Incidentally, there is no explicit doctrine in the church teaching that God was once a man. It comes from a quote by Lorenzo Snow that I don’t have time to find right now.
Well, it means God is saying in the Bible that ther never were or will be any other gods.
If you and your religion disagree, then you beleive God was wrong or lying.
Its not like He updates His scriptrues every so often.
Actually, you have no idea what my take or stance on that particular verse (or any other verse, for that matter) means I believe. My belief is between me and my deity. And, FWIW, as far as the LDS are concerend, He does have a method in place to update the Scriptures every so often, if needed.
Update the scriptures every so often??
Uh, I don’t think so. You saying God doesn’t know His own mind and has to change the word every so often? I believe the canon of scriptures is closed. There is no adding to or taking away. What we have from Genesis to Revelations is the word of God, period.
“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things that are written in this book.” Revelation 22:18-19
If I hear someone saying they have some new revelation from God and that we need to rewrite the Bible accordingly, I sure won’t have anything to do with that because it’s a lie.
Monty, I’m not listening to a bigot, no matter what you say. If you don’t believe what I say look up the mormon documents and see for yourself the things that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young have stated. This author was raised a mormon, taught their doctrines from childhood up. She loves the mormon people that’s why she wrote the book. The photo copied documents in the book are genuine. The beliefs taught are unbiblical, period. If you don’t believe it, you’re eyes are blinded. Go ahead, look up the documents and history of the teaching of the founders of your religion. They believed the things I’ve brought forth and those beliefs aren’t Christian. God and His wife spending all their time having spiritual babies, millions and millions of them up in heaven, or is it the star Kolob? Come on, give me a break! This is ludicrous and nowhere taught in the Bible. Please open your eyes.
A few more quotes from Mormon materials:
“Though we have it in history that our father Adam was made of the dust of this earth, and he knew nothing about his God previous to being made here, yet it is not so; and when we learn the truth we shall see and understand that he helped to make this world, and was the chief manager in that operation. He was the person who brought the animals and seeds from other planets to this world, and brought a wife with him and stayed here. You may read and believe what you please as to what is found written in the Bible. Adam was made from the dust of an earth, but not from the dust of this earth.” Disinclination to Learn, etc,; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, volume 3
Comment: Sounds like science fiction to me and bears no resemblance to the Genesis account of creation. Also, it sounds like Mr Young doesn’t care what the Bible has to say about it.
“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. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians and non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later.” The Latter Day Saints Millenial Star, no 48, volume XV, Saturday, November 26, 1853. Brigham Young, J of D, volume 1, pp 50-51
Comment: Adam is Michael, the archangel? He is our Father and our God? He came from elsewhere and brought one of his wives with him?? Sorry, I don’t think so. This isn’t in the Bible. Adam was not Michael the archangel, and he’s not our God and Father!
“Here, then, is eternal life–to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power.” Joseph Smith, History of the Church, volume 6
Comment: Multiple gods? Our God starting as a man like us and advancing to godhood?? The God I know was always God and there is none beside Him. This is ludicrous and unscriptural. Telling men they must learn to be gods?? Reminds me of satan. He wanted to be God too.
I remember sitiing at my desk one day, incredulous at the words I just read. They were:
Boasting that he’s better than Jesus? Isn’t that a little presumptuous on Smith’s part?
Does that insinuate that Smith wrote the Book of Mormon? If you take the 1830 edition and look at the title page, you will find the following:
Merriam Webster Collegiate Dictionary Online:
and
So, according to the 1830 Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith was the originator, the writer of the literary work called the Book of Mormon, and claimed the legal right and exclusive title to it.
Don’t bother looking in your later editions, they changed “author and proprietor” to “translator”. But you can view a scanned title page of the 1830 Book of Mormon here.
Any questions?
You prove, yet again, that you don’t know of what you speak. The LDS have, in their theology, recognized a manner in which they believe God continues to instruct humanity.
WTF did I ever say “change the word,” huh?
We don’t. If you don’t want to believe that it’s open, feel free not to. Just quit jumping down our throats because we don’t have the same narrow view you do.
That would be your opinion.
Not only is that your opinion, it also presents you a bit of a problem regarding a closed canon of scripture. After all, Revelations wasn’t the last book of the Bible written.
{snip}
No, it’s a matter of interpretation.
Every time you open your mouth on this subject, you prove that’s all you listen to.
You first. You’ve yet to go to the source.
Yet she has an admitted agenda to destroy the church. Why should I believe she’s telling the truth? Plus, I’m about fed up to here with morons and bigots doing stuff “for my own good.” I am now an adult, and have been one for many years. I’ll decide what’s for my own good.
Once again: THAT’S YOUR OPINION. BTW, the platonic philosphies introduced into Christianity aren’t exactly biblical either.
