Mormons and Catholics Get Along Fine!

[mjf001]

[SIGN]

Michael,
Growing up LDS, did you never hear the saying that “a prophet is only a prophet when he is acting as such”? Did you never understand that the Quorum of the Twelve needed to have a completely unanimous feeling about a “doctrine” in order for it to be taught as doctrine? If not, then you weren’t taught well. Did you never understand that each person needs to get a spiritual witness by the Holy Ghost for even the teachings of the prophets and apostles–in other words, there really should be no such thing as “blind faith” or “blind obedience”? These things are plainly taught. [/SIGN]

1. No
2. Sort of
3. That may well be, but I started asking tough questions when I was eleven that no one around me had answers for. As those unanswered questions piled up, well, the writing was kind of on the wall.
4. I never read the BoM, could never get past 1st Nephi, chapter 1. I could, sit for an hour and read the bible. In fact, I found a book of OT bible stories when I was eight and read the whole thing in less than a day. I’ve always loved the Bible.

[SIGN]A “prophet” (especially under the stresses Brigham Young was under during his life) can have a “bad day”. Just because he is the Lord’s mouthpiece does not mean everything he says is what the Lord would say, because the Lord even lets the prophet learn and grow and seek inspiration and not necessarily “get it right” every time. The Lord let Brigham Young say what he felt he wanted to say, and let the order of the church take care of the matter in this instance–the apostles disagreed, and the matter was eventually dropped.[/SIGN]

Statements like this make no sense to me, particularly in matters of truth. When it comes to God, things are either true or not. How can the leader of a church, particularly one who claims to communicate with God, not understand the nature of God. That seems a rather straight forward point, to me. In matters of doctrine, one who leads the faithful had better get it right, every time.

[SIGN]The credibility issue has to do with getting personal witness from the Holy Ghost whenever one hears a lesson or a talk or a message or a change in procedure. The Holy Ghost is the perfect credible witness. Men are not. They bear witness, but the Holy Ghost is the sealing influence who tells those who are listening whether the witness being conveyed by a teacher or a leader is true.

[/SIGN]

I disagree with this point. Credibility can not only be based “just about a feeling”. Objective truth and reality should weigh at least equal with the subjective. Otherwise, how do you know you’re being led to the truth. Do you know how many people have been misled, throughout human history by people because of feelings? The Holy Spirit will lead to all truth, but not all spirits will. As people, how are we to know which spirit is testifying to us? Or if we’re succumbing to a psychological trick? Or if our mind’s are telling us what we want to hear? You see, there are other possibilities. That’s not to say I don’t believe in the Spirit or private revelation, I do. I just think you’d better know what you’re dealing with.

[SIGN][/SIGN]

 

[ParkerD]

I disagree with this point. Credibility can not only be based “just about a feeling”. Objective truth and reality should weigh at least equal with the subjective. Otherwise, how do you know you’re being led to the truth. Do you know how many people have been misled, throughout human history by people because of feelings? The Holy Spirit will lead to all truth, but not all spirits will. As people, how are we to know which spirit is testifying to us? Or if we’re succumbing to a psychological trick? Or if our mind’s are telling us what we want to hear? You see, there are other possibilities. That’s not to say I don’t believe in the Spirit or private revelation, I do. I just think you’d better know what you’re dealing with.

Michael,
At least five foundational principles ought to be in place for a person to say they have a confirming witness of the Holy Ghost about a doctrine or a decision they are making.
1–It ought to have been taught in the scriptures, in some basic understandable way, or be in accordance with scriptural teachings.
2–It ought to be verifiable by being logical within the scope of human history and valid human experience.
3–It ought to have been a matter of sincere personal prayer, whether aloud or in the mind and heart. The person needs to have asked God a straightforward question, and been patient about receiving an answer.
4–It ought to have charity and love and faith in God and His plan of salvation as a basic premise for whatever the person thinks is a witness of the Holy Ghost telling them something they should do or believe. If not, it is clearly a false spirit trying to get their attention.
5–The person ought to feel completely peaceful and right, not rushed or doubtful or disquieted or “pushed into a corner” about the witness they have received, or if any of these is present then it is clearly a false spirit. They ought to feel like their own agency and everyone else’s agency is being upheld or strengthened by the decision or the teaching.

