LDS, Creeds, and the Trinity

  • Thread starter Thread starter gazelam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Two of the most comical responses to js’ plethora of versions is the “the responses are not that different. And it is because he was talking to different people and if they versions were too alike, you would think it was a memorized story”.

That is pure rubbish. The versions allege different people present (God, God and jesus, Angels, unnamed “personages”) different things said, and different ages of js. Further, they say that people often have differences in relating past events…as if they equate normal events with a visitation from God and Jesus. wow.

the other is comparing the many versions js told of his own story in English in the 1800s to Luke writing about Paul in the Middle East in Aramaic or Greek in 30-40 ad.

It is almost comical how they must contort themselves to fit those square pegs of deception into the round hole of truth.

but it is not comical. It is sad.
 
Thanks again Texan Knight. I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut. Helps make some sense out of what the LDS are thinking.
 
The Mormon Jesus was a polygamist.

This is but a tiny sample of the documentation, in roughly chronological order.
  1. Jesus was a polygamist, married to Mary Magdalene, Mary and Martha the sisters of Lazarus, and perhaps others. Also, Jesus had children.
“I discover that some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on Marriage, at our last Conference, that Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were his wives, and that he begat children.”
(President Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v2, p210)

“It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and on a careful reading of that transaction, it will be discovered that no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha [the sisters of Lazarus] and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved [Mary Magdelene], must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the best of it.”
(Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 4:259)

One thing is certain, that there were several holy women that greatly loved Jesus - such as Mary, and Martha her sister, and Mary Magdalene; and Jesus greatly loved them, and associated with them much; and when He arose from the dead, instead of first showing Himself to His chosen witnesses, the Apostles, He appeared first to these women, or at least to one of them - namely, Mary Magdalene. Now, it would be very natural for a husband in the resurrection to appear first to his own dear wives, and afterwards show himself to his other friends. If all the acts of Jesus were written, we no doubt should learn that these beloved women were his wives. (Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 159)

“We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before He was crucified. “Has he indeed passed by the nature of angels, and taken upon himself the seed of Abraham, to die without leaving a seed to bear his name on the earth?” No. But when the secret is fully out, the seed of the blessed shall be gathered in, in the last days; and he who has not the blood of Abraham flowing in his veins, who has not one particle of the Saviour’s in him, I am afraid is a stereotyped Gentile, who will be left out and not be gathered in the last days; for I tell you it is the chosen of God, the seed of the blessed, that shall be gathered.”
(Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 2:82)
  1. Jesus and the apostles were persecuted and killed for being polygamists.
    “The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing his crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in the doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were Mormons."
    (Prophet Jedediah M. Grant, Journal of Discourses, Vol.1, p.346, August 7, 1853)
  2. Early Mormon leaders were direct descendants of Jesus.
Joseph Smith was the first to reveal this teaching, when he informed the plural wife of Apostle Judge Adams, that the Apostle “was a literal descendant of Jesus Christ.” (Oliver B. Huntington Journal, p. 259)

Prophet Lorenzo Snow, and his counselor George Q. Cannon, later declared this doctrine publicly:

President George Q. Cannon also spoke … he said, "There are those in this audience who are descendants of the old Twelve Apostles - and shall I say it, yes, descendants of the Saviour Himself. His seed is represented in this body of men.
Following Pres. Cannon, President Snow arose and said that what Bro. Cannon had stated respecting the literal descendants among this company of the old apostles and the Saviour himself is true - the Saviour’s seed is represented in this body of men. (Journal of Pres. Rudger Clawson, pp. 374-375)

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
Interesting finds, thank you for sharing this. Like I said, never been taught this but didn’t say it wasn’t true ( in the sense that LDS believe it, not that Jesus actually had wives).
 
Interesting finds, thank you for sharing this. Like I said, never been taught this but didn’t say it wasn’t true ( in the sense that LDS believe it, not that Jesus actually had wives).
If you are fairly young, it doesn’t surprise me that you were unaware of these early LDS beliefs. I am 60 years old, and back in the 1970s and 1980s when I was LDS most of us believed these things and discussed them openly.

When the LDS church wants to distance itself from certain bizarre teachings, it simply removes them from the lesson manuals and then pretends they were never taught. Unless you dig through the JofD and the History of the Church, you would never know that the early LDS GAs believed and taught these things.

In the LDS world, the future is known - it is the past that is always changing. 😃

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
 
Interesting.