Your opinion.
I’d venture to say I’m far more familiar with Mormonism than you will ever be.
That’s your opinion.
Well, someone rising from the grave is pretty silly too. Anyway, AS I’VE ALREADY TOLD YOU, the LDS have a larger canon of scripture than you do.
Why don’t you go preach your hatred elsewhere?
Oh, and Monty:
I’d venture to say I’m far more familiar with Mormonism than you’ll ever be - so don’t pull that one on me.
And preaching hatred?
The LDS history is steeped in preaching hatred. As I stated in another thread concerning the LDS view of other religions:
All wrong.
An abomination
All corrupt
They deny the power.
Monty, if I were to use these terms in describing you and your beliefs, you’d instantly pounce on me for hate speech concerning your religion. But here is the founder of YOUR religion, in the scriptures that YOUR religion uses, calling my beliefs an abomination, corrupt, wrong. What’s the difference?
partly_warmer I have read a few posts of yours regarding Mormonism along the above lines. As monty will attest (:)) I am rather sceptical about Mormonism myself. But this particular argument does less than nothing for you and your position.
The argument that the value of Mormonism can be judged by seeing whether persons of other religions have high regard for it borders on the absurd. Likewise the suggestion that a new and small religion is “not authentic” purely on the basis that there is less written about it than there is about older and more widely established religions.
Maybe you are and maybe you’re not. I wasn’t pulling it on you anyway. I was pulling it on someone who appears to be too lazy to check out something for herself.
Yep.
Horse apples.
Not particularly interested in what you said in the other thread as you’ve already proven yourself to be a die-hard anti-Mormon.
Well, you could haul off and realize that there was the context of the times in which Smith purports to have received this vision. At the time, the sects to which he referred were preaching what he considered to be less than the fullness of the gospel. Those sects were also paying their priests to be priests. Smith appears to have felt that the priesthood should be an unpaid office. He also appears to have been referring to the platonic philosophies added to Christianity over the years.
Difference is that there’s the context of time and place.
Monty would you discount the views of a a person who consistently maintained that black was not white on the basis that they were a “die-hard anti-blackandwhiteconfusion” person?
The question is not whether people have a particular (“die-hard”) view. The question is whether that view is right or not.
In other words, Smith’s denouncing of other religions was justified because he disagreed with aspects of them. What’s good for the goose…
Please get off the “you’re preaching hatred” routine. Is that all you know to say when someone disagrees with what your religion teaches? There is not hatred involved here, and I resent you continually saying there is. I’m simply concerned for people I believe may be caught up in decpetion, that’s all there is to it. No hatred involved so please give that old horse a rest. Your belief that God is continually giving us new and “updated” scripture doesnt’ make it so. The God I believe in knew just what He wanted to say and reveal to us for all time and He needs to do no “updating” as you put it. You’re free to believe what you will, of course, Monty. But please stop this hatred nonsense, I’m getting tired of it and it’s untrure, period.
Why don’t you come off it, yourself, H4E. Just because you believe God doesn’t continue with revelatioin doesn’t make it so.
More doubletalk from a Mormon.
Notice how when you point out that Their prophets words preach hate of all christian churches, they come back with more vitrol.?
Just because You believe God changed His mind completely and contradicted what He said before doesn’t make it so either.
Ever realize that?
His4Ever- they are indoctrinated to believe everyone who disagrees with them is of Satan, so you cannot expect them to debate calmly with you or us.
Black is white and white is black to them. They only know what they are told to know.
They do believe all Christians other than them are wrong and in error (some try to dilute this by saying a "little "error).
The quote by Rico proves it beyond any doubt.
And exactly where did I ever say that God changed his mind completely, vanilla?
And where did I ever say that everyone who disagrees with me is of Satan?
And exactly when, where, and how did I get indoctrinated?
A very reasonable argument. The problem with it is, cmkeller or zev_steinhart could use it against us if they so chose – as in, "You guys added what you call “the New Testament” to God’s Holy Word, which runs from Genesis to Malachi (actually, I think the “Writings” such as Esther and Song of Solomon follow the prophets in the Hebrew Bible, but you get my point.).
Monty, you missed the indoctrination class?
My point, which I wasn’t making very well, was when the Missionaries came to give me the lessons, (which I called them first about-they were surprised) they told me my christianity wasn’t good enough, that my baptism wasn’t “official” because the pastor didn’t have “authority”.
Well, God thinks he did.
And there was nothing missing from my relationship with Jesus that i needed to get baptized again, Jesus was happy with me as a Pentecostal.
I didn’t mean offense; your religion is good for you, but nothing is wrong with my relationship with Jesus, and God.
Anyway, enough of dissenting here, I said everything I wanted to, sorry if I offended you, Monty.
His4Ever, I agree with you, you are my fellow christian; God love ya; don’t bother arguing though if people are determined not to listen.
