LDS LDS Jesus -- Married with Children ???

[yeshuaslavejeff]

So these early leaders were all heretics?

(It seems) based on this thread (and the history of the world) , etc et al, that most if not all of them were.

However, first it would probably be "more proper"(though not necessary perhaps) to identify "these early leaders" and/or who they led .... eh?

 

[drstevej]

However, first it would probably be "more proper"(though not necessary perhaps) to identify "these early leaders" and/or who they led .... eh?

See post #3.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Just looked at post 3 and the link.
Definitely (from Scripture's View) they appear anti-christ/ apostate/ or heretics, all bad in any case.

(I can hardly believe there is any question about this!)

So these early leaders were all heretics?

See post #3.

 

[Jane_Doe]

Just looked at post 3 and the link.
Definitely anti-christ/ apostate/ or heretics, all bad in any case.

(I can hardly believe there is any question about this!)

Again, that post isn't even about actual LDS doctrine, let alone an LDS's person love of Christ and acceptance of Him.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

You may be totally correct about what is or what is not actual LDS doctrine or teachings
As far as I know, though, that doesn't matter.

Again, that post isn't even about actual LDS doctrine, let alone an LDS's person love of Christ and acceptance of Him.

 

[PaulCyp1]

I attend several conferences every year. Christian ones however. Thanks for the warning. I'll stay far away from yours.

 

[Rescued One]

This argument that Jesus wasn't married is a big problem as far as Mormonism is concerned. Temple marriage is a requirement for eternal life.

John 5
19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

"Celestial marriage allows God's children to advance and progress and become like him."
Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual, p. 65

There is no Heavenly Mother in LDS scripture, but the First Presidency teaches it. Mormons like to quote 1 Corinthians 11:11 to justify eternal marriage.

1 Corinthians 11
11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

"The fullness and blessings of the Priesthood and Gospel grow out of Celestial marriage. This is the crowning ordinance of the Gospel and crowning ordinance of the temple.

"I want to plead to my good brethren and sisters, good members of the Church, to go to the temple to be married for time and all eternity.12

"In contrast to the practices of the world, marriage endures forever in the gospel plan.

"Marriage is considered by a great many people as merely a civil contract or agreement between a man and a woman that they will live together in the marriage relation. It is, in fact, an eternal principle upon which the very existence of mankind depends. The Lord gave this law to man in the very beginning of the world as part of the Gospel law, and the first marriage was to endure forever. According to the law of the Lord every marriage should endure forever. If all mankind would live in strict obedience to the Gospel and in that love which is begotten by the Spirit of the Lord, all marriages would be eternal." …
“Chapter 15: Eternal Marriage,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Fielding Smith (2013), 191–202
https://www.lds.org/manual/teaching...ng-smith/chapter-15-eternal-marriage?lang=eng

By definition, exaltation includes the ability to procreate the family unit throughout eternity. This our Father in heaven has power to do. His marriage partner is our mother in heaven. We are their spirit children, born to them in the bonds of celestial marriage.
The Lord would have all his children attain exaltation, but men must have their agency. Only those who subscribe by ordinance and by faithful adherence to covenant are worthy of “a continuation of seeds forever and ever.” (D&C 132:19.)

GOD IS NOW AN EXALTED MAN WITH POWERS OF ETERNAL INCREASE
Our Father in Heaven Lives in an Exalted Marriage Relationship
“No matter to what heights God has attained or may attain, he does not stand alone; for side by side with him, in all her glory, a glory like unto his, stands a companion, the Mother of his children. For as we have a Father in heaven, so also we have a Mother there, a glorified, exalted, ennobled Mother.” (Melvin J. Ballard, as quoted in Bryant S. Hinckley, Sermons and Missionary Services of Melvin J. Ballard, pp. 205-6.)
LDS Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual (p. 129)


ONLY THROUGH CELESTIAL MARRIAGE CAN A PERSON BECOME LIKE GOD
(Ibid, p. 131)

 

[Jane_Doe]

I attend several conferences every year. Christian ones however. Thanks for the warning. I'll stay far away from yours.

Again, this OP here isn't even quoting actual LDS doctrine....

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

This has apparently never been a problem for followers of Jesus historically since the first century.
(it's not actually thought to be an 'argument' even - simply a fact never questioned by Yahweh's Ekklesia)

This argument that Jesus wasn't married is a big problem as far as Mormonism is concerned.

 

[Jane_Doe]

This has apparently never been a problem for followers of Jesus historically since the first century.
(it's not actually thought to be an 'argument' even - simply a fact never questioned by Yahweh's Ekklesia)

FYI: Post #27 is grossly misrepresenting LDS beliefs.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

As you noted before, that may be , but I don't know if that matters.
As long as any LDS or any other beliefs are contrary to Scripture, whether they are posted here or not, what difference does it make if even 10,000 different beliefs are in error ?
There remains One Way to the Father, Jesus, and this never changes no matter how many false beliefs / systems/ there are.