So, I agree with your statement that “you’d better know what you’re dealing with.” I agree that it’s no small matter to seek and receive the guidance of the Holy Ghost, and although I’ve gotten better at it over the years I have been misguided many many times by either my own feelings or by my impatience, and still have a long way to go. I think one of the major things this life is all about is learning to be guided by the Holy Ghost and to know when that is happening in our life.

 

[zerinus]

Zerinus, I’ve now read the sermon in context. There are many questionable statements made in that sermon. Adam being the St. Michael the archangel, . . .

There is nothing “questionable” about that. That is indeed correct LDS doctrine. We believe that Adam is the same as Michael the Archangel. We believe that angels are of the same race as mankind; and that all true prophets, Apostles, and saints who die in righteousness will eventually be resurrected, and in that capacity are angels, or ministering servants, to God.

. . . Adam being the Father, Christ being begotten of the Father as in the Garden, and not by the power of the Holy Spirit.

That is part of the Adam-God theory that the Church rejects and has never accepted as doctrine.

If I’d heard these statements while I still believed the way I’d been taught, as an LDS, I’m pretty sure I would have started questioning, right then.

You wouldn’t need to. They were “questioned,” and rejected many years ago, and never accepted as a doctrine of the Church.

As a Catholic, I find the entire sermon offensive. I can’t say I would say it was inspired by God.

Well, I don’t know what you do as a Catholic; but as a Mormon I can say that I don’t find it “offensive,” but I don’t accept it as doctrine either, and neither does the LDS Church.

So, I repeat my question. How can a prophet, who is supposed to have direct communication with God, according to LDS belief, utter these kind of statements in whatever context, and still retain his credibility as a prophet? Truth is truth, it doesn’t change.

Do you remember the story of Jonah the Old Testament prophet who “ran away from God” because he didn’t want to obey God’s commandment to go and preach repentance to the people of Nineveh? Then he got into a ship and said more dumb things and they threw him overboard, until finally a fish swallowed him up and vomited him back on the shore! Then he finally did what God had commanded him to do; and when God would not destroy the people of Nineveh as He had promised, Jonah got angry, and sulked, and wished to die! Your question is like saying, “How can a nutcase like Jonah who runs away from God, and then acts like a fool, be considered a prophet of God”? Well, like it or not, he was, and so was Brigham young. Prophets are human beings like us. I doubt there has ever been a prophet who has not done some goofy things in his life.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Do you remember the story of Jonah the Old Testament prophet who “ran away from God” because he didn’t want to obey God’s commandment to go and preach repentance to the people of Nineveh? Then he got into a ship and said more dumb things and they threw him overboard, until finally a fish swallowed him up and vomited him back on the shore! Then he finally did what God had commanded him to do; and when God would not destroy the people of Nineveh as He had promised, Jonah got angry, and sulked, and wished to die! Your question is like saying, “How can a nutcase like Jonah who runs away from God, and then acts like a fool, be considered a prophet of God”? Well, like it or not, he was, and so was Brigham young. Prophets are human beings like us. I doubt there has ever been a prophet who has not done some goofy things in his life.

Jonah never claimed his actions against God were directed by God, divinely inspired, doctrine, scripture, etc. No one ever wrote songs praising the doctrine of disobeying God as Jonah taught, because, Jonah never taught any such thing. The story of Jonah is like many in the Bible, an illustration of what not to do, with the moral of the story being, obey the commandments of God. Which, is in line with the entire Old and New Testament.

No doubt we can learn from Jonah to do as God commands. What do you learn from a so called prophet who gives false teachings? What did BY teach that is in line with the entire Old and New Testament?

