Questions about Mormonism

[ldsfaqs]

I quoted Young calling it a doctrine above.

Still, it doesn't make doctrine of the Church.
LDS being more "liberal" in what they taught, according to what they believed in the past doesn't make doctrine of the Church. Never has.

 

[Darcy23]

And I stopped watching that video at the 1 minute mark when the guy says the word "servant" with such utter condescension and scorn, as if I should apologize for considering myself a servant of God. I am a servant. I share not your infinite aspirations.

 

[Darcy23]

Still, it doesn't make doctrine of the Church.
LDS being more "liberal" in what they taught, according to what they believed in the past doesn't make doctrine of the Church. Never has.

Is he a prophet or isn't he? Your prophet called it doctrine. If I were a mormon I would have to consider it true. You are basically now denying that he was a prophet. Fair enough.

 

[ldsfaqs]

And I stopped watching that video at the 1 minute mark when the guy says the word "servant" with such utter condescension and scorn, as if I should apologize for considering myself a servant of God. I am a servant. I share not your infinite aspirations.

Fine, continue to stick your head in the sand and falsely judge his context, as well as ignoring the actual doctrine. He's mocking your mocking.... Get familiar with a person before you judge. Further, aren't you supposed to judge the message and not the messenger?

 

[ldsfaqs]

Is he a prophet or isn't he? Your prophet called it doctrine. If I were a mormon I would have to consider it true. You are basically now denying that he was a prophet. Fair enough.

And it's good reason you're not a mormon, because mormons don't judge things the way you do. We are not blind sheep and consider our prophets "Gods" like you think a person should. They are human beings also.

LDS judge "doctrine" according to Scripture, the Holy Ghost, and the FULL Words of the Prophets, as well as Common Consent.

No one statement by a man prophet or not makes doctrine. Never has.

Further, no one has said that what he taught was "false". We don't know.
Further, you don't even actually know what he was teaching. Even most LDS don't.
Even more, you still ignore the 99.9% of the rest of the time in which he taught the traditional LDS views concerning God and Adam. Thus, either way, your judgment is flawed.

Your flawed understandings of our religion are not our religion.

 

[Darcy23]

Fine, continue to stick your head in the sand and falsely judge his context, as well as ignoring the actual doctrine. He's mocking your mocking.... Get familiar with a person before you judge. Further, aren't you supposed to judge the message and not the messenger?

I'm judging the messenger based on the merits of his message. He called it doctrine. He stated that Adam helped create the earth and that he brought Eve with him to Eden. It makes sense since Young admitted at one point to not having read the bible for years.

 

[Darcy23]

"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which is revealed to them, and which God revealed to me -- namely that Adam is our father and God...Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or ever will come upon the earth"

Brigham Young

He said God revealed it to him. Is he lying or what?

 

[ldsfaqs]

I'm judging the messenger based on the merits of his message. He called it doctrine. He stated that Adam helped create the earth and that he brought Eve with him to Eden. It makes sense since Young admitted at one point to not having read the bible for years.

Pay attention to the conversation please.... That comment of mine was in reference to the video you are choosing to ignore.

As to Brigham and the Bible..... What you don't know is Brigham had the entire Bible memorized. He grew up on it, and also was in another religion before being mormon. He didn't actually have to read it to know it, he had a photo-graphic memory of the entire thing already in his head.

Nothing like using a little truth to lie right....?

 

[ldsfaqs]

"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which is revealed to them, and which God revealed to me -- namely that Adam is our father and God...Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or ever will come upon the earth"

Brigham Young

He said God revealed it to him. Is he lying or what?

I have my own opinion based on my study and experience, but such is irrelevant.
His views on this issue NEVER were doctrine of the Church. What part of that can you not understand?

Doctrine of the Church only comes from the scriptures or something that's officially sanctioned and said so by the Church.
In fact, the Church at a later date officially condemned the theory.

Further, if you actually knew your Bible, you would know Prophets AND Apostles were not "infallible". They often had their own personal views, and often made mistakes. Yet, you wish to apply a "fantasy" double standard to mormonism.

