Teachings of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith Regarding the Godhead as Relates to Biblical Teachings

[Third_Day]

=ParkerD;6556616]This thread is being started to try and alleviate many misunderstandings regarding LDS beliefs

ParkerD you seem to be very knowledgable of your Mormon Faith. I have been to the Mormon website and asked questions and they all give different answers. Could you answer these please with a yes or no and then you can explain more if you wish. Thanks for your cooperation.

Is it true that the Mormon faith teaches that a faithful Mormon , after death,can progress and become a God and can progress and produce “spirit” children. Yes or no.

Is it true that if a faithful Mormon dies in the unconfessed and unrepented sin of adulterery or fornication they can, in the spirit world, repent and be forgiven and not suffer eternal damnation. Yes or no.

Is it true that there will be Mormon Missionaries in the spirit world that will try to convert non-Mormons. yes or no.

Is it true that God the Father was once a man and progressed into a God. Yes or no

Is it true that God the Father had parents and did not always exist. Yes or no.

Is it true that Jesus did not always exist. Yes or no

Is it Mormon teaching that we are to pray to God the Father and not to Jesus. Yes or no.

Is it true that God is flesh and bones. Yes or no. If yes how do you interpete this from
the Bible “God is spirit “ John 4:24 “A spirit hath not flesh and bones” Luke 24:39

Is it true that the Garden of Eden is in Spring Hill Missouri. Yes or no

“

 

[ParkerD]

I find your explanation and Parker"s to be contrary of the Book of Mormon which states:
3 Nephi 2:14-15 “ANd it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites,and their curse was taken from them, and their** skin became white** like the Nephites”

Is the apostle John alive today?

Third Day,
In answer to your last question, according to the Savior since the Second Coming hasn’t happened yet, the apostle John would indeed still be alive today (but that doesn’t mean the people he visits realize who is visiting them and teaching them).

Note a larger part of 3 Nephi 2:

6 And *six hundred and nine years had passed away since Lehi left Jerusalem.
7 And nine years had passed away from the time when the sign was given, which was spoken of by the prophets, that Christ should come into the world.
8 Now the Nephites began to reckon their time from this period when the sign was given, or from the coming of Christ; therefore, nine years had passed away.
9 And Nephi, who was the father of Nephi, who had the charge of the records, did not return to the land of Zarahemla, and could nowhere be found in all the land.
10 And it came to pass that the people did still remain in wickedness, notwithstanding the much preaching and prophesying which was sent among them; and thus passed away the tenth year also; and the eleventh year also passed away in iniquity.
11 And it came to pass in the *thirteenth year there began to be wars and contentions throughout all the land; for the Gadianton robbers had become so numerous, and did slay so many of the people, and did lay waste so many cities, and did spread so much death and carnage throughout the land, that it became expedient that all the people, both the Nephites and the Lamanites, should take up arms against them.
12 Therefore, all the Lamanites who had become converted unto the Lord did unite with their brethren, the Nephites, and were compelled, for the safety of their lives and their women and their children, to take up arms against those Gadianton robbers, yea, and also to maintain their rights, and the privileges of their church and of their worship, and their freedom and their liberty.
13 And it came to pass that before this thirteenth year had passed away the Nephites were threatened with utter destruction because of this war, which had become exceedingly sore.
14 And it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites;
15 And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites;
16 And their young men and their daughters became exceedingly fair, and they were numbered among the Nephites, and were called Nephites. And thus ended the thirteenth year.
17 And it came to pass in the commencement of the fourteenth year, the war between the robbers and the people of Nephi did continue and did become exceedingly sore; nevertheless, the people of Nephi did gain some advantage of the robbers, insomuch that they did drive them back out of their lands into the mountains and into their secret places.
18 And thus ended the fourteenth year. And in the *fifteenth year they did come forth against the people of Nephi; and because of the wickedness of the people of Nephi, and their many contentions and dissensions, the Gadianton robbers did gain many advantages over them.
19 And thus ended the fifteenth year, and thus were the people in a state of many afflictions; and the sword of destruction did hang over them, insomuch that they were about to be smitten down by it, and this because of their iniquity.

What verses 15 and 16 mean is that there was no longer an issue of “marrying in the covenant” by marrying a Nephite, in that a Nephite could marry a converted Lamanite and it be recognized as a covenant marriage. Note also that the Gadianton robbers were mostly Nephites, and their skin color did not change even though they were robbers and murderers–so the skin color did not reflect the righteousness of the person.

The larger issue for one such as a casual reader, is that the Book of Mormon is going to be a stumbling block for them and deliberately so as inspired by God. So the issues you are bringing up are a part of that stumbling block, and are there so that a person is able to dismiss the book at first glance by reading a few verses and saying “this is not for me” and thus they will not bring upon themselves a greater condemnation from having read too much of it and having rejected the plain, forthright and clear message of coming unto Christ and getting the guidance of the Holy Spirit in one’s life through such a prophetic book of scripture.

