The Truth about the Mormons from a Devout Mormon

[Chris-WA]

BJ and BYU Boy, I try to stay away from the Mary & God intercourse thing because I don’t think there is enough clear evidence one way or the other. But there is clearly a problem that needs to be addressed here–that of authority.

As I understand it, the 12 LDS Apostles have the same authority as the original 12 Apostles. I think it’s precarious at best to dismiss any teaching of an Apostle. We certainly could not do that with the original twelve. You can at least see how confusing this can be for us as outsiders to read such things from the early LDS Apostles and then hear it rebuked by modern LDS. It makes it very difficult to p(name removed by moderator)oint what LDS doctrine really is. The logical conclusion of all of this is that LDS teaching is whatever the current prophet/apostles say it is, regardless of what was taught by earlier leaders within the church. This also means that doctrine/teaching can change, which alarms me.

And guys, there is no way you can compare sexually abusive priests with documented teachings from early LDS leaders. There is a huge difference. I think you would be hard pressed to find any Catholic document, ancient or modern, that teaches sexual abuse as o.k. Of course that’s rediculous. But it’s not rediculous to put forth the documentation of early LDS leaders who’s teachings are no longer taught for whatever reason. You have to admit that LDS doctrines on certain issues have changed over the years. Therefore when studying the LDS church, it’s necessary to look at both the “then” and the “now” to fully understand it, and to ask why changes were made.

BJ, you have said many times in posts that you’ve never heard of or been taught many of these things people are posting about. I completely believe you. But that doesn’t mean that some of those things were never taught by the church in earlier times. That is why we must examine the history from the LDS church’s own sources.

 

[tkdnick]

BJ -
Sorry, I might have worded my post wrong. What I meant to say was that you have mentioned a couple of times in differnet posts that JS was an uneducated 14 yr old when he translated the BoM. But as you agreed in a previous post, he was not an uneducated 14 yr old, but an uneducated 21 yr old. The only point I think I’m trying to make is please don’t tell people JS was an uneducated 14 yr old. Tell them he was an uneducated 21 yr old.

I no negative view of you or your beliefs because of any post here. We all make the mistake of attacking someone else’s beliefs at some point…and some of us, me included, make the mistake often. It is a natural reaction that when someone attacks you, or you perceive an attack, you attack back. Not a big deal…I think we all need to be reminded that it doesn’t get anywhere though. Please understand that most of us here are not out to attack your beliefs, but to understand them. Many of us see them as erroneous and hope to show you that. Some get quite overzealous and make rude remarks, which of course gets no one anywhere.

As for your speaking from your heart and feelings - that’s great! It is obvious that you actually care. And I truly admire you for living with your Catholic husband and looking into his beliefs as well! One VERY important distinction though…in these threads we are discussing OFFICIAL LDS doctrines. That is very important to understand. I may believe that abortion is ok in certain circumstances, and I may believe that The Church (Catholic) teaches that same idea, BUT if official church doctrine says otherwise, then that is where others need to be looking, not to my personal beliefs. Personal beliefs are important as well, but we are looking at official doctrines. That’s why understanding official church teachings is so important. And I admire you for “taking up the cross” of reading into your beliefs.

I can honestly say that I was where you say you are…uneducated in scriptures/traditions/doctrines/history. I was rasied Catholic and for 23 years I had no idea what that meant. I listened to Protestant radio which gave me some beliefs that were un-Catholic. I had friends, colleagues, etc. that all believed different things, and I incorporated into my beliefs those things I thought sounded right. It wasn’t until I met some LDS friends, who are now the best friends I have, that I began to look into relgion, and which one was the “true” relgion. I looked into all of them, but the two I looked into the most were, of course, Catholicism and Mormonism. But I went into my research with open eyes. I had few preconceptions of what was right and what was incorrect. All the study, all the research led me here…to a STRONG faith in the Catholic Church which I believe with ALL MY HEART that Jesus Christ established. I suggest the same for you. Search scriptures (obviously when I talk of them I talk of the Bible), look into all religions with an honest and open heart (believe me this is not easy). Find the truth…it’s out there.

 

[tkdnick]

BYU-BOY:

What do ya say we hit the next topic of “Jesus was a polygamist”?

 

[tkdnick]

Chris-WA:

I tried starting a thread on the Great Apostacy but no LDS responded. So for now, I guess I will pose my questions wherever I think I can get a response.