 

[Darcy23]

Pay attention to the conversation please.... That comment of mine was in reference to the video you are choosing to ignore.

As to Brigham and the Bible..... What you don't know is Brigham had the entire Bible memorized. He grew up on it, and also was in another religion before being mormon. He didn't actually have to read it to know it, he had a photo-graphic memory of the entire thing already in his head.

Nothing like using a little truth to lie right....?

If he had a photographic memory of Genesis then why did his Adam-God doctrine so outrageously contradict it?

Sorry for the mistake. Its still not attacking the messenger. His message was that being a servant of God is something to be ashamed of. Note his expression and tone when he says "servant." He exudes such disgust and disdain towards those like me who strive to humbly serve God rather than aspire to equal Him.

 

[Darcy23]

I have my own opinion based on my study and experience, but such is irrelevant.
His views on this issue NEVER were doctrine of the Church. What part of that can you not understand?

Doctrine of the Church only comes from the scriptures or something that's officially sanctioned and said so by the Church.
In fact, the Church at a later date officially condemned the theory.

Further, if you actually knew your Bible, you would know Prophets AND Apostles were not "infallible". They often had their own personal views, and often made mistakes. Yet, you wish to apply a "fantasy" double standard to mormonism.

Young said it was "revealed" to him by God. He called himself a prophet. He deemed it doctrine. End of story.

 

[ldsfaqs]

Young said it was "revealed" to him by God. He called himself a prophet. He deemed it doctrine. End of story.

Man you guys don't quit misrepresenting do you?
Problem that you have is that "inspiration" is not the same as Revelation.

I have lot's of things revealed to me also, but be a man a Prophet or me, that doesn't make it revealed doctrine. Again, there is no actual "revelation" which has become scripture on the matter, and there has been no official pronouncement by the Church that some idea is actually True, and actually doctrine. Scripture and official pronouncement is what makes doctrine, not ONE MAN'S WORD ALONE!!! There is no such thing!

Sorry, but your standard of Prophets is not our standard, nor is it the Biblical standard either.

Why don't you learn what the Bible actually says on the issue, instead of your fantasy views of infallible prophets.

Mormonism and doctrine/Prophets are not infallible - FAIRMormon

 

[Darcy23]

Man you guys don't quit misrepresenting do you?
Problem that you have is that "inspiration" is not the same as Revelation.

I have lot's of things revealed to me also, but be a man a Prophet or me, that doesn't make it revealed doctrine. Again, there is no actual "revelation" which has become scripture on the matter, and there has been no official pronouncement by the Church that some idea is actually True, and actually doctrine. Scripture and official pronouncement is what makes doctrine, not ONE MAN'S WORD ALONE!!! There is no such thing!

Sorry, but your standard of Prophets is not our standard, nor is it the Biblical standard either.

Why don't you learn what the Bible actually says on the issue, instead of your fantasy views of infallible prophets.

"Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted."
—The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Approaching Mormon Doctrine (May 4, 2007)

All right. So the prophet Brigham discussed in detail a doctrine which he stated was revealed to him, that is revealed, not inspired, by God almighty Himself, and Mormons feel its okay to simply disregard it? The way he worded it you can tell he thought people should believe it. What other explanation is there? He was making stuff up and passing it off as divine revelation?

If a prophet is not to be taken at face value then why even consider him a prophet? If it wasn't divine revelation as Brigham stated it was then Brigham was either a dishonest man or a dunce.

Brigham discoursed on the Adam-God doctrine at length on multiple occasions. He did not call it a theory. Did not say it was merely "inspired." He called it a doctrine revealed by God.

And I'm not being unfair. Brigham also said that the moon and sun were inhabited. I do not hold this against him one bit. This is the kind of loose speculation and theorizing that you are talking about and which should not be taken seriously or held against him. But there is a difference between that and calling something doctrine "revealed by God." A big difference.

I do not think the Adam-God doctrine of Young provides open and shut logical refutation of Mormonism. But when a church refuses to accept as doctrine that which their prophet called a "doctrine revealed by God," then something is most obviously amiss.

