Mormonism

[Telstar]

Truthsave, I’m not sure I understand the above statement. There are moral laws and there are physical laws. They each have there place. I believe Christ used both in his work and ministry.

What do you mean by saying that everything is under His law so it is not transgressing?

I think what he means is that LDS don’t believe that Adam and Eve sinned, or that Original Sin is the cause of all their descendants being tainted by that sin and more inclined to sin, themselves. They believe it was just “part of God’s plan” to test us, so there’s no actual guilt involved. All we have to do is learn and ‘progress in knowledge’ by following all of the man made laws set down by Joseph Smith and his followers, aka “the law of Mormon”. If that’s the case, then according to LDS belief there really isn’t any actual sin in the world that wasn’t planned by God, and only those who are outside of the LDS church, or reject it outright, are true sinners. That’s why they think they have to ‘baptize the dead’ to give everyone a chance to accept Mormonism, even if it’s in the ‘spirit world’.

That belief makes God the author of our sin, which is blasphemy. God does not promote anyone to do evil. That’s Lucifer’s plan. He’s the one that breeds confusion about what sin really is, so that men will think that evil is good and good is evil. We’re the ones that must choose to follow him instead of God, by exercising our own free will. The guilt of doing that is our own. Saying “the serpent deceived me” to God, when we stand before Him to be judged, won’t help us any more than it did Eve.

 

[TexanKnight]

I think what he means is that LDS don’t believe that Adam and Eve sinned, or that Original Sin is the cause of all their descendants being tainted by that sin and more inclined to sin, themselves. They believe it was just “part of God’s plan” to test us, so there’s no actual guilt involved. All we have to do is learn and ‘progress in knowledge’ by following all of the man made laws set down by Joseph Smith and his followers, aka “the law of Mormon”. If that’s the case, then according to LDS belief there really isn’t any actual sin in the world that wasn’t planned by God, and only those who are outside of the LDS church, or reject it outright, are true sinners. That’s why they think they have to ‘baptize the dead’ to give everyone a chance to accept Mormonism, even if it’s in the ‘spirit world’.

That belief makes God the author of our sin, which is blasphemy. God does not promote anyone to do evil. That’s Lucifer’s plan. He’s the one that breeds confusion about what sin really is, so that men will think that evil is good and good is evil. We’re the ones that must choose to follow him instead of God, by exercising our own free will. The guilt of doing that is our own. Saying “the serpent deceived me” to God, when we stand before Him to be judged, won’t help us any more than it did Eve.

The problem is, WHO IS ADAM? Is it God, as BY taught? Is he the Angel Michael, as the temple ceremony teaches, or is it The First Man as the Catholic Church teaches?

 

[Janderich]

Thanks Lori for explaining… Let me see if I can now reply to the comments.

Again playing with words. Why you have to do this?
In the contest that everything is within God will nothing can exist out of His Will and His Will is the law.

I don’t believe everything in the universe is as God would will it to be. There is an important distinction between knowing what will occur and causing it to happen. God respects others agency, thus he does not cause people to act in certain ways.

So if you are saying this it is useless to make distinction between law and will.
When we talk about law it is better to make a distinction among human moral laws, phisics laws, or just don’t do any distinction if everything is God’s Will everything is under His law even the trasgression.
Even trasgressing His law it is under His law so it is not trasgressing.
This is mormonism.
In Christianity this point has a beautiful explication that I hope you will find out in your heart.

Again, all transgression is not according to Gods will. Simply because God sees the end from the beginning and works with eternal laws to accomplish His purposes does not mean he would have anyone sin.

I think what he means is that LDS don’t believe that Adam and Eve sinned, or that Original Sin is the cause of all their descendants being tainted by that sin and more inclined to sin, themselves. They believe it was just “part of God’s plan” to test us, so there’s no actual guilt involved. All we have to do is learn and ‘progress in knowledge’ by following all of the man made laws set down by Joseph Smith and his followers, aka “the law of Mormon”. If that’s the case, then according to LDS belief there really isn’t any actual sin in the world that wasn’t planned by God, and only those who are outside of the LDS church, or reject it outright, are true sinners. That’s why they think they have to ‘baptize the dead’ to give everyone a chance to accept Mormonism, even if it’s in the ‘spirit world’.

Men and women are punished for their own sins, not for Adam’s transgression. This seems fair and clear to me. Would God punish us for what Adam and Eve did?