Good point. I kept eyes on that thread hoping it would go somewhere, and it never did.

 

[catsrus]

BYUBOY & BJ, thank you for for coming here to explain your church to us. You are correct that many of us do not really know what you believe. One of my dearest friends, now deceased, was a bishop in the mormon church but we never discussed religion. (a bridge neither of us wanted to meet on because neither of us was going to budge!) I appreciate you explaining your beliefs on this forum.

 

[rcwhiteh]

Ella:

Dear Byu-Boy, you feel that your question is new to Catholics. That question being: “If our Lord and Savior personally came to you and told you that the Book of Mormon was true and that Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God would you believe?”

In fact many of our Catholic Mystics have been asked a question like this. For the basis of this question is to ask that if Jesus contradicted the commands of His Church, would we follow? Yet the answer that pleases Him, over and over again, is OBEDIENCE TO THE CHURCH. He told Faustina to wear a hair shirt. She asked her superior, who said ‘no’. So she did not. And Jesus was pleased that she obeyed, not Him, but her surperior.

BJ Colbert:

… Jesus would not ask her to wear a hair shirt. He does not ask frivolous things like that of anyone.

:tsktsk: NEITHER would He appear out of thin air and appoint a new Gospel and a new prophet to “restore” His Church, which He promised that even “the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.” It wouldn’t make any sense.

 

[PaulDupre]

BYU-BOY:

I do not doubt that you may come across an LDS friend who holds the beliefs of sexual union between God and Mary. However, this is not LDS doctrine. Let me repeat this again, THIS IS NOT LDS DOCTRINE.

I challenge those that oppose my views to find one source from an LDS Prophet who states Mary was not a virgin and had sexual intercourse with God the Father.

Here you go:
By “Virgin birth”, Mormons mean that no mortal human had sex with Mary, but since God had sex with Mary, and He is immortal, she remains a virgin.

Presidents (“prophets”) of the LDS Church:

President Brigham Young:
“The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, but Mary the wife of Joseph had another husband.” (Deseret News, Oct. 10, 1866)

“The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood – was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 115)

President Joseph Fielding Smith:
“They tell us the Book of Mormon states that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost. I challenge that statement. The Book of Mormon teaches No Such Thing! Neither does the Bible!” (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1:18)
“Jesus was not the son of any mortal man. His biological father was God, the Father. As Son of God, Jesus represents the Father and acts as his agent in all things.” (The Restoration of All Things, p.61)
“Christ was begotten of God. He was not born without the aid of Man, and that Man was God!” (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, page 18)

President Ezra Taft Benson:
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which he performed His mission in the flesh was sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He Begotten by the Holy Ghost. He is the Son of the Eternal Father.” (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, 1988, pages 6-7)

Continued…

 

[PaulDupre]

Apostles (“Prophets, seers and revelators”) of the LDS Church:

Apostle Orson Pratt (Appointed by President Brigham Young as Official publicist for LDS doctrine):
"The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful Wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Saviour unlawfully. It would have been unlawful for any man to have interfered with Mary, who was already espoused to Joseph; for such a heinous crime would have subjected both the guilty parties to death, according to the law of Moses.

But God having created all men and women, had the most perfect right to do with his own creation, according to His holy will and pleasure: He had a lawful right to overshadow the Virgin Mary in the capacity of a husband, and beget a Son, although she was espoused to another; for the law which He gave to govern men and women was not intended to govern Himself, or to prescribe rules for his own conduct.

It was also lawful in Him, after having dealt with Mary, to give her to Joseph her espoused husband. Whether God the Father gave Mary to Joseph for time only, or for time and eternity, we are not informed. Inasmuch as God was the first husband to her, it may be that He only gave her to be the wife of Joseph while in this mortal state, and that He intended after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal spirits in eternity." (The Seer, Oct. 1853, page 158)

Apostle Heber C. Kimball:
In relation to the way in which I look upon the works of God and his creatures, I will say that I was naturally begotten; so was my father, and also my Savior Jesus Christ. According to the Scriptures, he is the first begotten of his father in the flesh, and there was nothing unnatural about it. (Journal of discourses, 8:211)

Continued…

 

[PaulDupre]

Apostle Bruce R. McConkie:
“Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers.” (Mormon Doctrine, 1979, pages 546-47)