A false prophet is a false prophet, no matter how you dress him up.

 

[zerinus]

Jonah never claimed his actions against God were directed by God, divinely inspired, doctrine, scripture, etc. No one ever wrote songs praising the doctrine of disobeying God as Jonah taught, because, Jonah never taught any such thing. The story of Jonah is like many in the Bible, an illustration of what not to do, with the moral of the story being, obey the commandments of God. Which, is in line with the entire Old and New Testament.

I think that willfully disobeying God is a far more serious offense than erring in doctrine. I think that denying the Lord as Peter did is a more serious offence than erring in doctrine. I think that persecuting the saints as Paul had done is a more serious offence than erring in doctrine. I think that killing someone as Moses did is a more serious offense than erring in doctrine. I think that getting drunk, and indecently exposing yourself in your tent, and end up having to curse your own son as Noah did, is a more serious offence than erring in doctrine.

No doubt we can learn from Jonah to do as God commands. What do you learn from a so called prophet who gives false teachings? What did BY teach that is in line with the entire Old and New Testament?

Pretty much everything! The Adam-God theory (and a few other things he said that the critics like to jump on) are a tiny fraction of the total amount sermons and conference talks he uttered, which are inspiring and edifying. It is just that the apostates and anit-Mormons like blow them out of all proportion. Around twelve years ago the Church published a Priesthood / Relief Society study manual that consisted of the teachings of Brigham young. You can read it in PDF format online here. I think that they are not only “in line with the entire Old and New Testament,” but also highly inspiring and edifying.

A false prophet is a false prophet, no matter how you dress him up.

No doubt.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I think that willfully disobeying God is a far more serious offense than erring in doctrine. I think that denying the Lord as Peter did is a more serious offence than erring in doctrine. I think that persecuting the saints as Paul had done is a more serious offence than erring in doctrine. I think that killing someone as Moses did is a more serious offense than erring in doctrine. I think that getting drunk, and indecently exposing yourself in your tent, and end up having to curse your own son as Noah did, is a more serious offence than erring in doctrine.

Pretty much everything! The Adam-God theory (and a few other things he said that the critics like to jump on) are a tiny fraction of the total amount sermons and conference talks he uttered, which are inspiring and edifying. It is just that the apostates and anit-Mormons like blow them out of all proportion. Around twelve years ago the Church published a Priesthood / Relief Society study manual that consisted of the teachings of Brigham young. You can read it in PDF format online here. I think that they are not only “in line with the entire Old and New Testament,” but also highly inspiring and edifying.

I could say the same for any number of people who preach from the Bible. Some things, they get right, other things, not so much.

BY taught enough wrongness for me to understand that when he got it right, it was only a matter of sticking to what he learned before he joined the Restoration movement of the LDS. Polygamy alone, with his 30-something wives, discounts anything he has to say. Period. Add to that the Adam_God teaching, which included a whole lot more than Adam is God. Adam was born of divine parents, not created. This occured on another planet and then he was brought to this earth. God the Father having sexual relationships with Mary. Christ was the son of Adam. It goes on and on.

When the claim is being made that the person is a prophet of GOD, and they get so much wrong, it doesn’t take a genius to understand they are winging it.

 

[Christian55]

Part 1 of 2: Mormonism-Adam/God Theory

I have been participating in a number of LDS Threads (there are many). Every time I present difficult material or ask difficult questions regarding the history of Mormonism, I am either ignored or slandered. Neither creates a positive image for the LDS Church.

It really does not matter how current “Mormon Doctrine” is defined. The LDS Church was founded by Joseph Smith, who believed Adam is the “Ancient of Days.”

The second Mormon Prophet, Brigham Young claimed Adam is “MICHAEL, the Archangel,” the “ANCIENT OF DAYS,” “FATHER and GOD,” and “the only God with whom WE have to do.” Young claimed this was revealed to him by God, and by talking with Joseph Smith.

