Mormonism.

[JeffShott]

Somehow I suspect your source did not bother to mention that Bruce R. McConkie also said that teachings denying the virgin birth are utterly and completely apostate and false.

So, he contradicted himself.... Go figure.

Well maybe for you it would have to be, but then, you're not God, are you?

Nice try, but this time you are not gonna dance around the subject. McConkie said that Yeshua was conceived in the same manner as all other humans. Now, if you look at this from a point of view that is not blurred by a false church, it is easy to see that he meant sexual intercourse.

Of course I am not God, for I am a human, something that He is not.

I don't know about you, but for me, I can't help wonder how people who claim to believe in God, who often insist that all God did was speak and all the incredibly complex and intricate creations within the universe came into existence, can think Him incapable of siring Mary's child without engaging in sexual intercourse with her.

Quite an ironic statement, seeing as how I am the one that believes God the Father, that is not nor ever was a man, did not have sexual intercourse with Mary; Due to the fact that I believe the Holy Spirit was what impregnated Yeshua within Mary, as the Scripture teaches us.

I don't know about you, but I can't help wonder, since even the very elements obey God's command, how is it that some people will say they believe in God, yet think it's impossible that He could place His seed in Mary's womb by a means that would neither violate her chastity or her virtue.

Once again, that is exactly what I believe. The Holy Spirit miraculously made it so that Mary would bare the Son of God, without ever violating her.

I don't know about you, but that is something I find astounding.

What I find so astounding is that you keep making complete assumptions about my faith.

 

[Rescued One]

According to LDS doctrine a person must be baptised in the LDS church for their baptism to be legitimate.

Only the LDS church has the authority to do this. Basically, you have not really been baptised unless you are baptised in the LDS church...

Do you understand this?

True!

 

[Rescued One]

As I thought, she is not giving me direct answers and is claiming not to know much about Gods exaltation.

Most LDS know about it.

1 God Was Once a Man
As We Are Now
When he was a young man, Lorenzo Snow was promised by the Lord through the Patriarch to the Church that through obedience to the gospel he could become as great as God, “and you cannot wish to be greater”(Eliza R. Snow, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow, pp. 9-10).

President Lorenzo Snow recorded this experience that occurred when he was still a young elder: “The Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon me—the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the sun shone at noon-day, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man.” Elder Snow expressed this new found understanding in these words: “As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be.” Later the Prophet Joseph Smith assured him: “Brother Snow, that is true gospel doctrine, and it is a revelation from God to you” (quoted by LeRoi C. Snow, in “Devotion to Divine Inspiration,” Improvement Era, June 1919, pp. 651-56).

The Prophet Joseph Smith said:
“...It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth” (Teachings, pp. 345-46; italics in original).
(Search These Commandments, Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, Copyright 1984, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, p. 152)

 

[Rescued One]

She even had the liberty to question why I was asking her about Gods exaltation. I told her we were debating LDS doctrine on forums and that is why the question popped up, she even asked me what forums I was using. She claimed not to know enough to give me a decent answer on the subject. All she kept saying was "and how does this make you feel?"

That was utterly useless.

I couldn't get the answers you were looking for, but I am still awaiting a response on my LDS forums on the exact same subject. So there is hope yet.

They are unlikely to tell you about this until you have shown your obedience to the LDS church.

Specifically, what are your questions? Can you direct me to a post?

Brigham Young explained, “After men have got their exaltations and their crowns---have become Gods, even the sons of God---are made Kings of kings and Lords of lords, they have the power then of propagating their species in spirit; and that is the first of their operations with regard to organizing a world. Power is then given to them to organize the elements, and then commence the organization of tabernacles.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.275.)

“Each one of you has it within the realm of his possibility to develop a kingdom over which you will preside as its king and god.” (Spencer W. Kimball, “. . . the Matter of Marriage” [address delivered at University of Utah Institute of Religion, 22 Oct. 1976], 2).

 

[Zechariah]

Once again, that is exactly what I believe. The Holy Spirit miraculously made it so that Mary would bare the Son of God, without ever violating her.

Let me make sure I'm clear about what you're saying.