 

[Third_Day]

=ParkerD;6558079]Third Day,
In answer to your last question, according to the Savior **since the Second Coming hasn’t happened yet, the apostle John would indeed still be alive today **(but that doesn’t mean the people he visits realize who is visiting them and teaching them).

That 's not what Jesus said. He never said that John would remain alive until the second coming.
John 21:21-23 "When Peter saw him, he asked, Lord, what about him? Jesus answered, If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me. Because of this, the rumour spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?

Jesus is simply saying to the apostles to mind their own business.

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD you seem to be very knowledgable of your Mormon Faith. I have been to the Mormon website and asked questions and they all give different answers. Could you answer these please with a yes or no and then you can explain more if you wish. Thanks for your cooperation.

Third Day,
I don’t have time to give but only brief clarification about your questions (but have done so on other threads), so I’ll do what you have asked and answer with “yes” or “no” based on each specific question and its wording.

Is it true that the Mormon faith teaches that a faithful Mormon , after death,can progress and become a God and can progress and produce “spirit” children. Yes or no.

Yes if you change the capital “G” to the small letter “g” and if that means “joint heir with Christ” in your mind, and if by the word “produce” you understand the meaning to be “organize”.

Is it true that if a faithful Mormon dies in the unconfessed and unrepented sin of adulterery or fornication they can, in the spirit world, repent and be forgiven and not suffer eternal damnation. Yes or no.

No. That is also an oxymoron in that the words used cancel each other out.

Is it true that there will be Mormon Missionaries in the spirit world that will try to convert non-Mormons. yes or no.

Yes, and I assume there will be other denomination missionaries also teaching their beliefs to the spirits as well.

Is it true that God the Father was once a man and progressed into a God. Yes or no

Yes, a Holy Man like Christ was a Holy Man, and resurrected with a perfect body of flesh and bones just as Christ was resurrected with a perfect body of flesh and bones.

Is it true that God the Father had parents and did not always exist. Yes or no.

God the Father always existed, so no.

Is it true that Jesus did not always exist. Yes or no

No.

Is it Mormon teaching that we are to pray to God the Father and not to Jesus. Yes or no.

Yes.

Is it true that God is flesh and bones. Yes or no. If yes how do you interpete this from
the Bible “God is spirit “ John 4:24 “A spirit hath not flesh and bones” Luke 24:39

Yes. I had addressed that issue in the opening of this thread. God is Spirit, and we who seek to worship Him should worship Him in spirit and in truth. Christ still had His spirit within His body after He was resurrected, so although He was not “just a spirit” and indeed had a physical body and could eat with the apostles, He was Spirit in that His Spirit was within His body and His spirit presence could be felt by those near Him. The disciples on the road to Emmaus talked of their hearts “burning within them” as He spoke to them. They felt the power of His spirit presence with them, even though they didn’t recognize Him as the risen Lord.

Is it true that the Garden of Eden is in Spring Hill Missouri. Yes or no

No.

 

[lax16]

Hi, Lax16,
I was using the King James Version, and was aware that it says what you cited above. It implies that God has a “face”. (Why else would God say “thou canst not see my face” if He did not have a face to see?)

As far as why Moses was told that “there shall no man see me, and live”, it is important to understand that the natural man cannot be in the presence of God or see the face of God, so Moses was being told this. Man would need to be “carried” into the presence of God or to see His face through being changed by the changing power of the Holy Spirit to change the heart into a spiritually alive, spiritually transformed person to be able to speak with God face to face, as Moses later does.

As far as the Jewish teachings you noted, I hope it will not offend you too much to come to understand that what Moses prophesied would happen if the Jews did not live up to their covenants of obedience, did indeed happen so the prophesy was fulfilled and the teachings you are going to find today do not reflect the teachings given by God to Moses by revelation. Those teachings are a descendant of the original teachings, but are not the same thing as the original teachings.

Parker - Okay, I think I am beginning to understand what you are saying.

So, this is totally an LDS teaching because one would have to believe in the visions of Joseph Smith to understand that God has changed and is not the God who appeared to Moses in Exodus? Or God is the God who appeared to Moses in Exodus but went through a transformation then appeared to Joseph Smith?

As far as God not showing His face, I think that the Israelites were very clear in their understanding of God not having a body. If Moses did not appear to Joseph Smith, would there be any other sources regarding Moses having a spriritual transformation?

 

[dianaiad]

I find your explanation and Parker"s to be contrary of the Book of Mormon which states:
3 Nephi 2:14-15 “ANd it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites,and their curse was taken from them, and their** skin became white** like the Nephites”

“Ambiguity is an essential aspect of religion?” Explain how and why that would be true.
Is the aposlte John alive today?

You can ‘find it contrary’ all you want to, Third Day.