Joseph Smith declared that “Adam” was the “Ancient of Days.” (Doctrine and Covenants 27:11; 116:1; 138:38.)

Joseph Smith used Daniel, Chapter 7, to justify his belief, when he stated, “Daniel in his seventh chapter speaks of the Ancient of Days, he means the oldest man, our Father Adam…” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg. 157).

Are there any non-LDS Forum Members who would accept that Adam is the “Ancient of Days?”

The “Ancient of Days is God,” the one true God, not Adam.

In 1847, Brigham Young became the 2nd Prophet/President of the Mormon Church, and continued in his role as Prophet, until his death in 1877. Young was Prophet/President of the Mormon Church for 30 years.

The following are quotes taken from Brigham Young’s Sermon of April 9, 1852, found in the Journal of Discourses of the General Authorities of the LDS Church, Volume 1:50-51 (For Forum Members who do not have access to the LDS Journal of Discourses, it is online at journalofdiscourses.org/volume-01/):

It is also in my Post #156 on Thread entitled “Mormons and Catholics Get Along Fine!”
Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=349290&page=4

Regarding Adam:

“When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him.”

“He helped to make and organize this world.”

“He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken”

“HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do.”

Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later.

When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal.

Regarding the Virgin Mary, Jesus, Deity:

“When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness.”

“He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost.”

“And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; and when he took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven, after the same manner as the tabernacles of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve. . . …”

“It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael, these three forming a quorum, as in all heavenly bodies, and in organizing element, perfectly represented in the Deity, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.”

“Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven.”

“Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost.”

On June 8th, 1873, 21 years later, Young restated his belief that Adam is god, claiming it was revealed to him by God; and that he could not find any man on the earth who could tell him this, until he met and talked with Joseph Smith.

The Desert News
Discourse
By President Brigham Young
Delivered in the new Tabernacle
Salt Lake City, Sunday Afternoon, June 8th, 1873

“How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me—namely that Adam is our Father and God—I do not know, I do not inquire, I care nothing about it. Our Father Adam helped to make this earth, it was created expressly for him, and after it was made he and his companions came here. He brought one of his wives with him, and she was called Eve, because she was the first woman upon the earth. Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or who ever will come upon the earth. I have been found fault with by the ministers of religion because I have said that they were ignorant. But I could not find any man on the earth who could tell me this, although it is one of the simplest things in the world, until I met and talked with Joseph Smith.”
Link: udn.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/deseretnews3&CISOPTR=143021&CISOSHOW=143025

© THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH | J. Willard Marriott Library 295 S 1500 E SLC, UT 84112-0860

I really do not understand how Brigham Young could remain Prophet and President of the Mormon Church for 30 years, claiming Adam is god, unless his followers believed in him.

LDS Members refer to Young’s claims as the “Adam-God Theory.” However, it is clear this was not a theory, in the eyes of Brigham–since he stated that Adam is “the only God with whom WE have to do.”

Continued–Part 2-Next Post

 

[Christian55]

Continued-Part 2 of 2: Mormonism-Adam/God Theory

Finrock, LDS Forum Member, Post #25 Thread: Understanding Mormon Doctrine
Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=352785&page=2

**Originally Posted by Finrock **

“. . . . .Mormons during Brigham Youngs time were not bound by the Adam-God theory he proposed. Also, the dichotomy you’ve provided, isn’t valid. It is possible that Brigham Young is teaching the truth, but we simply don’t understand what he means. Or, it is possible that Brigham Young is teaching the truth, but we aren’t required to accept it because it was never consistently taught and published, it was not added to our canon of scripture, there was no official declaration or proclamation pertaining to it, and it wasn’t added to the Articles of Faith. Therefore, a member is under no obligation to believe the teaching or accept it. . . . .”

I respect Finrock for this comment. It seems to be an honest one.

However, considering all the history I have read about the origins of Mormonism; I must conclude that Smith & Young were false prophets leading their people to follow a false god: Adam.