Are you saying that do believe that Mary actually did bare the Son of God?

Are you saying that you do believe the Holy Spirit, somehow, in some miraculous way, made this possible?

And are you saying that you do believe that Mary was not violated and was still a virgin after she conceived?

 

[JeffShott]

Are you saying that do believe that Mary actually did bare the Son of God?

Yes, Mary did give birth to Yeshua the Messiah.

Are you saying that you do believe the Holy Spirit, somehow, in some miraculous way, made this possible?

I sure am, just as the Bible teaches us.

And are you saying that you do believe that Mary was not violated and was still a virgin after she conceived?

Yes sir.

 

[Zechariah]

Yes, Mary did give birth to Yeshua the Messiah.

I sure am, just as the Bible teaches us.

Yes sir.

Good!

This, is what we believe! This is LDS doctrine!

 

[JeffShott]

Good!

This, is what we believe! This is LDS doctrine!

I'm still confused on the LDS view of the role that the Father supposedly played.

------

I'd also like to bring up to things again:
(Maybe you can clarify, Zechariah)

On an unrelated note, can anyone explain to me why there are things in the Book of Mormon's North America that weren't actually there (i.e. horses, elephants and scimitars), as seen here: Why I Left Mormonism - the Mormon Church -- You have to scroll down a bit, it's under the "The Book of Mormon" subtitle.

Okay, well this seems to be the problem in the discussion: you believe that the Father is/was a human. Exaltation, I know. The thing is, I just don't understand exaltation. I side with Matt Slick on this one -- A logical proof that Mormonism is false | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

 

[Moodshadow]

That's it. So basicaly you and I have not statistically actually been baptised yet. The effects of your baptism are therefore just a figment of your imagination.

Well, except that I was in fact baptized LDS - and was active for forty years, after which I excommunicated myself after learning through independent research that Joseph Smith was not what he claimed to be. Since my apostasy (a favorite Mormon word) I've been baptized into the Methodist church - something Joseph Smith sought, incidentally, after he announced the vision wherein he claimed that God told him all earthy creeds were an abomination and he must join none of them. My Methodist baptism is 100% worthless according to Mormonism because it was not done by LDS priesthood, so if I should ever decide to renounce Methodism and seek readmission into the LDS church, I would have to be re-baptized by LDS priesthood. (Theoretically speaking, of course. The chance of that actually happening is zero.)

 

[Moodshadow]

Moodshadow displays no confusion.

Amusing, isn't it, that I'm confused only in their minds?

 

[Zechariah]

I'm still confused on the LDS view of the role that the Father supposedly played.

The title "Father" should help to clear up that confusion. God is the Father of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the Son of God the Father. They are father and son, parent and child, just as you and your biological father are genetically father and son, parent and child. This is what LDS Church leaders were stressing. They were not discussing sexual intercourse, they were addressing the literal reality of Mary's conception and Christ's divine paternity, he being the literal Son of the Living God.

Now, if you insist that this must mean an act of sexual intercourse, then, as I see it, you necessarily bypass the very miracle of Mary's conception. God has not revealed the specific details of exactly "how" this was accomplished, but we do know, that, according to scripture, the Holy Spirit was present and his power was involved.

The miracle is that Mary did literally conceive, that she was literally with child, literally the mother of her child, and she literally gave birth to the Son of God, with God being her child's literal Father. God being the literal Father of Jesus does not eliminate the miracle of it. That IS the miracle of it. How could it not be thought a miracle that a virgin did conceive, that a virgin bore a son, even very the Son of God? Being such an extraordinary event caused by the power of God makes it a miracle.

I'd also like to bring up to things again:
(Maybe you can clarify, Zechariah)

If you don't mind, I would rather focus on one thing at a time.

 

[JeffShott]

The title "Father" should help to clear up that confusion. God is the Father of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the Son of God the Father. They are father and son, parent and child, just as you and your biological father are genetically father and son, parent and child. This is what LDS Church leaders were stressing. They were not discussing sexual intercourse, they were addressing the literal reality of Mary's conception and Christ's divine paternity, he being the literal Son of the Living God.