The facts of the printings and who changed what are easily accessible; the books are out there, the editions are out there, and it is what it is.

As to your quote…what the flip do you think happens when a person of dark skin married a person of lighter skin? Their kids complexions grow ‘lighter’ or ‘darker’ depending on who is looking. MY children, for instance, range from a fairly deep brown with dark eyes and extremely curly hair to the classic Viking blue eyed blond…with a stop for a curly headed red head, one kid with very straight black hair who doesn’t need to save much, and another with very black curly hair…every one of them would ‘pass for’ (and boy, do I hate THAT phrase!) 'white…but every one of them have the same (in order of amount) Celtic/Black/Hispanic genes. It’s what HAPPENS when people ‘unite.’

There is another BoM quote that I’ll bet you haven’t come across in the anti-sites…unless taken entirely out of context: Jacob, chapter 3:

5 Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were bone wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.
6 And now, this commandment they observe to keep; wherefore, because of this observance, in keeping this commandment, the Lord God will not destroy them, but will be merciful unto them; and one day they shall become a blessed people.
7 Behold, their husbands love their wives, and their wives love their husbands; and their husbands and their wives love their children; and their unbelief and their hatred towards you is because of the iniquity of their fathers; wherefore, how much better are you than they, in the sight of your great Creator?
8 O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God.
9 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers.

In other words, if the Nephites (whose skin was ‘fairer’ than the Lamanites at the time) counted themselves as better than the Lamanites BECAUSE their skin was lighter, then they were in for a rude surprise. God doesn’t measure righteousness and worthiness by skin color. However, if that is the measure the Nephites used (and at the time they were not the righteous group…as it happened, the Lamanites weren’t always the ‘bad guys’) then they were very likely to see that the Laminites would be ‘whiter’ than themselves when the time of judging comes. The metaphorical analogy is a fairly standard literary device, in all languages and cultures.

 

[Third_Day]

=ParkerD;6558190]Third Day,
Yes if you change the capital “G” to the small letter “g” and if that means “joint heir with Christ” in your mind, and if by the word “produce” you understand the meaning to be “organize”.

So we can become gods and “organize” spirit children. What exactly does that mean?

Yes, and I assume there will be other denomination missionaries also teaching their beliefs to the spirits as well.

But the word of God says this “and just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment” Hebrews 9:27
We die, we are judged. No need for missionaries. How can this be interpreted any other way?

God the Father always existed, so no.

So God has always existed as a soul and then he experienced a “spiritual birth” into a human body.
Doesn’t this mean that there are other “gods” beside the Father, the Son and the Holy SPirit?

You said that the Garden of Eden is not in Spring Hill Missouri but *Journel of Discourses 10:235 *says “The spot chosen for the Garden of Eden was Jackson County, in the state of Missouri, where Independence now stands; it was occupied in the morn of creation by Adam and his associates, who came with him for the express purpose of peopling this earth.”

*Section 116 of Doctrines and Covennant says *"**Spring Hill **is named by the Lord Adam-ondi-Ahman because, said, he, it is the place where Adam shall come to visit"

Are you saying that Spring Hill was not the Garden of Eden but it will be or that Adam will come and “visit” Spring Hill Missouri? For what reason?

 

[lax16]

Hi, Lax16,
I was using the King James Version, and was aware that it says what you cited above. It implies that God has a “face”. (Why else would God say “thou canst not see my face” if He did not have a face to see?)

Parker - There are other interpretations regarding God having a face.

From Dhouay-Rheims: My face, even in my assumed form…To behold the divine essence, we must be divested of our mortal body…Moses, therefore, did not see it on earth, though he had greater favours shown to him than the other prophets.

From The New American Bible: I myself; literally, “my face,” that is, “my presence.”

 

[Third_Day]

=dianaiad;6558243 You can ‘find it contrary’ all you want to, Third Day.The facts of the printings and who changed what are easily accessible; the books are out there, the editions are out there, and it is what it is.

As to your quote…**what the flip do you think **

Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed? I’m just curious about what and why you believe what you do.

Explain this to me. You believe that in the next world you can progress and become a god. Then what happens? Can you keep progressing and become a God with a big “G”? Is it possilbe to be a God over your own planet? Just curious.

 

[Jay53]

Hi, Catholic20064,
The only relevance of any teaching from God or from prophets of God is its relevance as we live by the teaching. The Book of Mormon teachings are relevant to me, as are the teachings of the Bible, because I have lived by them and found them to bring happiness, joy, peace and peacefulness, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit in making decisions in life as well as in repenting and seeking to be a better person.

I would not expect that the Book of Mormon teachings would be relevant to anyone who did not first of all have a fervent desire to have the Holy Ghost in their life on a personal, ongoing basis day by day. If they have such a fervent desire, then they are going to be in a position to expect that God will provide them more guidance in their life than what they would find just in the Bible alone, since the Bible shows that God reveals more knowledge to people as they have the Holy Spirit with them.