That belief makes God the author of our sin, which is blasphemy. God does not promote anyone to do evil. That’s Lucifer’s plan. He’s the one that breeds confusion about what sin really is, so that men will think that evil is good and good is evil. We’re the ones that must choose to follow him instead of God, by exercising our own free will. The guilt of doing that is our own. Saying “the serpent deceived me” to God, when we stand before Him to be judged, won’t help us any more than it did Eve.

God is not the author of sin and of course he does not promote evil. This is a twisting of our beliefs. God allows sin to occur and because he knows what will happen he can even use sinful men and women to accomplish his purposes. In Adam and Eve’s case, he simply let them know the consequences, told them what they should do in order to not transgress, and allowed them the freedom to chose. He did not cause evil to occur, it was Adam and Eve’s choice.

 

[RebeccaJ]

A miracle is a miracle because it can’t be explained by human understanding. When we see it everyday, or if we can explain it, we often don’t call it a miracle. For instance, the growth a plant, is it not a miracle? Yet most don’t bother to think of it as such because we see it regularly.

Well yeah, if a miracle can be explained, it is not a miracle. Therefore you are saying, Mormons don’t believe in miracles.

No wonder you have no problem believing false prophets.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Men and women are punished for their own sins, not for Adam’s transgression. This seems fair and clear to me. Would God punish us for what Adam and Eve did?

It is very logical, but as far as I can tell Mormons can’t understand it because your understanding of Salvation is so individualistic. But I’ll give it a try anyway, with a metaphor.

Let’s say you are very wealthy, with one child who you consider to be your heir. You think it will be great, how your heir will, or does, have children of his/her own, and what your child will inherit from you will be inherited by his/her children. You think on it and believe that even your grand children and great grand children will know an inheritance that is sourced from you.

Then a calamity happens, your child makes a huge mistake, which cause him/her to lose this inheritance you had planned. Because of this mistake, the inheritance is lost. Your grand children can’t inherit what their parents don’t have. Neither can their children or their children.

This is the “punishment” of original sin. Our First Parents sinned, and could no longer live in the presence of God. Their children could not inherit what they did not have. We could not inherit from our parents what they did not have.

The Good News is, Jesus Christ, who has reconciled us to the Father. Through Him we are made heirs to the Kingdom of God once more. We are saved as a people, all of humanity, God’s desire being that all His children become His heirs once more. Each individual is saved, of course, but we are children of our First Parents, and so we are saved as a people.

The view of Mormonism is, God desired that Adam and Eve lose their inheritance. That it is necessary for your individual progression to godhood. Even to the point of setting up a situation that would force them to choose sin. This makes God the author of sin, which of course, is a blasphemy against God.

 

[Janderich]

Well yeah, if a miracle can be explained, it is not a miracle. Therefore you are saying, Mormons don’t believe in miracles.

No wonder you have no problem believing false prophets.

If in order to be a miracle it must break all laws of space and time then I submit you have not found a miracle but an impossibility.

Please note the Sun out your window. Were it not for law of universal gravitation, the Sun and Earth would separate. Earth would spin out of it’s orbit and all life on this planet would die. (Except for maybe cockroaches which are amazing ). Is it such a large step to believe that everything occurs because of law? Indeed, I would say law must exist for miracles to occur, else what rules would govern even a given miracles occurrence?

 

[RebeccaJ]

If in order to be a miracle it must break all laws of space and time then I submit you have not found a miracle but an impossibility.

Please note the Sun out your window. Were it not for law of universal gravitation, the Sun and Earth would separate. Earth would spin out of it’s orbit and all life on this planet would die. (Except for maybe cockroaches which are amazing ). Is it such a large step to believe that everything occurs because of law? Indeed, I would say law must exist for miracles to occur, else what rules would govern even a given miracles occurrence?

God did not have to make a rose the way it is because the rose is an eternal law of itself. He didn’t have to make what you are calling natural laws the way they are because they are eternal laws of themselves.

Observing natural law is no different than observing the sun. Would you name the sun as eternally separate from God’s creation? No. Then why name any other part of creation as something that God is dependent on? Without God all of nature would cease to exist, including the rose, what you are calling natural laws and yourself. It is God that holds us in existence, not the laws of nature.

God is the Creator of ALL things, including space and time. All things are possible to God. You could only believe otherwise if you took the view that God is a human, and subject to creation, like yourself.

You are a creation of God, existing in creation. God is the Creator, therefore logically God exists outside of creation.

