a nail in a sure place” is not talking about the crucifixion, when placed in conjunction with the key of David when it is known that Christ fulfills Davidic prophecies, is still amazing to me that any student of the Bible doesn’t see the connection. It doesn’t mean I have pride. It means I can read and put some verses together and see their connection.

The “Keys of the Kingdom” is not the same as the “key of David.” You can say it is the same, the early fathers can say it is the same (to their advantage, of course)–but the Bible does not equate the two sets of keys.

Christ couldn’t delegate the atonement. Just because Peter was crucified also doesn’t mean he was taking upon himself our sins. (I assume you know that.)

I assume you are aware that the name “Eliakim” means “God shall cause to arise.” This goes right along with John’s vision about the key of David. We can arise in resurrection and can arise in a new birth because of the Savior’s atoning sacrifice and His resurrection and triumph over death.

Note in Revelation 3:5 that the vision John has shows that the Person who is talking and saying “I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels” in that verse is the same Person who is “he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;”

This is not a reference to Peter. It is a clear reference to Christ as the One who said “I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.” (Revelation 1:17-18)

The Key of David is the same thing as the “keys of hell and of death”. This is why the opening and shutting can’t be done by a “man”. It can only be done by Christ, who suffered the atonement and crucifixion so He could open those gates with His key–the Key of David, which was laid “upon his shoulder” and the “government” will be “committed into his hand.” (Isaiah 22:21)

Those words I just cited ought to bring immediately to mind the passage a student of the Bible ought to love–“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom,…” (Isaiah 9:6, 7)

Peace to you and all. Have a good day.

 

[RebeccaJ]

This really interesting. I came to this conclusion independently years ago. I believe it is true as well. I grew up with a Mormon girl who lived across the street. I used to beg my mom to go to temple with her but she only allowed me to go a couple of times. I generally love Mormons because they are kind and try hard to be good people.

I have been a Catholic for 2 years. I decided to become Catholic instead of Mormon as I believe in the Trinity and have personal habits that are not in line with the Mormon Church, i.e. I like the occasional glass of wine and a cup of coffee now and again.

This is actually quite funny as my friend used to come over and drink coca cola with me and her mom used to come and borrow one when the kids were ill.

Anyway This discussion is very good and I hope to read more from you.

I_Fortuna, Joseph Smith taught that the Native Americans and Pacific Islanders were the primary ancestors of Jews who migrated to the Americas. Until about 25 years ago, the official LDS teaching was that all Native Americans were descendants of “Lamanites”. Their skin was darker because of a curse God had put on them. The Book of Mormon calls them lazy and loathsome.

The pragmatic teachings of mormonism required that this change. The underlying racism has been toned down. Scientific and anthropological evidence shows that there are no descendants of people from the mideast among the DNA of Native Americans. So, mormons changed their teaching to say that there are Hebrew descendants among Native Americans, instead of primary descendants.

So while you, yourself, may come to a conclusion, the scientific and anthropological evidence doesn’t support it.

But it would be interesting to hear why you came to this conclusion.

You can read more on human migration and DNA studies:

genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html

 

[why_me]

What I have never understood, and will probably never understand, is how informed, knowledgable, intelligent people, such as some of these LDS posters, can accept and truly believe such drivel and obvious lies as promulgated by Joseph Smith and Mormon
“theology”. Mormonism has been proven false so many times and yet these people refuse to investigate with an open mind to find out for themselves the real truth.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

The problem is: If one is a follower of Richard Dawkins and his book The God Delusion, that person can say the same thing as you did about any religion. Mormonism has not been proven false. However, mormons are great god loving people who attempt to obey god’s commandments and live life accordingly. And that says much about the lds church. What is unfortunate is when non mormons overlook such things.

 

[Javl]

The problem is: If one is a follower of Richard Dawkins and his book The God Delusion, that person can say the same thing as you did about any religion. Mormonism has not been proven false. However, mormons are great god loving people who attempt to obey god’s commandments and live life accordingly. And that says much about the lds church. What is unfortunate is when non mormons overlook such things.

I do not deny any Mormon’s motives, or beliefs. I respect them for their attempts, but as much as they believe to be true has been proven otherwise. Much proof has been given by Christians with use of scripture alone. There has been no need for “another gospel” for substantiation of a “raison d’etre”. As I have mentioned in a previous post, we heed the words of Paul and the Apostles about another gospel, even if preached by angels, and do not mis-interpret scripture to fit our situation(s), as does the LDS.

Then also there’s the matter of historical, anthropological, geneological, paleoentological, etc. proof to substantiate the claims of not only Joseph Smith, et al, but also the Book of Mormon and other LDS literature.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem