What do Mormons Think of Mary - Mother of Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_in_SD
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Paul,
Mconkie’s Mromon doctrine has changes substantially over the years. Many of us grew up with the “old” copy with VERY controversial statements all in it. You have probably seen only th ecurretn edition and thus don’t find these statements in it anymore.
(his teachings on race and the Catholic church being the great abominable church of the devil have all been removed in newer printings)
 
40.png
majick275:
Paul,
Mconkie’s Mromon doctrine has changes substantially over the years. Many of us grew up with the “old” copy with VERY controversial statements all in it. You have probably seen only th ecurretn edition and thus don’t find these statements in it anymore.
(his teachings on race and the Catholic church being the great abominable church of the devil have all been removed in newer printings)
Click to expand...
Maj-

The copy I have is a 1966 printing but I notice that there are 1993 versions available from Deseret Book (mine came from used bookstore owner that I met via eBay and who can seem to find anything - cheap! - for me…). Don’t have the $$$ just now to buy the lastest publishing but are you saying that the later editions may have undergone some editing? It was only first published in 1958, wasn’t it? Has doctrine changed that much? I would have thought that with the ‘disclaimer’ in the intro in Mormon Doctrine there would have been no reason to edit the book - even 35 years after publication!

Oh, well, the nice thing about the JoD that I have access to is that it’s a facsimile edition - no way to edit photos (um, I just thought of all those “private audience with the Pope” photos that I have with myself and JPII… created in Photoshop. Strike that last comment).
 
Well, Bruce was very outspoken and his book Mormon Doctrine was intended to ANSWER questions so he attempts to leave as little room for interpretation as possible. (a worthy goal)

The problem is that some of his earlier statements seem inflammatory and offensive now. Yes, the doctrine HAS changed that much and not all of his earlier assertions are recognized as doctrine anyway. What was “tolerated” back then is so politically incorrect now that , where doctrine allows, it was just removed.

His statements on race (especially regarding black people) fit this category. You will no longer see the RCC portrayed as the great and abominable church nor see the statements about Mary. The changes are legion.
 
Unfortunately, the end result of Mormon teachings throughout the years leads to only one conclusion: that Jesus is the product of incest.
 
Chris-WA said:
  1. In Hebrew the word for cousin is the same as brother. They are not distinguished. Catholic and Protestant scholars alike have acknowledged this and in the case of Jesus’ “brothers” or “sisters,” they understand this to mean “cousins” as was understood in ancient Hebrew. There is no record of Jesus having siblings.
Click to expand...
Except Mark 6:3 (and another passage that I can’t find at the moment). When we go to the Greek, we find that it’s the word ‘adelphos,’ which always means brother, never cousin.
 
Returning_Home said:
Except Mark 6:3 (and another passage that I can’t find at the moment). When we go to the Greek, we find that it’s the word ‘adelphos,’ which always means brother, never cousin.
Click to expand...
Actually, adelphos, in the way it was used by the greeks two millennia ago, had a variety of different meanings:
  1. a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother
  2. having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman
  3. any fellow or man
  4. a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection
  5. an associate in employment or office
and then later: (which don’t really apply in this case 😃 )
6) brethren in Christ 6a) his brothers by blood 6b) all men 6c) apostles 6d) Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place
 
PeaceSerenity said:
Actually, adelphos, in the way it was used by the greeks two millennia ago, had a variety of different meanings:
  1. a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother
  2. having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman
  3. any fellow or man
  4. a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection
  5. an associate in employment or office
and then later: (which don’t really apply in this case 😃 )
6) brethren in Christ 6a) his brothers by blood 6b) all men 6c) apostles 6d) Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place
Click to expand...
Please cite your sources.
 
majick275 said:
Well, Bruce was very outspoken and his book Mormon Doctrine was intended to ANSWER questions so he attempts to leave as little room for interpretation as possible. (a worthy goal)

The problem is that some of his earlier statements seem inflammatory and offensive now. Yes, the doctrine HAS changed that much and not all of his earlier assertions are recognized as doctrine anyway. What was “tolerated” back then is so politically incorrect now that , where doctrine allows, it was just removed.

His statements on race (especially regarding black people) fit this category. You will no longer see the RCC portrayed as the great and abominable church nor see the statements about Mary. The changes are legion.
Click to expand...
Ben DY and Majick:

This is one of the church’s, funnelling information through its members or organizations like FAIR and FARMS to get their position heard but when it’s inevitably refuted and proven false, they can simply say that it was so-and-so’s opinion and not that of the church.

To get the church’s stand on anything, you have to get something published by it alone. One of the best books I have showing major problems in Mormonism is the BOM student manual (1996 edition) purchased from Deseret Books. That’s not what they intended, but it shows a clear revision of church history and doctrine and even ignores major problems like 3 Nephi 20:23-25 being not only stolen from the Bible, but having the Mormon jesus mistaken assigning Peter’s words from Acts #:22-23 to Moses in Deut 18:15.
 
PeaceSerenity said:
The online greek bible provides definitions for every word 🙂
greekbible.com/
Click to expand...
I asked for sources, as in citations, not links to online sites that I’ve probably already looked at.

Not only that, but you made some pretty sweeping claims about ancient language usage and its terminology. Why can’t you back it up?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top