Then, if a person recognizes that the Holy Spirit will indeed guide their life and help them gain wisdom and understanding, then the Bible becomes an open door to gaining new insights including the insight that God could indeed reveal truth to more people than just the Old Testament group of followers and the New Testament group of followers.

By opening that door, a person can read the Book of Mormon and see the application of this principle at work among a small group of people in the Americas. Then those teachings of those additional prophets of God can bless their life and make the atonement of Christ all the more relevant as they recognize the expanded scope of His saving and redeeming mission among all humankind.

But it would take a fervent desire to open such a door–not just some casual curiosity and certainly not a dismissive attitude. This is what Paul wrote about in 1 Corinthians 2 and 3. It is talked about in Isaiah 29, and in Isaiah 55.

Have a good day. I hope your love for the Bible will bring you much joy and peace in your life as you live its teachings.

Why must you make offensive statements such as this? I, and other Catholics, most certainly DO have a desire to have the Holy Spirit in our daily lives - and we DO have the Holy Spirit in our lives. We most certainly DO NOT need the Book of Mormon to have that. You are making an offensive assertions that those who find the Book of Mormon false and irrelevant somehow are lacking in faith or lacking in a desire to be closer to God. This is completely false as well as an extremely arrogant and offensive assertion to make!

 

[dianaiad]

Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed? I’m just curious about what and why you believe what you do.

I tend to react badly when someone a; calls me a liar (even when such an accusation is expressed in carefully academic language), and b: I do not react well when, after someone HAS just called me a liar, he demands things from me in less than courteous terms. In other words, when you wrote:

“Ambiguity is an essential aspect of religion?” Explain how and why that would be true.

your method of asking made even my eyebrow raise…and I can’t RAISE one eyebrow, except ‘virtually.’ It was not a courteous statement of “I don’t understand your use of ambiguity; would you mind explaining it?” or "Would you explain your use of ‘ambiguity?’ It was an order; a demand. This is not a courtroom. I was not suppoened to appear, nor am I handcuffed to a chair awaiting interogation; shoot, I’m not even in a classroom with a grade depending upon giving you the correct answer to an oral exam. You raised my hackles, in other words. I was put off by what I percieved to be a rather supercillious, condescending and ungracious demand–especially since the concept of ambiguity and religion is a rather well understood concept in religious studies.

Or, if you wish, you could simply dismiss the whole thing as my having gotten out of bed on the wrong side this morning. Up to you.

Explain this to me.

…and there you go again…

You believe that in the next world you can progress and become a god. Then what happens? Can you keep progressing and become a God with a big “G”? Is it possilbe to be a God over your own planet? Just curious.

We do not believe that anybody will become a “God over your own planet,” and I for one am INCREDIBLY tired of that one. What part of “GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE” seems difficult to assimilate? If GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE, where does that leave room for Gods to rule over specific planets?

The thing is, the ONLY place one will find the idea that Mormons believe this nonsense is from ANTI Mormon sites. We believe that we are God’s spiritual children, very literally. This is true; we do believe that. We believe that we may become ‘heirs and joint-heirs’ with Christ and have all that He does. This is also true.

I do not see how anybody with two synapses to rub together could extrapolate that to ‘we will be Gods over our own planets.’ MORMONS certainly don’t!!!

In my own (and very personal…) thoughts on the topic, it means that…if we become God as the Father is, then it will be universes that we create—or it means something else; I’m going, for right now, with the ‘something else–’ and I don’t know quite what that might entail.

However, to borrow your own style of discourse: explain what is going to happen to you in Heaven. What are you going to do? What exactly is going to happen to you there? What relationship will you hold with God? With Christ? What does that mean, EXACTLY?

Does it mean that you will be in some subordinate position to a Saint? Hauling water for an apostle? Just curious. After all, you are demanding all the details from us, and yet from what I have seen, the Catholic (and other mainstream Christian) idea of Heaven is considerably more amorphous and a LOT less detailed than ours is…and it does not, by the way, contradict our idea…but you INSIST that WE have all the answers when you don’t?

…dang. I hate double standards.

The idea of deification and that God wants us to be gods is dealt with very well by other posters. I don’t think I could add much clarification to those posts.

 

[Stephen168]

Why must you make offensive statements such as this? I, and other Catholics, most certainly DO have a desire to have the Holy Spirit in our daily lives - and we DO have the Holy Spirit in our lives. We most certainly DO NOT need the Book of Mormon to have that. You are making an offensive assertions that those who find the Book of Mormon false and irrelevant somehow are lacking in faith or lacking in a desire to be closer to God. This is completely false as well as an extremely arrogant and offensive assertion to make!