“God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the son of God, and that designation means what it says.” (Mormon Doctrine, 1979, page 742)

"For our present purposes, suffice it to say that our Lord was born of a virgin, which is fitting and proper, and also natural, since the Father of the Child was an immortal Being" (The Promised Messiah, pg. 466)

Mary told the story most beautifully when she said that an angel of the Lord came to her and told her that she had found favor in the sight of God, and had come to be worthy of the fulfilment of the promises heretofore made, to become the virgin mother of the Redeemer of the world. She afterwards, referring to the event, said: “God hath done wonderful things unto me.” “And the Holy Ghost came upon her,” is the story, “and she came into the presence of the highest.” No man or woman can live in mortality and survive the presence of the Highest except by the sustaining power of the Holy Ghost. So it came upon her to prepare her for admittance into the divine presence, and the power of the Highest, who is the Father, was present, and overshadowed her, and the holy Child that was born of her was called the Son of God. (The Promised Messiah, p.472 - p.473)

Apostle James E. Talmadge
And so, in the final analysis it is the faithful saints, those who have testimonies of the truth and divinity of this great latter-day work, who declare our Lord’s generation to the world. Their testimony is that Mary’s son is God’s Son; that he was conceived and begotten in the normal way; that he took upon himself mortality by the natural birth processes; that he inherited the power of mortality from his mother and the power of immortality from his Father—in consequence of all of which he was able to work out the infinite and eternal atonement. This is their testimony as to his generation and mission. (James E. Talmage, Jesus the Christ, Ch.5, p.43)

Poster’s note: “Jesus the Christ” was required reading when I was a full-time missionary. I know of no missionary (during the 1970’s) who did not read it and fully comprehend its meaning.

There is so much more, but I thought a small sample would be sufficient to make the point.
It is plain to see that this doctrine has pervaded all of Mormon doctrine and thinking for the last 170 years. It is an insult to our intelligence for any Mormon to deny that this doctrine was ever authoritatively taught.

Paul

 

[PaulDupre]

The Mormon Jesus was a polygamist.

This is but a tiny sample of the documentation, in roughly chronological order.

1) Jesus was a polygamist, married to Mary Magdalene, Mary and Martha the sisters of Lazarus, and perhaps others. Also, Jesus had children.

“I discover that some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on Marriage, at our last Conference, that Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were his wives, and that he begat children.”
(President Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v2, p210)

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

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

“We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before He was crucified. “Has he indeed passed by the nature of angels, and taken upon himself the seed of Abraham, to die without leaving a seed to bear his name on the earth?” No. But when the secret is fully out, the seed of the blessed shall be gathered in, in the last days; and he who has not the blood of Abraham flowing in his veins, who has not one particle of the Saviour’s in him, I am afraid is a stereotyped Gentile, who will be left out and not be gathered in the last days; for I tell you it is the chosen of God, the seed of the blessed, that shall be gathered.”
(Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 2:82)

2) Jesus and the apostles were persecuted and killed for being polygamists.

“The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing his crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in the doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were Mormons."
(President Jedediah M. Grant, Journal of Discourses, Vol.1, p.346, August 7, 1853)

3) Early Mormon leaders were descendents of Christ.

Joseph Smith was the first to reveal this teaching, when he informed the plural wife of Apostle Judge Adams, that the Apostle “was a literal descendant of Jesus Christ.” (Oliver B. Huntington Journal, p. 259)

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

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

 

[PaulDupre]

PaulDupre:

It is an insult to our intelligence for any Mormon to deny that this doctrine was ever authoritatively taught.

Oops, a typo - should read

“It is an insult to our intelligence for any Mormon to deny that this doctrine was never authoritatively taught.”

 

[BYU-BOY]

If I only I had the time to focus on someone’s elses religion! Thanks, Paul, It’s nice to have a rebuttal before I even begin.

 

[Chris-WA]

BYU Boy, if you’re going to really show that there is and was no official LDS Doctrine that Mary conceived Jesus through sexual intercourse, I think you’re going to have to explain the quotations presented by Mr. Dupre in his previous couple posts on the subject. After reading those quotations by Brigham Young and others, I have to say that it at least appears that the church did at some point teach this. Obviously people back then would not come right out and say the words “sexual intercourse” because they just didn’t talk that way. But it certainly appears that Brigham Young and others tried to get that point across. I honestly don’t know how they can be interpreted any other way without doing some serious gymnastics.