The LDS doctrine seems to be evolving?
Yes, it is always evolving. The 2 largest actions in the history of the LDS Church is 1. Stopping the practice of polygamy (although Joseph Smith said it was an eternal law?). And 2. Allowing people of African descent to be ordained to the priesthood. Even this year they have evolved in changing the age that a missionary may serve (although that isn’t really a doctrine, it still took a “revelation” from the prophet)
 
If you are fairly young, it doesn’t surprise me that you were unaware of these early LDS beliefs. I am 60 years old, and back in the 1970s and 1980s when I was LDS most of us believed these things and discussed them openly.

When the LDS church wants to distance itself from certain bizarre teachings, it simply removes them from the lesson manuals and then pretends they were never taught. Unless you dig through the JofD and the History of the Church, you would never know that the early LDS GAs believed and taught these things.

In the LDS world, the future is known - it is the past that is always changing. 😃

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
very true. I was openly taught the Catholic Church was evil. I was openly taught Jesus had several wives. I was openly taught that I would get my own planet. I was openly taught that the Cumorah in NY was THE Cumorah…I was taught as a missionary that the Mayans were from the Book of Mormon (I served in Honduras and we went to the Mayan ruins there. The Mission Pres gave a talk)
 
If you are fairly young, it doesn’t surprise me that you were unaware of these early LDS beliefs. I am 60 years old, and back in the 1970s and 1980s when I was LDS most of us believed these things and discussed them openly.

When the LDS church wants to distance itself from certain bizarre teachings, it simply removes them from the lesson manuals and then pretends they were never taught. Unless you dig through the JofD and the History of the Church, you would never know that the early LDS GAs believed and taught these things.

In the LDS world, the future is known - it is the past that is always changing. 😃

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
I’m 24, so I guess i’m young 😃 but yeah, I’ve read some church history stuff and basically know everything about Joseph Smith and all that he did. But I haven’t read much of the Journals. It’s amazing to me how much a church can change over 180 years and I find it pretty hypocritical when the LDS church says a lot was changed in Christ church over the same period and thats why it apostatized. I find more has changed in the LDS church over that span of time then the early church. 🤷 but who am I to say, i’m just a future archaeologist.
 
very true. I was openly taught the Catholic Church was evil.
This was a given. The Catholic Church was referred to as the G&A (Great and Abominable) church.

A Marvelous Work and a Wonder by LaGrand Richards and The Great Apostasy by James Talmage were required reading for every missionary (at least in my mission). Both are extremely anti-Catholic. Both, as I recall, point to the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church spoken of in the BoM.

I’ll never forget LaGrand Richards’ declaration: “Under cover of darkness, the Roman Catholic Church continued its fungoid growth.”

No anti-Catholic sentiment there. :rolleyes:

I wonder if today’s young Mormons even know those books ever existed?

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
 
This was a given. The Catholic Church was referred to as the G&A (Great and Abominable) church. A Marvelous Work and a Wonder by LaGrand Richards and The Great Apostasy by James Talmage were required reading for every missionary (at least in my mission). Both are extremely anti-Catholic. Both, as I recall, point to the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church spoken of in the BoM.

I’ll never forget LaGrand Richards’ phrase “…and the Catholic Church continued its fungoid growth.”

No anti-Catholic sentiment there. :rolleyes:

I wonder if today’s young Mormons even know those books ever existed?

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
the original “Mormon Doctrine” also claimed that the Catholic Church was evil
 
Yes, it is always evolving. The 2 largest actions in the history of the LDS Church is 1. Stopping the practice of polygamy (although Joseph Smith said it was an eternal law?). And 2. Allowing people of African descent to be ordained to the priesthood. Even this year they have evolved in changing the age that a missionary may serve (although that isn’t really a doctrine, it still took a “revelation” from the prophet)
maybe someone can help me here. I’ve been taught that Joseph Smith ordained an african american to the quorum of the seventy in his day by the name of elijah abel. so when did the LDS church stop ordaining blacks?
 
This was a given. The Catholic Church was referred to as the G&A (Great and Abominable) church.

A Marvelous Work and a Wonder by LaGrand Richards and The Great Apostasy by James Talmage were required reading for every missionary (at least in my mission). Both are extremely anti-Catholic. Both, as I recall, point to the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church spoken of in the BoM.

I’ll never forget LaGrand Richards’ declaration: “Under cover of darkness, the Roman Catholic Church continued its fungoid growth.”

No anti-Catholic sentiment there. :rolleyes:

I wonder if today’s young Mormons even know those books ever existed?