See how nice Mormons are; and arrogant

 

[twopekinguys]

Why must you make offensive statements such as this? I, and other Catholics, most certainly DO have a desire to have the Holy Spirit in our daily lives - and we DO have the Holy Spirit in our lives. We most certainly DO NOT need the Book of Mormon to have that. You are making an offensive assertions that those who find the Book of Mormon false and irrelevant somehow are lacking in faith or lacking in a desire to be closer to God. This is completely false as well as an extremely arrogant and offensive assertion to make!

Don’t worry about that, if you look at his posts, he uses that statement quite frequently. It is like he’s the only one with the Holy Spirit or something.

Typical tactic of going after the person instead of the topic. He also uses the I’m taking my marbles and going home excuse alot too when he can’t address something.

Just look at his posting history. It is very consistent.

 

[Third_Day]

=

dianaiad;6559520]I tend to react badly when someone a; calls me a liar (

I apologize if you took what I said to be calling you a liar.
.

Or, if you wish, you could simply dismiss the whole thing as my having gotten out of bed on the wrong side this morning. Up to you.

I would like to continue.

We believe that we are God’s spiritual children, very literally. This is true; we do believe that. We believe that we may become ‘heirs and joint-heirs’ with Christ and have all that He does. This is also true.

We also belief that we will be joint heirs with Christ.

I do not see how anybody with two synapses to rub together could extrapolate that to ‘we will be Gods over our own planets.’ MORMONS certainly don’t!!!
In my own (and very personal…) thoughts on the topic, it means that…**if we become God **as the Father is, then it will be universes that we create—or it means something else; I’m going, for right now, with the ‘something else–’ and I don’t know quite what that might entail.

Pardon me for embolding your text. If you don’t mind I would like to ask you about what you just said. From the Mormons I have spoken to they all say what you just said, “if we become God as the Father is”. Wouldn’t this mean that you could create your own universe and therefoe be a God over your own planet. Please correct me if I have that wrong.

However, to borrow your own style of discourse: explain what is going to happen to you in Heaven. What are you going to do? What exactly is going to happen to you there? What relationship will you hold with God? With Christ? What does that mean

,
We will not become Gods. We will have no desire to. We will simply share in God’s riches as a child would share in the riches of his father. That is our inheritance, to share in God’s glory. We will worship God in heaven along with all of the angels and saints.
As Paul tells us “eye has not seen, ear had not heard what awaits those who love Him”.

Does it mean that you will be in some subordinate position to a Saint? Hauling water for an apostle? Just curious

.
All will be given happiness beyond words.Those that have given much to God in this life will be rewarded with a greater knowledge of the mysteries of God.

After all, you are demanding all the details from us, and yet from what I have seen, the Catholic (and other mainstream Christian) idea of Heaven is considerably more amorphous and a LOT less detailed than ours is…and it does not, by the way, contradict our idea…but you INSIST that WE have all the answers when you don’t?

Paul was given a revelation of heaven and to keep him from being too elated by the “abundance of revelations” a thorn was given to him in the flesh. The details of heaven are, apparently, not for us to know.
…

 

[dianaiad]

= I apologize if you took what I said to be calling you a liar.
.
I would like to continue.

We also belief that we will be joint heirs with Christ.

Pardon me for embolding your text. If you don’t mind I would like to ask you about what you just said. From the Mormons I have spoken to they all say what you just said, “if we become God as the Father is”. Wouldn’t this mean that you could create your own universe and therefoe be a God over your own planet. Please correct me if I have that wrong.

Are you one of those people who believe that this entire universe…all the billions of stars and planets (yes, we even have scientific proof that other solar systems exist, complete with planets…) was created just for US? THIS earth? This is it?

I suppose that this is where the problem might be. You see, in the Pearl of Great Price (which we also believe to be scripture) God tells Moses the following:

27 And it came to pass, as the voice was still speaking, Moses cast his eyes and beheld the earth, yea, even all of it; and there was not a particle of it which he did not behold, discerning it by the cspirit of God.
28 And he beheld also the inhabitants thereof, and there was not a asoul which he beheld not; and he discerned them by the Spirit of God; and their numbers were great, even numberless as the sand upon the sea shore.
29 And he beheld many lands; and each land was called earth, and there were inhabitants on the face thereof.
30 And it came to pass that Moses called upon God, saying: Tell me, I pray thee, why these things are so, and by what thou madest them?
31 And behold, the glory of the Lord was upon Moses, so that Moses stood in the presence of God, and talked with him face to face. And the Lord God said unto Moses: For mine own purpose have I made these things. Here is wisdom and it remaineth in me.
32 And by the word of my power, have I created them, which is mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth.
33 And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.
34 And the first man of all men have I called Adam, which is cmany.
35 But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them.

Please note: I give you the above quote, not because I insist that you should believe, but that so you may understand what WE believe–we are not, as you see, all that ‘earth centric.’