Smith said when a church prophet received new doctrine "he will declare it as revelation from God, and it will be so accepted by the Council of the Twelve and sustained by the body of the Church." And then Church President Harold B Lee taught that "if he says something that contradicts what is found in the standard works (I think that is why we call them "standard"—it is the standard measure of all that men teach), you may know by that same token that it is false; regardless of the position of the man who says it."

Doctrine and Covenants is supposedly divine revelation, just like the Adam-God doctrine. I understand the practical difference between D&C and the Adam-God doctrine, but as far as the actual meaningfully qualitative difference, that I cannot discern.

Like I said - something is amiss.

 

[ldsfaqs]

Why don't you read the link I gave above.....

You have several assumptions of what makes a Prophet that simply is not Biblical, and they are assumptions which would damn many Biblical Prophets and Apostles.

Are you really telling me you aren't aware of the various mistakes and views of Biblical Prophets and Apostles, even authoritative views which were wrong? Well, read up.

Anyway, bottom line, is the Church has a "process" by which Doctrine is determined.... Actually, it's the Lords process..... You condemn us for something that is actually very wise. It's entirely designed to prevent False Prophets and False Prophecy. Yet, YOU would want us to be subject to every view and whim of a man, be he prophet or not. That however is not the Lords Way.

It's really simple. The deeper theology Brigham taught "may" be True.
But Brigham Young is not the Church, nor is ANY Prophet.
GOD did not dictate a revelation.... Do you understand the difference?
If he dictated a revelation TO THE CHURCH, we would have it in our scriptures.
But that didn't happen. God spoke to Brigham PERSONALLY (if it was him)..... not to the Church. Do you understand the difference?

 

[Darcy23]

You're mincing words. Brigham took on the title of prophet and declared the Adam-God doctrine to have been revealed to him by God. I am not taking his every view and whim as infallible, as I stated about his belief that the moon was inhabited. You are mischaracterizing my view. The only difference between what is in the D&C and Young's Adam-God doctrine is that a few men decided the former to be scriptural and latter to not be. Simple as that. I didn't read the link you provided above? I quoted from it.

"It's entirely designed to prevent False Prophets and False Prophecy."

^ You are actually calling Brigham Young a false prophet here, and that's what he is, since he declared the doctrine to be divine revelation when it apparently was not. What other definition of false prophet is there?

And Joseph Smith is the church. The entire religion rests on his credibility. The majority of the so called "witnesses" later changed their minds, as if that even matters. Its Smith. If it was Christ then he would have revealed a lot more during his time in the holy land. He would not have let 2000 years go by during which time people worshipped incorrectly. You think your baptisms of the dead will account for all those who lived and died during the supposed apostasy?

Anyway. We will never agree. I've had plenty of reasons to convert to mormonism. None of them could overcome the illogic and errancy of it all. I really could go on and on and on. Mormonism is that vulnerable, has that many glaring weak links.

 

[Darcy23]

While my agreement is something you shall never attain, you have earned my respect. You come on here and face the barrage of criticisms. You seek out answers to those questions which myself and others and you no doubt yourself have posed regarding the mormon faith. From my experience many mormons do play the part of "blind sheep." You, however, I must say that you do not.

 

[ldsfaqs]

You're mincing words. Brigham took on the title of prophet and declared the Adam-God doctrine to have been revealed to him by God. I am not taking his every view and whim as infallible, as I stated about his belief that the moon was inhabited. You are mischaracterizing my view. The only difference between what is in the D&C and Young's Adam-God doctrine is that a few men decided the former to be scriptural and latter to not be. Simple as that. I didn't read the link you provided above? I quoted from it.

"It's entirely designed to prevent False Prophets and False Prophecy."

^ You are actually calling Brigham Young a false prophet here, and that's what he is, since he declared the doctrine to be divine revelation when it apparently was not. What other definition of false prophet is there?

This is not that complicated..... Anything "true" is doctrine. But everything "true" is not "doctrine" of a religion.