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
I read them on my mission. Still around.
 
maybe someone can help me here. I’ve been taught that Joseph Smith ordained an african american to the quorum of the seventy in his day by the name of elijah abel. so when did the LDS church stop ordaining blacks?
Read all about it Here.

Paul (Formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
 
One of the most difficult issues I have dealt with regarding Mormonism is that they have done such teachings and then deny they never had done so.

This alone says alot about certain leaderss within its religion.
 
maybe someone can help me here. I’ve been taught that Joseph Smith ordained an african american to the quorum of the seventy in his day by the name of elijah abel. so when did the LDS church stop ordaining blacks?
I think it was present during JS time but really took effect with Brigham Young.
 
maybe someone can help me here. I’ve been taught that Joseph Smith ordained an african american to the quorum of the seventy in his day by the name of elijah abel. so when did the LDS church stop ordaining blacks?
Elijah Abel - Baptized 1832 by Ezekiel Roberts. Ordained an Elder in 1836. Ordained a Seventy Dec. 20 1836. Received the washing and anointing, but was denied the Endowment by BY. Still recognized as a Seventy in 1883. Sent on a mission in 1883, returns in 1884 and dies. Elijah Abel’s son is ordained an Elder in November of 1900. Elijah Abel’s grandson is ordained a priest in 1934 and an Elder in 1935.

Joseph T. Ball - Held the priesthood and was a Branch President in the 1840’s.

Walker Lewis - Ordained an Elder in 1847.

William McCrary - Ordained an Elder in 1846.

In 1869 Brigham Young denies the concept of Blacks being neutral in the pre-existence. “All spirits are pure that came from the presence of God”

I don’t know when the ban actually occurred, I think it was a gradual thing and there is no real definitive starting point.

Overall, the Church has always been divided on the subject of the ban. There was no strong revelatory reason given for BY’s position, combined with the fact of those ordained by JS, caused a lot of issue. What the exact rationale was, I don’t know. I don’t know whether it was a ban given by God or not. Joseph F. Smith opposed it quite regularly, but then flip-flopped a couple of time. The division existed from the time BY first stated it and continued until the removal in 1978. Various Church officials spoke poorly often during the ban, and many used the ban to promulgate racism, even while the Church did various contradictory equal rights type actions. I’m glad it is in the past and not something I need to worry about.
 
Elijah Abel - Baptized 1832 by Ezekiel Roberts. Ordained an Elder in 1836. Ordained a Seventy Dec. 20 1836. Received the washing and anointing, but was denied the Endowment by BY. Still recognized as a Seventy in 1883. Sent on a mission in 1883, returns in 1884 and dies. Elijah Abel’s son is ordained an Elder in November of 1900. Elijah Abel’s grandson is ordained a priest in 1934 and an Elder in 1935.

Joseph T. Ball - Held the priesthood and was a Branch President in the 1840’s.

Walker Lewis - Ordained an Elder in 1847.

William McCrary - Ordained an Elder in 1846.

In 1869 Brigham Young denies the concept of Blacks being neutral in the pre-existence. “All spirits are pure that came from the presence of God”

I don’t know when the ban actually occurred, I think it was a gradual thing and there is no real definitive starting point.

Overall, the Church has always been divided on the subject of the ban. There was no strong revelatory reason given for BY’s position, combined with the fact of those ordained by JS, caused a lot of issue. What the exact rationale was, I don’t know. I don’t know whether it was a ban given by God or not. Joseph F. Smith opposed it quite regularly, but then flip-flopped a couple of time. The division existed from the time BY first stated it and continued until the removal in 1978. Various Church officials spoke poorly often during the ban, and many used the ban to promulgate racism, even while the Church did various contradictory equal rights type actions. I’m glad it is in the past and not something I need to worry about.
Yeah… No reason at all to worry about your wishy washy lds god
 
In 1869 Brigham Young denies the concept of Blacks being neutral in the pre-existence. “All spirits are pure that came from the presence of God”

.
The other part of BY’s belief was that they were pure BEFORE being put into the body. Then they were cursed after.
 
“You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind…Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 290).
“In our first settlement in Missouri, it was said by our enemies that we intended to tamper with the slaves, not that we had any idea of the kind, for such a thing never entered our minds. We knew that the children of Ham were to be the “servant of servants,” and no power under heaven could hinder it, so long as the Lord would permit them to welter under the curse and those were known to be our religious views concerning them.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 172).
“Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 110).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top