From the above you get a couple of very important LDS doctrinal points: that God created the universe through His Son Jesus–which of course means that we believe that Jesus was with Him from before the universe was created…from ‘eternity to eternity;’ that this earth is not the sole reason for the creation of the universe; but that our purpose, spiritually, HERE, is restricted to the knowledge and understanding of THIS earth 'and the inhabitants thereof." So, while we are given only the information we need to deal with what we need to deal with in terms of our own mortality and eternal lives, we are told straight out that we just ain’t that unique.

This idea was rather ahead of its time in the 1830’s and '40’s, by the way. I believe that the first extra solar planet wasn’t discovered until, what…1988. As of a week and a half ago, we have directly confirmed the presence of 452 extrasolar planets. Most of these are giants like Jupiter, but they figure that planets the size of Earth, Venus and Mars not only exist, they probably outnumber the giants that we can directly ‘see.’

The point is, I suppose, that one must be very careful not to assume that the earth is the entire purpose of God’s creation of the universe. WE sure don’t!

…in fact, is that why you asked if creating a universe meant that we would be Gods over our own planet…this idea of earth being the center of God’s creation–or rather, that the humans who live here are? Is THAT where this “Mormons believe that we will become Gods over our own planet” comes from?

If so, that does explain why, when I finally get tired of the constant accusation of: “'you believe that your husband will be a god over his own planet and keep you pregnant and populating it!“and I say:”'no, I’M shooting for a universe!” the joke falls flat?

Two entirely different assumptions going on here, divided further by a common vocabulary. (sigh)

= We will not become Gods. We will have no desire to. We will simply share in God’s riches as a child would share in the riches of his father. That is our inheritance, to share in God’s glory. We will worship God in heaven along with all of the angels and saints.
As Paul tells us “eye has not seen, ear had not heard what awaits those who love Him”.

OK.

…and that’s fine. You don’t know what you can’t know. So—why do you insist that WE answer questions you can’t?

.

= All will be given happiness beyond words.Those that have given much to God in this life will be rewarded with a greater knowledge of the mysteries of God.

Paul was given a revelation of heaven and to keep him from being too elated by the “abundance of revelations” a thorn was given to him in the flesh. The details of heaven are, apparently, not for us to know.

Yet you insist that we know, and tell you…and that the fact that we can’t proves that our beliefs are incorrect. Do you see where I might see a disconnect…a major problem, here?

 

[ParkerD]

Why must you make offensive statements such as this? I, and other Catholics, most certainly DO have a desire to have the Holy Spirit in our daily lives - and we DO have the Holy Spirit in our lives. We most certainly DO NOT need the Book of Mormon to have that. You are making an offensive assertions that those who find the Book of Mormon false and irrelevant somehow are lacking in faith or lacking in a desire to be closer to God. This is completely false as well as an extremely arrogant and offensive assertion to make!

Jay53,
Here was what I had written:

I would not expect that the Book of Mormon teachings would be relevant to anyone who did not first of all have a fervent desire to have the Holy Ghost in their life on a personal, ongoing basis day by day. If they have such a fervent desire, then they are going to be in a position to expect that God will provide them more guidance in their life than what they would find just in the Bible alone, since the Bible shows that God reveals more knowledge to people as they have the Holy Spirit with them.

Then, if a person recognizes that the Holy Spirit will indeed guide their life and help them gain wisdom and understanding, then the Bible becomes an open door to gaining new insights including the insight that God could indeed reveal truth to more people than just the Old Testament group of followers and the New Testament group of followers.

By opening that door, a person can read the Book of Mormon and see the application of this principle at work among a small group of people in the Americas.

Evidently, if I am to take what you have written about having a desire to have the Holy Spirit in your daily life, and that you indeed do have this blessed gift and comfort, then in the first place, I would think that there would be no offense taken because one would merely think to themselves, “I know the peace and comfort I feel in my heart, and I know the voice of the Holy Spirit in my life guiding my choices, so what someone else thinks is completely irrelevant.”

I have never written that Catholics don’t have the Holy Spirit. I have made an assumption that they do. I have also assumed that if they do, and if they read the Book of Mormon with the same sincerity with which they would read the Bible, that they will find truth in the Book of Mormon and it will not be scorned en toto. This is possible without changing religions.

I never wrote that one needs the Book of Mormon to have the Holy Spirit. One can do very well with the Bible alone plus sincere prayer. The deal about the Book of Mormon was to say that a person familiar with the voice of the Holy Spirit in their life is going to expect more guidance and truth in their life than just what the Bible brings by itself. This is what Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 2 and 3. When a person is familiar with this process, then they are not going to be uncomfortable with the possibility of there being words of scripture besides the Bible in existence somewhere in the world. This is because they will understand that God gives revelation through the Holy Spirit to prophets as well as to people generally, and prophets could exist in more places and at more times than just what is recorded in the Bible. The Bible even says that by citing books that aren’t in it.