I hear what you’re saying, vanilla…Sigh! Sometimes it’s just pointless to continue but something, or should I say Someone keeps urging me on. Sometimes all that’s left for us to do is to pray for people.
Princhester, when I quoted the BOM, or the understanding of the BOM I got from Mormons I lived with, or even the understanding of the BOM from churches I’ve attended, I got the same answer from the Mormons: I didn’t understand.
I found that strange. To reacquaint myself, I read Mormon, ex-Mormon, Protestant, and Catholic sites.
I also phoned my sister, an ex-Mormon, whose opinion, if I can be excused, is both educated and intelligent. I asked whether I had misunderstood.
So I return to the thread and get similar responses from Mormons: I was getting the wrong information. After opponants supported the purity of their arguments by calling me a liar, misinformed, and a Mormon-basher, I stopped for a few days to consider the larger picture.
What I realized was that I was being systematically deceived in not being allowed to call in evidence anything I read, except Mormon sites.
Any major religion criticizing another must try to get its facts straight, so it isn’t ridiculed for gross and obvious misunderstanding. Therefore some good part of what they say likely has validity. I quoted from a couple sites that I had not found fault with before. The fact that NO OTHER MAJOR RELIGION defends any part of “The Book of Mormon” I found significant.
Hence the value of “The Book of Mormon” is judged – in conjunction with other experience and opinion, including reading parts of the book itself. I wasn’t claiming the opinion of antagonistic religions alone was sufficient evidence.
I see boomerangs flying all over here! Vanilla and H4E seem to be throwing stuff into the discussion that are just waiting to fly right back at them! this might be a little long…
First off, would you agree with me that when Jesus Christ was on the earth, he taught a doctrine of love? Something about loving your neighbor, right? Well, if mormons teach that “other religions are wrong” is a doctrine of hate, and you believe that mormonism is wrong, then do you also follow a religion of hate? Sound like to me, then, that you aren’t preaching “God’s word” nor “God’s will” if that is the definition of a hateful religion. The truth is, the first and last of our 13 basic beliefs state:
“We believe in God the Eternal Father, and in his son, Jesus Christ, and in the holy Ghost…”
“We believe in being Honest, True, Chaste, Benevolent, Virtuous, and in DOING GOOD TO ALL MEN…”
OK, now about Brigham Young and the whole gang making weird statements about man being God and such… They have a right to their own personal beleifs as well as any other man or woman on this earth. I have my own personal beliefs that other Mormons wouldn’t agree with. If I were to openly state these beliefs, does that mean that ALL mormons believe what I stated? The same goes with Joseph Smith and company. If you would like a plausible explaination for the quotes, we believe that God made man in His own image, meaning that our physical form is in the likeness of Him. There are several accounts in the Bible of prophets talking to God “face to face.”
Now, when you state all of the other stuff that we believe such as Eternal Progression and man becoming Gods, those things are not the ONLY things we believe in. We hold the basic and fundamental beliefs required to be called “Christian” (btw, I notice that you repeatedly differentiate between Christians and Mormons), and we have more beliefs compounded upon them. The Catholic church is, to the best of my knowlege, a Christian Church. Yet they believe in infant baptism and celebacy (which, IMHO, is WORSE than polygamy, and if you ask me about polygamy being stupid, read the Old testament VERY carefully before you start bashing), which are specifically rebuked in the New Testament. Woah, so the Catholic church is bunk now, and they aren’t christian, because they teach something that isn’t taught in the Bible?? Go bash them for a while then, and lay off the Mormons.
Ok, going down the checklist, you say that God doesn’t “update his commandments” or something to that affect. I remember somewhere in the bible about the “Laws of Moses.” They were pretty good laws, I guess, something about cutting off hands, and laws against adultery and the likes. I guess they suited the people at the time, because they were the only thing that the Hebrews could handle at the time, and even then they had major trouble. (In fact, while Moses was recieving the 10 commandments, weren’t they dancing naked while worshiping Idols?) Later, if you recall the New Testament, Jesus taught what is commonly reffered to as the “Sermon on the Mount.” This effectively made the Law of Moses “Obsolete {spelling}.” Is this an “Update” to God’s Laws? I thought that God doesn’t update his laws. In fact, if God didn’t update his commandments, Abraham would have sacrificed his son on the alter forthwith. But remember, and Angel of the Lord came down and said, effectively “Hold your horses, it was just a test.” Let’s put H4E in abraham’s shoes for a minute:
“But God doesn’t update his laws, and so you are a being of light sent from the Devil!” screams of agony from vanilla, H4E’s son
I think I crossed off the whole checklist, but keep me posted on things I missed. I know there was a very old argument brought up somewhere, but I HAVE to go to bed. School is a pain.
l8r