 

[BJ_Colbert]

B J Colbert,

You just wrote this after a gentleman told you that when you attack the Catholic Church you make no headway, but rather you make an enemy.

You wrote," It is not true, anymore than pedophilia is a doctrine of the Catholic church."

Was that necessary?

No it was not necessary, but at the time seemed a parallell that you might understand and that would make sense to you. I wanted you to feel the same pain I was feeling when you quoted things that were not Mormon Doctrine. I know that what I said is not Catholic doctrine, but neither is the idea that God had sex with the Virgin Mary, Mormon Doctrine. I find it so offensive that I struck back with something that I equate with the filth that you flung about God and Mary.
As I stated above, it was beneath contemptible of me to strike back in a like manner as I felt I had been struck.
Most of you are sincerely searching for answers about the LDS religion, and if you are, should just listen and take the answer that BYU-BOY gives you as the truth about what we believe. If you want to tell us what we believe, it is no more that me telling you that you worship Mary, or other misconceptions of the Catholic Church. Don’t write back about Mary(I know you don’t worship her) It is a question I asked before and it has been explained and I believe the explanation given. I will not be trying to dig up something that proves you really do worship Mary, as Paul and Katholikos do about what Mormons believe.
BYU-Boy has a very good understanding of what Mormons believe and he is very good at explaining it in a clear and concise way. What he has said so far, I agree with completely, although I could not explain it to you as well as he is.

 

[puzzleannie]

BYU Boy confused me from the beginning of this thread, because he offered to explain what LDS does teach, and what Mormons believe (which are not necessarily the same thing), yet he began by listing doctrines ascribed to LDS by its detractors, and then refuting them by trying to give authentic LDS teaching. It was not until well into his presentation that I realized the statements in his first post were NOT LDS teaching. I think others offering rebuttal or argument are operating under the same misapprehensions.

Someone who is well versed in the LDS doctrine and lives the commitments demanded by that denomination is most welcome on these boards, but let us remind everyone participating that terminology, especially on the Apologetics forum, must be accurate. We must also be extremely careful when we attempt to restate Church doctrine (our own or other denominations) in our own words, that we do not indadvertently add to confusion and obscurity.

None of us here has been designated to speak for the Catholic Church, the most we can do is offer our own interpretation and understanding of what we have been taught. So dogmatic statements of any position, offered as authoritative teaching, without documentation and source, are not going to be very usefull in this type of discussion.

 

[BYU-BOY]

I want to thank everyone for their patience these past few days as I have worked on the next questions on my list. I have had a really hard time focusing on my studies because I really enjoy your posts and questions. Before I go on though, I need to clear up a few things that Brother Dupre brought up in his last post.

First of all, about half of things that Brother Dupre quoted had already been discussed in my first post on the question of sexual union between God and Mary. I am concerned that he may have missed my statements concerning Bruce R. McConkie and who Elder McConkie was addressing his remarks to. For I am sure if Brother Dupre had read my post that he would not have added his additional remarks.

Furthermore, he also used the exact quote from Orson Pratt that I showed, with evidence, was not condoned by the brethren of the church. I know that Katholikos asked for exact statements on what doctrine was not approved in the Orson Pratt’s writings in the Seer. It has never been stated but it is safe to say that since Brigham Young revoked the official church seal on his writings that Orson Pratt’s statements in the Seer cannot be held as creditable.

Which brings me to my next point. Many of you have felt that since there has been dissension between Mormon Apostles and Prophets that they cannot be men of God. However, with this understanding then we must conclude that the ancient apostles Paul and Peter cannot be men of God due to their bickering and opposing teachings on circumcision. The one thing that we must remember is that being temporal in the flesh means that we are imperfect. Therefore, we will learn of actions and beliefs that may not be of God but to completely negate an individual and their beliefs would be a great injustice.

I would like to conclude with several other oversights that I found by Brother Dupre. First, he has not shown evidence that LDS doctrine teaches that God and Mary had sexual intercourse. He has given several quotes by LDS leaders and then has postulated that these statements must mean something. This type of logic is what got Orson Pratt into trouble. I also am concerned with Brother Dupre’s quote stating:

PaulDupre:
By “Virgin birth”, Mormons mean that no mortal human had sex with Mary, but since God had sex with Mary, and He is immortal, she remains a virgin.