Sorry the comment rubbed you the wrong way, but I did mean what I wrote in that comment about the impact of the Holy Spirit in the personal life of a person. It is a one-to-one communication, and I assume many Catholics do have that in their life.

 

[Third_Day]

dianaiad;6559922]Are you one of those people who believe that this entire universe…all the billions of stars and planets (yes, we even have scientific proof that other solar systems exist, complete with planets…) was created just for US? THIS earth? This is it?

When did I say the earth is all there is? God’s word tells us that a new heaven and a new earth awaits us. That will be our reward. Where we differ is that I don’t believe that you or I will become a god that can create their own universe.

Please note: I give you the above quote, not because I insist that you should believe, but that so you may understand what WE believe–we are not, as you see, all that ‘earth centric.’

I understand why you believe what you believe. I just don’t believe it.

From the above you get a couple of very important LDS doctrinal points: that God created the universe through His Son Jesus–which of course means that we believe that Jesus was with Him from before the universe was created…from 'eternity to eternity

;’
Correct me if I am wrong. Don’t you believe that Jesus is a “lesser” God than God the Father? He is subordinate to Him? Also there was a time when Jesus was not a God, correct?
You are not permitted to pray to Jesus, correct? Your apostle Orson Hyde taught that Jesus was married at the wedding feast at Cana. Surely you can understand how heretical these beliefs sound to those outside Mormonism.

The point is, I suppose, that one must be very careful not to assume that the earth is the entire purpose of God’s creation of the universe. WE sure don’t!

…in fact, is that why you asked if creating a universe meant that we would be Gods over our own planet…this idea of earth being the center of God’s creation–or rather, that the humans who live here are? Is THAT where this “Mormons believe that we will become Gods over our own planet” comes from?

You said that you could become a god and create your own universe. From now on I will just ask Mormon missionaries if it is true that they will be able to “create” their own universe and leave it at that. Is that a less-offensive way to put it?

Yet you insist that we know, and tell you…and that the fact that we can’t proves that our beliefs are incorrect. Do you see where I might see a disconnect…a major problem, here?

I guess I am at a disadvantage because I only have the Church and the scriptures and they don’t tell me anything about creating universes, missionaires in a spirit world, becoming gods etc. You have “Another Testament of Jesus Christ” so I guess I am lacking and will just end up in the Terestial world. Which is ok. I’m not too worried about it.

 

[ParkerD]

Don’t worry about that, if you look at his posts, he uses that statement quite frequently. It is like he’s the only one with the Holy Spirit or something.

Typical tactic of going after the person instead of the topic. He also uses the I’m taking my marbles and going home excuse alot too when he can’t address something.

Just look at his posting history. It is very consistent.

On the contrary, I leave a conversation when I think it would be a waste of my time to continue the conversation, or when I have more important things to do with the limited time that I have. This happens. I am sure mature people can deal with it. They need not be offended one little bit if their particular question doesn’t get answered. For one thing, they can do their own research, of course, which is what most people would expect that one would be doing anyway who comes onto a forum such as this is.

 

[dianaiad]

When did I say the earth is all there is? God’s word tells us that a new heaven and a new earth awaits us. That will be our reward. Where we differ is that I don’t believe that you or I will become a god that can create their own universe.

That’s not what I asked, Third Day. I ASKED (and it was a question…) whether you were one of those people who believe that this earth, “Terra” is the only planet or place in the universe where sentient life exists…or even that life exists. Is this planet all there is? Not a "new heaven’, or a ‘new earth’ that AWAITS us; I mean–other planets with other peoples upon them. You have just answered a question I did not ask, and thus avoided answering the one I DID ask.

Or perhaps your non-answer was, indeed, an answer. If it was, I don’t know why you should be ashamed of saying so; until very recently people believed that not only are we the only creations of God in the universe, that the universe from the sun outward, revolved around us. I think that the kneejerk reaction of most Christians is 'of course we are all there is…" except of course there is no ‘of course.’

I understand why you believe what you believe. I just don’t believe it.

Not asking you to, Third Day. I am simply asking you to believe that we believe what we say we do. That is, if you have quarrels with it, quarrel with the beliefs we actually hold, not some strawman construction that an honest to goodness Mormon wouldn’t recognize as his own. I don’t think that would be too much to ask.
;’

Correct me if I am wrong. Don’t you believe that Jesus is a “lesser” God than God the Father?

Nope.

He is subordinate to Him?

Not in power or knowledge, no. In that He respects and honors His Father? I suppose–though if that is being ‘subordinate,’ it is a self described one of honor and respect only.

Also there was a time when Jesus was not a God, correct?

er…no…remember, we believe that God created the universe through Jesus. They were/are together, as God, outside the time They created. So how can we say that there was a time that either was not God, when They are the inventors of the concept? The problem is that human language isn’t adequate to encompass the ideas. If mathematics can, i’m not literate enough in that to be of service.