FYI: Post #27 is grossly misrepresenting LDS beliefs.

 

[Rescued One]

FYI: Post #27 is grossly misrepresenting LDS beliefs.

Post #30 is misrepresenting Mormonism.

“Jesus kept the commandments of his Father and thereby worked out his own salvation, and also set an example as to the way and means whereby all men may be saved.”
Bruce R. McConkie, The Mortal Messiah, Vol. 4, p. 434

“I testify that with unimaginable suffering and agony at an incalculable price, the Savior earned His right to be our Redeemer, our Intermediary, our Final Judge.”
Elder Richard G. Scott, “The Atonement Can Secure Your Peace and Happiness,” Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2006, 42
https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-...13/mosiah/unit-12-day-4-mosiah-15-17?lang=eng

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

These excerpts are not true .....
so it is certain the main site is not true either ....

“Jesus kept the commandments of his Father and thereby worked out his own salvation, and also set an example as to the way and means whereby all men may be saved.”
Bruce R. McConkie, The Mortal Messiah, Vol. 4, p. 434

“I testify that with unimaginable suffering and agony at an incalculable price, the Savior earned His right to be our Redeemer, our Intermediary, our Final Judge.”
Elder Richard G. Scott, “The Atonement Can Secure Your Peace and Happiness,” Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2006, 42

 

[RoseCrystal]

FYI: Post #27 is grossly misrepresenting LDS beliefs.

I don't see how? Its just a bunch of quotes from LDS scripture and teaching manuals

 

[RoseCrystal]

Again, this OP here isn't even quoting actual LDS doctrine....

No its not, but it is quoting obviously heretical statements made by one of the original 12 Apostles of the LDS church.

If the 12 Apostles speak today in the LDS church (especially at general conference like Orson Hyde did) they are listened to and taken very seriously, so it stands to reason that those who were members in 1855 took what Orson Hyde said very seriously and believed every word of it - AND HE WAS SPREADING HERASY. Thats really bad!

Can you acknowledge that is not a good thing? And that at the very least Orson Hyde was wrong?


Orson Hyde (original member of the LDS Quorum of The Twelve Apostles)
March 18, 1855

“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” (Journal of Discourses 2:210).

 

[Jane_Doe]

I don't see how? Its just a bunch of quotes from LDS scripture and teaching manuals

Set up so that the reader draw conclusions that aren't actual LDS doctrines. For example, the OP here is written such to give the reader the impression that "this is LDS doctrine". When in reality it's not remotely LDS doctrine.

No its not, but it is quoting obviously heretical statements made by one of the original 12 Apostles of the LDS church.

If the 12 Apostles speak today in the LDS church (especially at general conference like Orson Hyde did) they are listened to and taken very seriously, so it stands to reason that those who were members in 1855 took what Orson Hyde said very seriously and believed every word of it - AND HE WAS SPREADING HERASY. Thats really bad!

Can you acknowledge that is not a good thing? And that at the very least Orson Hyde was wrong?


Orson Hyde (original member of the LDS Quorum of The Twelve Apostles)
March 18, 1855

“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” (Journal of Discourses 2:210).

Again, misleading on the post's part. LDS aren't Catholic to hold to automatic infallibility and JoD isn't remotely an LDS doctrinal source.

 

[RoseCrystal]

Set up so that the reader draw conclusions that aren't actual LDS doctrines. For example, the OP here is written such to give the reader the impression that "this is LDS doctrine". When in reality it's not remotely LDS doctrine.

Again, misleading on the post's part. LDS aren't Catholic to hold to automatic infallibility and JoD isn't remotely an LDS doctrinal source.

I'm not saying it is doctrine, but Orson Hyde DID say this in general conference - can you please acknowledge that this is a heretical statement and Orson Hyde was very wrong to say such a thing? Unless of course you agree with his statement?

 

[Jane_Doe]

I'm not saying it is doctrine, but Orson Hyde DID say this in general conference - can you please acknowledge that this is a heretical statement and Orson Hyde was very wrong to say such a thing? Unless of course you agree with his statement?

Again, not remotely a doctrinal statement. I just said that.

 

[Rescued One]

Set up so that the reader draw conclusions that aren't actual LDS doctrines. For example, the OP here is written such to give the reader the impression that "this is LDS doctrine". When in reality it's not remotely LDS doctrine.

Again, misleading on the post's part. LDS aren't Catholic to hold to automatic infallibility and JoD isn't remotely an LDS doctrinal source.

If it isn't doctrine, your Jesus didn't keep the commandments.

 

[RoseCrystal]

Again, not remotely a doctrinal statement. I just said that.

I agree its not doctrine, I NEVER said that is was - but do you agree that is was wrong for Orson Hyde to make such a statement in General Conference or anywhere at all?

To be 100% clear, I am asking you do you believe it was wrong for Orson Hyde to say the below - yes or no?

Orson Hyde (original member of the LDS Quorum of The Twelve Apostles)
March 18, 1855

“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” (Journal of Discourses 2:210).