Questions about Mormonism

[Darcy23]

As a scientist well versed in mathematics - I am quite perplexed by your use of words??? If one claims to be "one" with anything - especially G-d please explain to me how they are not equal? Please do this without changing the meaning of "one" or equal.

You may want to review from ancient scripture (John chapter 10)
verse 30: Jesus declares he is one with G-d the Father
verse 31: The Jews take action to stone Jesus to death
verse 32: Jesus asks why they intend to kill him - for which of his works?
verse 33: The Jews say not because of his works but because of his doctrine of being one with G-d because in claiming to be one with the Father Jesus was making himself a g-d equal to the Father. Please note that your accusation is no different than the Jews in this scripture.

Also note that Jesus corrected them and pointed out that the scriptures clearly teach that men are g-ds (verse 34). So their argument and your argument is proven false by the teachings of Christ - if you believe the Bible.

Please allow me to point out one other very important thing about Joseph Smith and the beliefs of LDS. We believe that Jesus is the example in every way what we need to understand concerning G-d - including G-d the Father.

Thus we LDS believe that the only way to perceive and understand the Father is in the example of Jesus Christ. In the example of Jesus Christ we learn that G-d (Jesus) once was a man. We also learn that the Man Jesus Christ is now G-d that rules as "King of Kings" in the Kingdom of G-d. So it is because of Jesus that we learn G-d was once a man.

So I ask - is knowing Jesus knowing the Father or not? Did Jesus lie?

Son of Zadok

You are taking traditional Christian beliefs and equating them to Mormon beliefs. Smith's doctrine that men can become gods is not a typical Christian belief. He did not teach that we would merely become one with God. He taught that a man can become ANOTHER God. He believed that God became God and that Mormons can follow in His footsteps and become gods themselves.

I think it funny how Mormons take what Jesus said about himself and then apply it to themselves. Then they'll say Jesus called all men gods. So are we gods? Vanity aside, I am but a man. I don't know about you.

 

[Zechariah]

You are taking traditional Christian beliefs and equating them to Mormon beliefs. Smith's doctrine that men can become gods is not a typical Christian belief. He did not teach that we would merely become one with God. He taught that a man can become ANOTHER God. He believed that God became God and that Mormons can follow in His footsteps and become gods themselves.

I think it funny how Mormons take what Jesus said about himself and then apply it to themselves. Then they'll say Jesus called all men gods. So are we gods? Vanity aside, I am but a man. I don't know about you.

And why should men not apply things Jesus said of himself to themselves? Is this not a clear example of what the Father and the Christ intend for the man that overcometh?

What could be more plain and simple language? Or maybe you prefer to put your own limitations on what Christ said and meant here, as well?

Revelation 3:21
To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.


.

 

[bbbbbbb]

And why should men not apply things Jesus said of himself to themselves? Is this not a clear example of what the Father and the Christ intend for the man that overcometh?

What could be more plain and simple language? Or maybe you prefer to put your own limitations on what Christ said and meant here, as well?

Revelation 3:21
To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.


.

Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by me." (John 14:6)

I suspect that if I made the same statement, one of us would be wrong, because one or the other can be the way to the Father, but not both of us.

 

[A New Dawn]

And why should men not apply things Jesus said of himself to themselves? Is this not a clear example of what the Father and the Christ intend for the man that overcometh?

What could be more plain and simple language? Or maybe you prefer to put your own limitations on what Christ said and meant here, as well?

Revelation 3:21
To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.


.

That quote in Revelation states that we will be granted to sit with Christ on HIS throne (because we are positionally in Him), not that we would be given our own throne in another (our own) kingdom. We could not sit on any throne if it weren't for Christ and what HE did for us. We are not purified by the blood of Christ, we are still dirty stinking rotten sinners, we are just covered in HIS blood. We don't deserve anything, and just because we are in heaven/eternal life, that doesnt' mean that we are pure, it means that Christ paid our debt and got us a "get out of jail free" card. I don't see how us receiving something we don't deserve means that we are guaranteed to be gods of our own world.

 

[Zechariah]

Revelation 3:21
To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.


.

 

[A New Dawn]

However you look at it, you're still sitting on Christ's throne with him. You don't have a throne of your own, or a kingdom of your own.

 

[Zechariah]

However you look at it, you're still sitting on Christ's throne with him. You don't have a throne of your own, or a kingdom of your own.

Just as he is set down in his Father's throne...

 

[A New Dawn]

Just as he is set down in his Father's throne...

What does that have to do with becoming gods of your own kingdom?

 

[Zechariah]

What does that have to do with becoming gods of your own kingdom?

Do you see anywhere I was addressing that? Maybe you should read what I was responding to...

 

[A New Dawn]

Do you see anywhere I was addressing that? Maybe you should read what I was responding to...

I'm sorry you are not following the conversation. I responded to you, and you responded to Darcy23, and he was talking about men becoming gods.

 

[Zechariah]

I'm sorry you are not following the conversation. I responded to you, and you responded to Darcy23, and he was talking about men becoming gods.