The Biblical test of a true Prophet is that all prophesies must come true. This is a very specific criteria. The Prophesies spoken by a true Prophet of God must 100% accurate, 100% of the time. There are no second chances.

In Biblical times, a prophet who presumed to speak in the name of God, anything God did not command him to say, was to be put to death. That tells us how critical this issue really is.

LDS Forum Members, please know that I am not advocating the death sentence for any of your prophets; I am simply quoting Scriptures from the Bible to show the serious requirements for a Prophet.

Deuteronomy 18:19-22: 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. 20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?” 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

For LDS Members who slander those of us who quote your founders, let me say that I am not a “Mormon-hater” or any of the other terrible names you have hurled, instead of answering the issues. Surely, you must realize that slanderous behavior is not the best witness for your faith.

For me, this is all about truth, God’s Truth. I harbor no ill feelings toward the Mormon Church or any other Church. I believe we are to love God with all our hearts, mind, and soul; and we are to love our neighbors as ourselves.

If I have misquoted anything in this Post, then please correct my quotes in a respectful manner. All information quoted (in this 2-part Post) regarding Joseph Smith and Brigham Young can be found at official LDS websites.

I pray that God will open our hearts and minds to His Truth.

 

[FBI_Agent711]

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/9/9a/Nice_sick_stuff.JPG
http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/9/9a/Nice_sick_stuff.JPG
http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/9/9a/Nice_sick_stuff.JPG
http://images.encyclopediadramatica...dramatica.com/images/9/9a/Nice_sick_stuff.JPG

 

[mjf001]

I could say the same for any number of people who preach from the Bible. Some things, they get right, other things, not so much.

BY taught enough wrongness for me to understand that when he got it right, it was only a matter of sticking to what he learned before he joined the Restoration movement of the LDS. Polygamy alone, with his 30-something wives, discounts anything he has to say. Period. Add to that the Adam_God teaching, which included a whole lot more than Adam is God. Adam was born of divine parents, not created. This occured on another planet and then he was brought to this earth. God the Father having sexual relationships with Mary. Christ was the son of Adam. It goes on and on.

When the claim is being made that the person is a prophet of GOD, and they get so much wrong, it doesn’t take a genius to understand they are winging it.

Exactly, couldn’t have said it any better.

 

[mjf001]

Michael,
At least five foundational principles ought to be in place for a person to say they have a confirming witness of the Holy Ghost about a doctrine or a decision they are making.
1–It ought to have been taught in the scriptures, in some basic understandable way, or be in accordance with scriptural teachings.
2–It ought to be verifiable by being logical within the scope of human history and valid human experience.
3–It ought to have been a matter of sincere personal prayer, whether aloud or in the mind and heart. The person needs to have asked God a straightforward question, and been patient about receiving an answer.
4–It ought to have charity and love and faith in God and His plan of salvation as a basic premise for whatever the person thinks is a witness of the Holy Ghost telling them something they should do or believe. If not, it is clearly a false spirit trying to get their attention.
5–The person ought to feel completely peaceful and right, not rushed or doubtful or disquieted or “pushed into a corner” about the witness they have received, or if any of these is present then it is clearly a false spirit. They ought to feel like their own agency and everyone else’s agency is being upheld or strengthened by the decision or the teaching.

So, I agree with your statement that “you’d better know what you’re dealing with.” I agree that it’s no small matter to seek and receive the guidance of the Holy Ghost, and although I’ve gotten better at it over the years I have been misguided many many times by either my own feelings or by my impatience, and still have a long way to go. I think one of the major things this life is all about is learning to be guided by the Holy Ghost and to know when that is happening in our life.

Even with the above criteria, it is still possible for a person to be led into error. How do we know we’re interpreting the scripture correctly? Or history for that matter? Do we have any hidden biases which color our perspective? I think one thing your missing here, is authority? And the people who claim to have that authority should show the same consistency that you’re positing in the above list.