Now, if you insist that this must mean an act of sexual intercourse, then, as I see it, you necessarily bypass the very miracle of Mary's conception. God has not revealed the specific details of exactly "how" this was accomplished, but we do know, that, according to scripture, the Holy Spirit was present and his power was involved.

The miracle is that Mary did literally conceive, that she was literally with child, literally the mother of her child, and she literally gave birth to the Son of God, with God being her child's literal Father. God being the literal Father of Jesus does not eliminate the miracle of it. That IS the miracle of it. How could it not be thought a miracle that a virgin did conceive, that a virgin bore a son, even very the Son of God? Being such an extraordinary event caused by the power of God makes it a miracle.

Okay! Now, that makes A LOT more sense than what I gathered from the quotes that I presented you with. Turns out we share the same beliefs (on this topic, anyway). It's all in the interpretation.

Thank you for the clarification, sir.

[The part of the above quote that I put in bold is basically all that anyone can know for sure, concerning the subject ]

If you don't mind, I would rather focus on one thing at a time.

Would you agree that we are ready to move on?

 

[Ran77]

What I find so astounding is that you keep making complete assumptions about my faith.

As opposed to the numerous assumptions you have already made about the LDS faith?

 

[Ran77]

They are unlikely to tell you about this until you have shown your obedience to the LDS church.

That is false in all the experiences I have had with it. So "they" is probably a limited subset of the LDS, it certainly isn't all LDS.

 

[Ran77]

Amusing, isn't it, that I'm confused only in their minds?

Is there a reason that you are making this personal? Why not just address the topic?

 

[Ran77]

Since my apostasy (a favorite Mormon word)

This is a petty jab at Mormons. And of course, not true. I'm sure that a top 100 list of the favorite words of the LDS would not include it.

However, I have a couple of favorite words: Love, Savior, Sacrifice. I find it wonderful that the Lord loves us enough to Sacrifice His son for us. I find it wonderful that Jesus loves us enough to Sacrifice Himself for us. I find it wonderful on this holiday that I can look to the celebration of what the Savior did for us rather than focusing on tearing down others.

How are those for favorite words?

I've been baptized into the Methodist church - something Joseph Smith sought, incidentally, after he announced the vision wherein he claimed that God told him all earthy creeds were an abomination and he must join none of them.

CFR - What is the timeline for these events?

My Methodist baptism is 100% worthless according to Mormonism because it was not done by LDS priesthood, so if I should ever decide to renounce Methodism and seek readmission into the LDS church, I would have to be re-baptized by LDS priesthood. (Theoretically speaking, of course. The chance of that actually happening is zero.)

And of how much worth is an LDS baptism in the Methodist church? I find it amazing that people can make statements like this, when they do the same thing. Obviously, the LDS baptism was worthless if you had to be baptized Methodist. But that is acceptable and it sounds like you are condemning the LDS for doing the same thing that you do.


:o

 

[Ran77]

Imagine claiming that those who read the Bible "because of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over them!"

Yea, imagine that.

I see plenty of evidence of it being true.

 

[Rescued One]

And of how much worth is an LDS baptism in the Methodist church? I find it amazing that people can make statements like this, when they do the same thing. Obviously, the LDS baptism was worthless if you had to be baptized Methodist. But that is acceptable and it sounds like you are condemning the LDS for doing the same thing that you do.

There is no Methodist teaching that only Methodists have authority to baptize.

 

[Ran77]

Moodshadow displays no confusion.

Your opinion is duly noted. I don't think I would call it confusion, I just know that there are plenty of posts submitted by her - and you - that do not contain the actual doctrines of the Church. I don't know the reason for the misinformation.

 

[Ran77]

There is no Methodist teaching that only Methodists have authority to baptize.

This is very simple to get to the bottom of - one question.

Do Methodist accept LDS baptism as valid?


If the answer is anything other than yes, then all the dancing around it is deceptive. Being critical of LDS for not accepting the baptism of other denominations while rejecting the validity of LDS baptism is hypocritial. Period. Trying to make it sound different doesn't change that fact.