Now, I know that I am young, however, I am quite certain that this assumption by Brother Dupre has never been taught by the church. What we can conclude from this discussion is that LDS official doctrine states that Mary was a virgin at the birth of Jesus Christ. Any form of sexual intercourse would mean that Mary was not a virgin. We can also see that LDS doctrine holds that Jesus Christ is the “Only Begotten Son” of the Father (John 3:16). This is essential doctrine for any Christian to believe.

I do appreciate Brother Dupre and Jay Katholikos giving us their own opinions on LDS beliefs. Their diligent study and research has been quite inspirational to me. If only I had their fortitude in my school studies as they have in Apologetics.

 

[BYU-BOY]

Now onto our next question. I will try to be more clear with this question and follow the format that many have asked me to follow.

Question: Was Jesus a polygamist?
Official Church Doctrine: No official statement has been given.
Common LDS belief: Yes
Does BYU BOY believe it: Yes

Explanation:
If the LDS church declared that Jesus was a polygamist, I would not find this doctrine to be offensive. We can see Abraham, Jacob, King David and King Solomon all practiced polygamy. This also addresses the question about a popular LDS belief that Jesus was married. We can find that many scriptures point to the fact that Jesus was married. We see in Mark 6:2, where it states that Jesus taught in the synagogue. That was against Jewish law and custom and would never have been tolerated unless he was married. John, chapter 11 tells how Lazarus died while Jesus was away. Mary sat in her house until Jesus returned and called her out. This is found in verse 28. Under Jewish custom, a woman in mourning stays indoors until her husband calls her out.

One might concede that Jesus was married but find it unbiblical to believe that Jesus had more then one wife. We look at the 24th chapter of Luke where we can see that certain women came to anoint the body of Jesus, following his crucifixion, with burial spices. In verse 10 it states that this included Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and the other Mary. Under Jewish custom, it was the widows’ responsibility to anoint the body of their dead husbands.

Not only that, but in Hebrews 1:8 Paul quotes Psalms 45:6 as applying to Jesus: “But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.” In Psalms 45:6 through 9 we further read “Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. All thy garments smell of myrrh, and aloes, and cassia,out of the ivory palaces, whereby they have made thee glad. Kings’ daughters were among thy honourable* women: upon thy right hand did stand the queen in *gold of Ophir.” (italics added) So the passage Paul quotes as referring to Jesus speaks of him having wives.

I refer you back to Brother Dupre’s quotes from LDS leaders about Christ being married and polygamy being practiced. I also tried to dig through my books to find a certain quote by Joseph Smith but couldn’t find it. This belief is widely held by Latter-day Saints though, not really widely taught in Sunday School or over the pulpit since there has been no official statement by the Church.

One thing that you must understand about Mormon theology is that we believe in finding all truth. Brigham Young has been quoted over and over about “laying claim onto all truth’. I hope that this has been helpful and open it up for your discussion. I should be posting another question soon.

 

[PaulDupre]

BYU-BOY:

I would like to conclude with several other oversights that I found by Brother Dupre. First, he has not shown evidence that LDS doctrine teaches that God and Mary had sexual intercourse. He has given several quotes by LDS leaders and then has postulated that these statements must mean something.

No other reasonable meaning is possible.

This type of logic is what got Orson Pratt into trouble. I also am concerned with Brother Dupre’s quote stating:

By “Virgin birth”, Mormons mean that no mortal human had sex with Mary, but since God had sex with Mary, and He is immortal, she remains a virgin.

I merely re-phrased Elder McConkie’s statement:
"For our present purposes, suffice it to say that our Lord was born of a virgin, which is fitting and proper, and also natural, since the Father of the Child was an immortal Being" (The Promised Messiah, pg. 466)

If it is only “fitting and proper” “for our present purposes” that Mary be considered a virgin, then it naturally follows that for other purposes Mary would not be considered a virgin by the LDS.

If you ask any Catholic whether Mary was and is a virgin, you will get no such equivocation.

Now, I know that I am young, however, I am quite certain that this assumption by Brother Dupre has never been taught by the church.

Remember, BYU-BOY, I was an active Mormon for 11 years, during which time I served a full-time mission, was married in the temple, taught gospel doctrine class, taught Elder’s Quorum lessons, served as counselor to two bishops, etc, etc. I am very familiar with what the LDS Church taught up until 1986 when I had my name removed from the records of that Church.