The point is, we understand that before His physical birth, Jesus was indeed God; Jehovah, through Whom all things were created that were created. He was a man, Who was born, lived a life, died and was resurrected into a body of flesh and bone.

We see this; we see that God was indeed a man who lived on earth—and we don’t have any problems with the concept. I mean–there He was.

You are not permitted to pray to Jesus, correct?

No, we pray to God the Father in Jesus’ Name, since He is the One Who 'bought us with a price," and His is the Only Name by which we may be saved. It is His role in the Godhood.

Your apostle Orson Hyde taught that Jesus was married at the wedding feast at Cana.

That was his opinion. It is not official church doctrine. Though I personally think He MAY have been married, and it certainly wouldn’t upset me any if it turns out that He was—or that He was not–we don’t honestly know. Culturally speaking, it is more likely that He was than that He was not, but that’s my personal opinion. What YOU need to understand is that our apostles and leaders are/were men, and are/were absolutely entitled to their own opinions–which may or may not be correct. If those opinions end up as scripture, THEN you can claim that those opinions and statements nail our doctrine down. After all, you don’t want me to start claiming that Catholicism believes that God invented black people for the express purpose of slavery because a couple of your Popes said so, do you?

All I ask is that you NOT use double standards here. You get to tell me what Catholics believe, and when a Pope is speaking for the church (ex cathedra) and is thus infallible, and when he’s just spouting off opinion and making political hay. By the same token, we get to tell you when something said by one of our leaders is ‘scripture’ and binding—and when it isn’t.

cont. on next post…(dang, I HAVE to stop doing this!)

 

[dianaiad]

Yep, this is continued…

Surely you can understand how heretical these beliefs sound to those outside Mormonism.

Of course. That doesn’t MAKE it ‘heresy,’ though, and again, by the same token I’m sure you can understand how apostate and heretical some of your beliefs sound to us, right?

You said that you could become a god and create your own universe. From now on I will just ask Mormon missionaries if it is true that they will be able to “create” their own universe and leave it at that. Is that a less-offensive way to put it?

No. What I WROTE was this:

dianaiad:

The thing is, the ONLY place one will find the idea that Mormons believe this nonsense is from ANTI Mormon sites. We believe that we are God’s spiritual children, very literally. This is true; we do believe that. We believe that we may become ‘heirs and joint-heirs’ with Christ and have all that He does. This is also true.

I do not see how anybody with two synapses to rub together could extrapolate that to ‘we will be Gods over our own planets.’ MORMONS certainly don’t!!!

In my own (and very personal…) thoughts on the topic, it means that…if we become God as the Father is, then it will be universes that we create—or it means something else; I’m going, for right now, with the ‘something else–’ and I don’t know quite what that might entail.

I WROTE that I would respond to the constant accusations of 'Mormons believe that they will become gods with their own little planet to populate" with “I’m shooting for my own universe!” It was an exasperated joke…a reaction to this utterly insane misrepresentation of our beliefs…and YOUR reaction to it is very educational for me, if it is at all indicative of non-LDS beliefs about the universe and our place in it.

I guess I am at a disadvantage because I only have the Church and the scriptures and they don’t tell me anything about creating universes, missionaires in a spirit world, becoming gods etc. You have “Another Testament of Jesus Christ” so I guess I am lacking and will just end up in the Terestial world. Which is ok. I’m not too worried about it.

The Terrestrial Kingdom of Heaven, we believe, is pretty much the Heaven most Christians think they are headed for, so you could be right. The problem is, you are being dismissive and condescending to our beliefs–when in reality, when looked at from OUTSIDE the parameters of Catholicism, your beliefs look every inch as strange. Wierder, actually.

That’s not a judgment of your beliefs, by the way. It’s simply an observation on humanity. Nobody thinks his OWN ideas are wierd, and pretty much everybody thinks the other guys are.

Do you have a CLUE what I thought the first time someone tried to describe transubstantiation to me, or attempted to explain the Trinity (as opposed to our own idea of the Godhead, that is)? You can have no idea whatsoever how the lighting of candles, the Rosary, the annointing of statues, the reverence of the relics of Saints, the idea of limbo for unbaptized children…you have NO clue how such things appear to a person raised in the LDS faith.

I mean, really—talk about wierd! “Creepy” wasn’t too strong a word for what I felt. I have always felt that my beliefs follow very logical processes from the assumptions we begin with, and yours…don’t. However, after putting my own prejudices aside, and looking at the whole background, these things fit into place, and work from within your own culture. Most of those beliefs and practices seem beautiful to me now, when seen in context.

I still do not believe in them, and at times they still seem crazy/wierd, but I’m not going to make fun of those things that you consider sacred, because if you consider them to be sacred, and to make sense, then they are sacred and they make sense. To you.

Just because they never will to me doesn’t mean that YOU are stupid to believe in them. I have the distinct impression that you are having some difficulty returning the sentiment.