 

[ParkerD]

Even with the above criteria, it is still possible for a person to be led into error. How do we know we’re interpreting the scripture correctly? Or history for that matter? Do we have any hidden biases which color our perspective? I think one thing your missing here, is authority? And the people who claim to have that authority should show the same consistency that you’re positing in the above list.

Michael,
Those are very good points and good questions. I basically agree with you, and I think if a person is trying their best to live the gospel as they have understood it from the Bible, including the criteria I had listed, then even though two people may have different understanding about certain passages, they are going to be headed in a direction that will fulfill God’s purposes and He will guide them along a path that will be beneficial to themselves and others. If they trust in God’s guidance, He will guide them along including guiding toward new insights.

The authority issue for me hinges on agency. If an authority figure, especially in religion, exerts that authority by saying in essence “I know more than you know so follow what I have said,” then that is to usurp authority. If they say, “here is what I have been impressed to tell you–pray for spiritual guidance and understanding yourself and you will be blessed to come to understand this also, but the decision is yours,” then it seems to me that they have preserved agency and allowed for individual spiritual guidance.

I might as well acknowledge that Brigham Young seemed to exert a level of authoritative leadership that I disagree with, but perhaps it was necessary for its time. I think he was the man who was needed to give leadership in the colonizing situation of his time period, but that doesn’t mean he was a perfect leader. God does His work through imperfect people, and prophets are no different in that respect.

 

[dianaiad]

Your persistence is seen at best, as you lacking in faith and the gift of the Holy Spirit. At worse, as an enemy that is persecuting.

I wouldn’t take it personally.

He is an enemy. We didn’t declare him that, though, he did. You know that my definition of “anti” is rather strict…and he is an anti. Why? Because he deliberately takes things out of context, and when corrected refuses to acknowledge his error. He simply waits for a beat or two and does it again.

He equivocates.

He claims that his questions are not answered when, indeed, they are–over and over again. He doesn’t like the answers, but that doesn’t mean they were not answered. He reminds me of my niece who called me today crying because she flunked the assessment test for math, and so is not able to enroll in Algebra. She has to take Math 60 (not even Math 70, but…Math 60.) This means that it is going to take her a full year of remedial math in order to be ready to take college level math.

In the meantime, she’s acing English, Lit and history classes, as well as her science classes. Ok, she says, I want to take Algebra. They won’t let me. Fix it.

I say…sorry, your assessment test says “Math 60.” you have two choices; retake the assessment test and hope for a better grade or take Math 60. “But…” she whined…" I don’t WANT to take Math 60! I have to have Algebra for my AA so I can transfer!" I said “fine. Retake the assessment test and hope for a better grade or take Math 60 and 70, then take Algebra.”

“But…I don’t want to!”

“Fine. Don’t. Then you won’t get the classes you need to transfer and to graduate.”

“But it will take me a year!”

“Fine. go cram for a few weeks, retake the assessment test and get a better grade.”

…and on it went.

The end of the conversation was “Oh, you are no help, Aunt Diana; you didn’t answer any of my questions!”

…

Yep, Christian reminds me of that.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Yep, Christian reminds me of that.

I think you just did exactly what Christian55 says you (the collective Mormon you) do. Nothing answered. Personal attack.

And I think you just compared your niece to someone you call an “enemy”.

 

[Christian55]

I think you just did exactly what Christian55 says you (the collective Mormon you) do. Nothing answered. Personal attack.

And I think you just compared your niece to someone you call an “enemy”.

Thank you Rebecca. I appreciate your support.

 

[Christian55]

Michael,
Those are very good points and good questions. I basically agree with you, and I think if a person is trying their best to live the gospel as they have understood it from the Bible, including the criteria I had listed, then even though two people may have different understanding about certain passages, they are going to be headed in a direction that will fulfill God’s purposes and He will guide them along a path that will be beneficial to themselves and others. If they trust in God’s guidance, He will guide them along including guiding toward new insights.