This is the miracle of the Incarnation: God entered into creation, lowering Himself to exist side by side, as Man, with us.

 

[Janderich]

God did not have to make a rose the way it is because the rose is an eternal law of itself. He didn’t have to make what you are calling natural laws the way they are because they are eternal laws of themselves.

Observing natural law is no different than observing the sun. Would you name the sun as eternally separate from God’s creation? No. Then why name any other part of creation as something that God is dependent on? Without God all of nature would cease to exist, including the rose, what you are calling natural laws and yourself. It is God that holds us in existence, not the laws of nature.

God is the Creator of ALL things, including space and time. All things are possible to God. You could only believe otherwise if you took the view that God is a human, and subject to creation, like yourself.

You are a creation of God, existing in creation. God is the Creator, therefore logically God exists outside of creation.

This is the miracle of the Incarnation: God entered into creation, lowering Himself to exist side by side, as Man, with us.

This of course is where we disagree. There are some fundamental laws which God did not create but uses to bring about his eternal purposes. Indeed there is likely wide and varied freedom to create within these laws and from our limited perspective it is difficult to tell which laws are fundamental but that does not change the fact.

 

[RebeccaJ]

This of course is where we disagree. There are some fundamental laws which God did not create but uses to bring about his eternal purposes. Indeed there is likely wide and varied freedom to create within these laws and from our limited perspective it is difficult to tell which laws are fundamental but that does not change the fact.

Why disagree with what is reasonable and rational?

This is the fundamental flaw of Mormonism: a god that is not creator and subject to laws. Who or what is the creator of these laws? If they have always existed then you are naming them as gods. Even calling them “what rules and governs”. What or whose eternal purposes? Really, have you thought this through? Who is this god that has defined eternal purposes of which your god is subject to?

God is our ruler and governor, there is nothing that exists outside of Him, or that He is subject to.

It is a in our eyes a weak god, no god at all, who is dependent and subject to some thing. This is not God, but an idol of human making.

 

[Janderich]

Why disagree with what is reasonable and rational?

Laws are reasonable and rational. A being who has no rules in which to function is not.

Let me give you and example as to why a god who has no laws is not rational. Let’s play a game. I’ll call it Jandrich’s Game. Go ahead and start Rebecca…

You of course can do nothing. The game has no boundaries. Do you role a die, do you move a piece. You cannot function. The game is over before it starts. We cannot even talk about the game because the entire thing is non-sequitur. Such is a god with no boundaries. It sounds good in speech but ultimately empty in meaning.

 

[TexanKnight]

I agree with Jerusha. I remember clearly Mormons teaching that Mary was just an ordinary woman. Denying the virgin birth of Jesus. Guessing, or claiming as truth (depending on the Mormon) at God copulating with one of His own creations.

They believe God came down and had sex with Mary. How does that not denigrate her?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Laws are reasonable and rational. A being who has no rules in which to function is not.

Let me give you and example as to why a god who has no laws is not rational. Let’s play a game. I’ll call it Jandrich’s Game. Go ahead and start Rebecca…

You of course can do nothing. The game has no boundaries. Do you role a die, do you move a piece. You cannot function. The game is over before it starts. We cannot even talk about the game because the entire thing is non-sequitur. Such is a god with no boundaries. It sounds good in speech but ultimately empty in meaning.

This is of course your view, from being a creation of God. You have made God in your image, and devise a game where you are God and life is a game.

God is not a game or a man. God IS. He has revealed Himself as Good. What you describe here is not faith in God, and His love for you, but faith in the rules you believe keep Him.

 

[TexanKnight]

If in order to be a miracle it must break all laws of space and time then I submit you have not found a miracle but an impossibility.

Please note the Sun out your window. Were it not for law of universal gravitation, the Sun and Earth would separate. Earth would spin out of it’s orbit and all life on this planet would die. (Except for maybe cockroaches which are amazing ). Is it such a large step to believe that everything occurs because of law? Indeed, I would say law must exist for miracles to occur, else what rules would govern even a given miracles occurrence?

Yes, it is a miracle because God made it all happen that way. See, We believe God made all things. You believe all things made god.

 

[TexanKnight]

This of course is where we disagree. There are some fundamental laws which God did not create but uses to bring about his eternal purposes. Indeed there is likely wide and varied freedom to create within these laws and from our limited perspective it is difficult to tell which laws are fundamental but that does not change the fact.