Uh...I was addressing men being/becoming gods. I was not addressing having my own kingdom...

 

[Darcy23]

The Father did not overcome. He always was, perfect, eternally.

 

[BadWolf123]

Originally Posted by ldsfaqs

There is no "doctrine" stating that God has many wives.
​

Really?
here is what Dictionary.com has to say on your word of choice:

doc·trine

   /ˈdɒk

trɪn/ Show Spelled[dok-trin] Show IPA
noun 1. a particular principle, position, or policy taught or advocated, as of a religion or government: Catholic doctrines; the Monroe Doctrine.

2. something that is taught; teachings collectively: religious doctrine.

3. a body or system of teachings relating to a particular subject: the doctrine of the Catholic Church.




Apostle Orson Pratt makes these unbelievable statements: "… the great Messiah who was the founder of the Christian religion, was a Polygamist … the Messiah chose to take upon himself his seed; and by marrying many honorable wives himself, show to all future generations that he approbated the plurality of Wives under the Christian dispensation … God the Father had a plurality of wives … the Son followed the example of his Father … both God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ inherit their wives in eternity as well as in time; …" (The Seer, p. 172)

here is the source: The Seer

go look it up for yourself

Apostle Pratt clearly and eloquently demonstrates this doctrine in an LDS publication. How can you say that

Originally Posted by ldsfaqs

There is no "doctrine" stating that God has many wives.
​

when there clearly is such a doctrine?

Bump for ldsfaqs

 

[Son of Zadok]

You are taking traditional Christian beliefs and equating them to Mormon beliefs. Smith's doctrine that men can become gods is not a typical Christian belief. He did not teach that we would merely become one with God. He taught that a man can become ANOTHER God. He believed that God became God and that Mormons can follow in His footsteps and become gods themselves.

I think it funny how Mormons take what Jesus said about himself and then apply it to themselves. Then they'll say Jesus called all men gods. So are we gods? Vanity aside, I am but a man. I don't know about you.

This is such a shock to me - So "Traditional Christians" do not believe in being one with G-d? I thought "Traditional Christians" believed in the Bible and in the teachings of Jesus in the Bible. Did not Jesus clearly teach in his prayers that his followers would be "one" with him and the Father in the same way they are one? (see John 17:21-22)

Who was Jesus praying about? Why will you not apply this to yourself - is it because you do are not among "them also which shall believe on me through their word" (See John 17:20 for context of above quote).

Son of Zadok

 

[Son of Zadok]

Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by me." (John 14:6)

I suspect that if I made the same statement, one of us would be wrong, because one or the other can be the way to the Father, but not both of us.

Hmmmmm - interesting logic - so you believe Jesus is the one and only "keeper" of the way - if there is another such a claim is wrong?

Son of Zadok

 

[Darcy23]

This is such a shock to me - So "Traditional Christians" do not believe in being one with G-d? I thought "Traditional Christians" believed in the Bible and in the teachings of Jesus in the Bible. Did not Jesus clearly teach in his prayers that his followers would be "one" with him and the Father in the same way they are one? (see John 17:21-22)

Who was Jesus praying about? Why will you not apply this to yourself - is it because you do are not among "them also which shall believe on me through their word" (See John 17:20 for context of above quote).

Son of Zadok

Ugh! Why did you ignore the main point of my response? Here. Saves me the trouble. I can just quote what I said before.

"Smith did not teach that we would merely become one with God. He taught that a man can become ANOTHER God."

 

[fatboys]

Ugh! Why did you ignore the main point of my response? Here. Saves me the trouble. I can just quote what I said before.

"Smith did not teach that we would merely become one with God. He taught that a man can become ANOTHER God."

and the difference is?

 

[Darcy23]

and the difference is?

Obvious.

 

[Rescued One]

Ugh! Why did you ignore the main point of my response? Here. Saves me the trouble. I can just quote what I said before.

"Smith did not teach that we would merely become one with God. He taught that a man can become ANOTHER God."

Yes, he taught that and so did Brigham Young:

"Here then is eternal life---to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves...the same as all Gods have done before you...To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a God"
(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.346-347).

"The Lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods like himself”
(Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, p. 93)


And Brigham Young explained that God was once like us:

“He is our Father—the Father of our Spirits—and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are....

“...There never was a time when there were not Gods and worlds and when men were not passing through the same ordeals that we are now passing through....

“It appears ridiculous to the world, under their darkened and erroneous traditions, that God has been a finite being” (Deseret News, 16 Nov. 1859, p. 290).

(Search These Commandments, Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, Copyright 1984, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, p. 152)

 

[bbbbbbb]

Hmmmmm - interesting logic - so you believe Jesus is the one and only "keeper" of the way - if there is another such a claim is wrong?

Son of Zadok

I did not say, nor does the Bible, that Jesus is the one and only "keeper" of the way. He stated in John 14:6, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by Me." He does not claim to be the "keeper" of the way, but claims to be the way.