Here is the "actual" definition of what makes a true and false prophet:

Biblical Keys for Discerning True and False Prophets - FAIRMormon

And Joseph Smith is the church. The entire religion rests on his credibility. The majority of the so called "witnesses" later changed their minds, as if that even matters. Its Smith. If it was Christ then he would have revealed a lot more during his time in the holy land. He would not have let 2000 years go by during which time people worshipped incorrectly. You think your baptisms of the dead will account for all those who lived and died during the supposed apostasy?

No witness ever denied their experiences, and most actually came back. But even those who stayed gone, did not deny anything they experienced.

The history of man is a VERY LONG period..... There have been MANY "Apostasy's"..... 2,000 years is pretty much the standard timeline of Apostasy.

As to Temple Work.... The Temple provides Salvatory AND Exalting Ordinances for all mankind. Remember, Christ himself went and taught the spirits in Prison so they might be judged the same as those in the flesh. Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess Jesus is the Christ.

Anyway. We will never agree. I've had plenty of reasons to convert to mormonism. None of them could overcome the illogic and errancy of it all. I really could go on and on and on. Mormonism is that vulnerable, has that many glaring weak links.

The "vulnerability" you speak of is because of the bearing false witness of our enemy's and because of people not actually knowing their Bibles. There is no actual vulnerability in mormonism.

 

[ldsfaqs]

While my agreement is something you shall never attain, you have earned my respect. You come on here and face the barrage of criticisms. You seek out answers to those questions which myself and others and you no doubt yourself have posed regarding the mormon faith. From my experience many mormons do play the part of "blind sheep." You, however, I must say that you do not.

I appreciate you at least seeing that truth about me. Thank you.

As to most other LDS, to be fair, most are busy with their lives and striving to simply live their Faith and provide for their families. Further, most have been exposed to the claims of our enemy's, and have to some degree studied them, and found them lacking. Thus, they don't need or have an interest in spending their lives focusing on such things.

Also, LDS are far from "blind" sheep. Most of us are LDS because of what we see as the state of religion in the world. We are a people who aren't interested in man-made religion. We are all in a sense what I like to call "mini-Joseph Smiths". We are people seeing the state of religion, calling to God for the actual truth, and he brings us to it.

Anyway, hope I've helped shed some light on some things for you. If you could check the other recent thread, I was asked a question that relates to our conversation. Take care.

 

[Seeking His Face]

Also, LDS are far from "blind" sheep. Most of us are LDS because of what we see as the state of religion in the world. We are a people who aren't interested in man-made religion. We are all in a sense what I like to call "mini-Joseph Smiths". We are people seeing the state of religion, calling to God for the actual truth, and he brings us to it.

My dad would express exactly the same sentiment. He, although not a LDS, believes Joseph Smith was a great theologian.

I have a few more questions, and I wanted to see them answered from the horse's mouth, so to speak, instead of reading all the vitriol that is posted online about LDS by non-LDS.

First, what kind of emphasis does the Church of LDS place on converting them first and foremost to Jesus Christ, rather than on expounding why LDS beliefs are correct? In other words, is a real effort made to make sure that new converts understand the ins and outs of the gospel, as outlined in Romans, and to make sure they know Christ as their personal savior and understand their position in Him? Or are the other "less-essential" doctrines that are peculiar to the Church of LDS forced down their throats right away so as to confuse them before they are ready to understand them? Please understand I am not taking a pot shot at LDS, but I'm sure you understand my concern.

Third, I know that LDS are non-trinitarian, as am I, but I guess what I would like to know is, exactly what flavor of non-trinitarian are they? My christology is decidedly Arian, but unlike many who subscribe to Arianism, I believe that Christ pre-existed with the Father from eternity, and was not created at any point in time. I also believe that although He was not equal to God, He was still divine, unlike many Arians who write off His divinity entirely.

Second, does the Church of LDS teach that there is no salvation outside LDS? I have read that it does, but of course most of what is written about Mormons is biased against them.

Thank you for any answers you could give me.

 

[Seeking His Face]

Remember, Christ himself went and taught the spirits in Prison so they might be judged the same as those in the flesh.

I believe it was Enoch, not Christ. 1 Enoch describes how he preached to the spirits in Sheol. Peter was quoting from this book in 1 Peter 3:19.