What we can conclude from this discussion is that LDS official doctrine states that Mary was a virgin at the birth of Jesus Christ.

No, we can conclude that what the LDS Church reveals to potential converts and to the gentile world at large is not what they teach within their own Church. Perhaps they have finally learned that Joseph Smith’s doctrines are so repugnant to any reasonable person that they are trying to deny that he and his successors ever taught them. Quite a task given the evidence to the contrary.

Any form of sexual intercourse would mean that Mary was not a virgin.

That’s not what Apostle McConkie says. See above.

BYU-BOY, either you are completely unaware of what your religion has historically taught (because you have been sold a bill of revisionist goods), or you are deliberately trying to deceive us LDS missionary-style (milk before meat).

I am 50 years old and have lived through a period of LDS history that occurred before you were born. I think I know better than you do what was taught when I was in the Church prior to 1986. My fellow Mormons and I lived it every day.

BYU-BOY, have you asked some older people - bishops, stake presidents, etc if they were taught and believed these doctrines? You are living in a dream-world not shared by the majority of knowledgable LDS.
Grace to you,
Paul

 

[puzzleannie]

if part of the basis for the claim that Jesus practiced polygamy is: “he taught in the synagogue, which would never have been allowed by observant Jews had he not been married” then you have shot down your arguement.

polygamy was certainly not practiced by 1st century Jews in Palestine whatever may have been acceptable in the age of patriarchs, so certainly were he openly practicing poygamy he would not have been allowed to enter the temple, as he did frequently, nor to preach in the synagogue, and this charge would have been part of the accusations against him at his trial before the Sanhedrin

Either he was celibate (a practice amply documented among ascetic Jewish sects of his day, and among the prophets), or he was married to one woman (as customary in his time) and you have the task of identifying the wife, given the list of names of women who assisted his ministry, or he practiced polygamy. If you assert either of the last two–contradictory–statements, it is incumbent upon you to provide extra-biblical proof, since there is none in the new Testament.

if your extra-biblical proof consists in the book of Mormon, its interpretation by LDS elders, or in other gnostic gospels, then you have not made a case convincing to Catholics and other bible-based sects.

 

[Katholikos]

BJCOLBERT wrote:

. . . I wanted you to feel the same pain I was feeling when you quoted things that were not Mormon Doctrine. I know that what I said is not Catholic doctrine, but neither is the idea that God had sex with the Virgin Mary, Mormon Doctrine. I find it so offensive that I struck back with something that I equate with the filth that you flung about God and Mary.

Here are the possibilities:

• Mr. DuPre and others misquoted the material they have posted here and have falsified their sources – therefore, the allegation that Mormon doctrine holds (or held) that God had sex with the Virgin Mary is false.
• Mr. DuPre and others accurately quoted the material they have posted here, and their sources are genuine – therefore, the allegation that Mormon doctrine holds (or held) that God had sex with the Virgin Mary is true.

If it was doctrine in the past and is not now, we need an explanation of how and when that occurred, since God himself is alleged to have revealed His Truth to Joseph Smith. God cannot contradict Himself.

BJ, I know this is very unpleasant for you, and that you are very sincere when you say that these things are not Mormon doctrine, but you are sincerely wrong. Such things as God being the literal, biological father of Jesus through intimacy with Mary may have not been taught to you, or perhaps not to BYU-BOY, but they are (or were) Mormon doctrine. The truth has been presented to you from official Mormon records, written by people authorized by the LDS church to teach doctrine.

You can obtain the documents that Paul DuPre and others have quoted and examine them for yourself. They are all available on the Internet. Many of them are offered on ebay’s auctions at a very reasonable cost. Or they are available at your local LDS bookstore or can be ordered from Deseret publishing. Deseret also has an online auction, and many of these items can be purchased there as well, at bargain prices.

Today I ordered a replica of the original 1830 Book of Mormon and a copy of Joseph Smith’s “translation” of the Scriptures from ebay and saw many if not all of the documents Mr. DuPre has cited offered there.

BTW, I genuinely want to know what the LDS doctrine is regarding believe the fate of women in the afterlife, without an ‘exalted’ husband. I hope you will enlighten me. I wrote:

Since you are married to a Catholic who will not be “exalted,” and you therefore cannot become his goddess-wife in the afterlife, what will be your fate?

Thank you.

Peace be with you,

JMJ Jay