The authority issue for me hinges on agency. If an authority figure, especially in religion, exerts that authority by saying in essence “I know more than you know so follow what I have said,” then that is to usurp authority. If they say, “here is what I have been impressed to tell you–pray for spiritual guidance and understanding yourself and you will be blessed to come to understand this also, but the decision is yours,” then it seems to me that they have preserved agency and allowed for individual spiritual guidance.

I might as well acknowledge that Brigham Young seemed to exert a level of authoritative leadership that I disagree with, but perhaps it was necessary for its time. I think he was the man who was needed to give leadership in the colonizing situation of his time period, but that doesn’t mean he was a perfect leader. God does His work through imperfect people, and prophets are no different in that respect.

Actually, Prophets are different. If a prophet claims a revelation from God, as Brigham Young did in claiming Adam is god, there is no margin for error.

As the Holy Scriptures clearly state:

Deuteronomy 18:19-22: 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. 20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?” 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

Young proclaimed his heresy for 30 years, and led his people to worship Adam, not God.

Young was a false prophet. There is no way around this, unless you deny what is written in the Bible. There is never a time when a false prophet, claiming a false god, is required or needed–at least not in Christianity.

 

[Christian55]

He is an enemy. We didn’t declare him that, though, he did. You know that my definition of “anti” is rather strict…and he is an anti. Why? Because he deliberately takes things out of context, and when corrected refuses to acknowledge his error. He simply waits for a beat or two and does it again.

He equivocates.
He claims that his questions are not answered when, indeed, they are–over and over again. He doesn’t like the answers, but that doesn’t mean they were not answered. . . . .

 

[ParkerD]

Christian 55,
Brigham Young did not change the way the Mormons worshiped God at all. They still prayed to Heavenly Father as Heavenly Father, in the name of Jesus Christ.

But have a nice day.

 

[mjf001]

Christian 55,
Brigham Young did not change the way the Mormons worshiped God at all. They still prayed to Heavenly Father as Heavenly Father, in the name of Jesus Christ.

But have a nice day.

As a Catholic, I pray to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. As they are all God, this is right and good.

 

[Christian55]

Christian 55,
Brigham Young did not change the way the Mormons worshiped God at all. They still prayed to Heavenly Father as Heavenly Father, in the name of Jesus Christ.

But have a nice day.

I appreciate your polite response. However, you are leaving out the most important detail: Brigham Young believed Adam was the Father. He preached that for 30 years.

Mormon Prophet, Brighan Young, April 9, 1852, (Journal of Discourses of the General Authorities of the LDS Church, Volume 1) (For Forum Members who do not have access to the LDS Journal of Discourses, it is online at journalofdiscourses.org/volume-01/):

Journal of Discourses Volume 1:50-51
"Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken–HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do.

On June 8th, 1873, 21 years later, Young restated his belief that Adam is god, claiming it was revealed to him by God; and that he could not find any man on the earth who could tell him this, until he met and talked with Joseph Smith.

The Desert News
Discourse
By President Brigham Young
Delivered in the new Tabernacle
Salt Lake City, Sunday Afternoon, June 8th, 1873

"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me—namely that Adam is our Father and God—I do not know, I do not inquire, I care nothing about it. Our Father Adam helped to make this earth, it was created expressly for him, and after it was made he and his companions came here. He brought one of his wives with him, and she was called Eve, because she was the first woman upon the earth. Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or who ever will come upon the earth. I have been found fault with by the ministers of religion because I have said that they were ignorant. But I could not find any man on the earth who could tell me this, although it is one of the simplest things in the world, until I met and talked with Joseph Smith."
Link: udn.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/documen…ISOSHOW=143025
© THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH | J. Willard Marriott Library 295 S 1500 E SLC, UT 84112-0860

For the LDS Forum Members who claim these quotes are taken out of context–this is yet another opportunity for you to explain the quotes in “context.”

When I pray to God the Father, in the name of Christ the Son, I am not praying to Adam.