Janderich, let me say I am honored that you LDS folks are afraid to discuss with me. It will not stop me from posting truth, but I truly understand your fear.

Having said that, it is a shame you do not believe the true God. The true God made all, your god is made by outside forces. That is not a god, it is a project.

 

[Stephen168]

Laws are reasonable and rational. A being who has no rules in which to function is not.

Let me give you and example as to why a god who has no laws is not rational. Let’s play a game. I’ll call it Jandrich’s Game. Go ahead and start Rebecca…

You of course can do nothing. The game has no boundaries.

If I was playing a game with no boundaries, I could do anything. God can do anything. The Mormon god seems to be stuck playing by somebody else’s rule. Who is the somebody else?

 

[Stephen168]

As long as you don’t try make me an offender for a word, I’m fine with definitions. Granted the definitions I write may need some clarification as they are discussed. Also, I don’t want to get hung up on a Webster’s dictionary definition etc. I want to come to an understanding and see where we disagree.

omniscient - All knowing.
omnipotent - Unlimited power, though not to the point of impossibility.
exist - To be, to have life, independence, and the ability to progress.
eternal - Unique existence without beginning or end.
God - The father of the spirits of all humanity. The ruler of the universe as we know it.
eternities - Place where time has no application.
progress - To develop.
create - To organize, to form.

I am ‘hung up’ on two things I see.
‘omni’ means all. As you said omniscient is all knowing, so omnipotent means all powerful not just real real powerful. An omnipotent God can create anything from nothing, a real real powerful god has to play by another god’s rules.

How does god progress if he is already omniscient and omnipotent, etc?

 

[Janderich]

I am ‘hung up’ on two things I see.
‘omni’ means all. As you said omniscient is all knowing, so omnipotent means all powerful not just real real powerful. An omnipotent God can create anything from nothing, a real real powerful god has to play by another god’s rules.

How does god progress if he is already omniscient and omnipotent, etc?

As you have said He does not need to learn more, nor is He lacking in power. God progresses as his children are exalted. We believe that is his work and his glory (see Moses 1:39). Joseph Smith in talking about Jesus and the Father summed it up in these words:

What did Jesus do? Why, I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence. I saw my Father work out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom I shall present it to my Father so that he obtains kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt his glory. And so Jesus treads in his tracks to inherit what God did before. It is plain beyond disputation. (Teaching of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p347,348)

 

[truthsave]

Janderich, let me say I am honored that you LDS folks are afraid to discuss with me. It will not stop me from posting truth, but I truly understand your fear.

Having said that, it is a shame you do not believe the true God. The true God made all, your god is made by outside forces. That is not a god, it is a project.

Thank you for this statement. It has been a long time I had something in my brain about mormonism and now after I have red your sentence I could finally remember it.
A book I have red long long time ago writen by one of the most if not the most important writer on the subject of evolution of consciousness.
Even though I don’t share the writer’s beliefs his insight is extremely remarkable.
It is the Atman project by Ken Wilber.
.
"**Each stage or level of growth seek absolute Unity (the Atman trend or Atman telos) but in way or under conditions that necessarily prevent it, and allow only substitute unities and substitutes gratifications, (that is the Atman project proper).
**

 

[truthsave]

… It is also very interesting no mormon answered either what once I have written about apostasy

*Of course it was to prepare humanity to the revelation He would have given to Joseph Smith. And this preparation had to be preceded by an apostasy. So He, Jesus Christ, whose coming was so much waited and prophetized, prepared the field so it after would fell down and apostasize to wait the right time to reveal the fullness of truth to Joseph Smith.
At that point Jesus could have come later when the humanity was going to be ready to accept the fullnes of truth prepared by Joseph Smith before Him as another John the Batistis or something like that.
But apparently believing through Joseph Smith is in a way better. *

or what TexanKnight wrote about the “cruelty” (for susteining mormons standpoint of view) of Christ sending his friends to a useless mission and martirium that soon would have turned in a “apostasy” since the real mission was not in the hands of His apostols but had to be held by mormons missionaries…

 

[Stephen168]

As you have said He does not need to learn more, nor is He lacking in power. God progresses as his children are exalted. We believe that is his work and his glory (see Moses 1:39). Joseph Smith in talking about Jesus and the Father summed it up in these words:

Using the Mormon definition of omnipotent, your god is lacking in power. Your god has to play by the rules set by a more powerful God.

It seems your god is no longer progressing but is getting points for the progress of others. Who got points when your god became exalted?