Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: hall@vice.ico.tek.com (Hal Lillywhite) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: LDS (Mormon) Religion Message-ID: Date: 17 Aug 90 07:29:21 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR. Lines: 179 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu [This is my response to the second part of Cindy Smith's last posting (as received here). I sent in my response to the first part a bit ago, having split it in 2 to keep length down. Of course it is possible you may see this one before the other but I don't think it will make a lot of difference. hl] Cindy Writes: >6. "Each of these Gods, including Jesus Christ and His Father, being in >possession of not merely an organized spirit, but a glorious immortal body of >flesh and bones..." (Parley P. Pratt, Key to the Science of Theology, ed. 1965, >p. 44). >7. "And then the Lord said: Let us go down. And they went down at the >beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the >earth" (Abraham 4:1). How about Gen 3:22, "And God said, Behold the man is become as one of *us*." [emphasis mine] I think you will find the plural used quite freely in reference to God in this part of the Bible if you investigate the original Hebrew. >10. "Christ was the God, the Father of all things...Behold, I am Jesus Christ. >I am the Father and the Son" (Mosiah 7:27 and Ether 3:14, Book of Mormon). I think you are trying to claim that the Book of Mormon says that Jesus and the Father are the same person. Not so, read the context. Jesus is Father in the sense that he is our redeemer and thus the "father of our salvation" and also in that God the Father delegated to him the actual creation of the earth. .................................................. [A lot of unofficial (and sometimes out of context) stuff deleted, purporting to show that LDS belief is that Adam was God.] The official LDS position on Adam is that he was Michael the archangel (D&C 27:11, 107:54, 128:21). This is not only official, being in cannonized scripture, but was written long before the unofficial sources you get from Walter Martin. (We believe that most angels are humans who have either not yet come to earth or have lived here and died. We believe that all of us lived as spirits before comming here. Thus having a man such as Adam identified with an angel fits right in.) Adam is also regarded as the father of the race and as such deserving of the honor due our first parent. However, he is not our God. >That the Mormons reject the historic Christian doctrine of the Trinity no >student of the movement can deny, for after quoting the Nicene creed and early >church theology on the Trinity, Talmage, in The Articles of Faith, declares: >"It would be difficult to conceive of a greater number of inconsistencies and >contradictions expressed in words as here...The immateriality of God as >asserted in these declarations of sectarian faith is entirely at variance with >the Scriptures, and absolutely contradicted by the revelations of God's person >and attributes..." (p. 48). Certainly LDS belief rejects the God without body, parts or passions of the creeds. While this trinitarian view may indeed be historic is is less certain that the Trinity is the God of the prophets, many of us think it is more the God of the philosophers. There have been previous exchanges on the subject of Trinity here and on t.r.m. I think neither side could claim any clear victory. Since according to at least one scholar trinitarian doctrine originated 300-400 years after Christ, I think it is pushing things a bit to insist that all Christians must accept it. >................................ > > In Mormon theology, Christ as a pre-existent spirit was not only the spirit >brother of the devil (as alluded to in the Pearl of Great Price, Moses 4:1-4, >and later reaffirmed by Brigham Young in the Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. >282), but celebrated his own marriage to both "the Marys and Martha, whereby he >could see his seed before he was crucified" (apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of >Discourses, Vol. 4, pp. 259-260). Cindy, would you care to explain what you are trying to say here? You seem to be addressing 2 rather unrelated subjects, even refering to different volumes of JOD, in the same sentence. What is your point? And how do the 2 unrelated quotes fit into it? > [Brigham Young]: "Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and >put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would >atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God. I would at once >do so in such a case; and under such circumstances, i have no wife whom I love >so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it >with clean hands... > "There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God, >that they will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never >wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it; and the judgements [sic.] of >the Almighty will come, sooner or later, and every man and woman will have to >atone for their covenants...All mankin love themselves, and let these >principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood >shed...I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously >slain, in order to atone for their sins...This is loving our neighbor as >ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is >necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill >it" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. III,p. 247, and Vol. 14, pp. 219-220). Once again you mix things from different volumes without indicating which is which. I think you are also trying to compare this with your previous BoM and D&C quotes (separated from this in your posting by quite a bit of other stuff, I've brought it down here for reference): > In Doctrine and Covenants 20:37 the following statement appears: > "All those who humble themselves...and truly manifest by their works that they >have received of the Spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins, shall >be received by baptism in His church." > >[In the Book of Mormon]: "Yea, blessed are they who shall...be baptized, for >they shall...receive a remission of their sins...Behold, baptism is unto >repentance to the fulfilling of the commandments unto the remission of sins" >(3 Nephi 12:2; Moroni 8:11). Cindy, you have 2 different issues confused here (in addition to the confusion of your out of context and unofficial quotes). One is the forgiveness of sins for the repentant sinner, the other is the deliberate sinning by one who has had that forgiveness and made covenants with the Lord to follow him. If you want a strong statement about forgiveness not being available to those who deliberatly turn away from Jesus you need look no further than your Bible: Heb 6:4-6: For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away to renew them again unto repentance; seeing tehy crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. Heb 10:26-27: For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgement and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. > > There's much more. Obviously, this author does not favor Mormonism. I quoted >his quotes of Mormons, along with some of his comments. (I hope I didn't quote >too much. I skipped around to find Mormon quotes. How much can you quote >directly from a book to generate discussion anyway?) > > LDS doctrine is really rather limited as to what members are > expected to believe. The cannonized scriptures and a few official > statements of the "First Presidency" are about it. However, we are > encouraged to think and study for ourselves and some of this gets > published. It is useful to give others something to think about but > in general is not official. [Cindy, I wish you would be a bit more careful about quotes and atributions. The above 6 lines are from one of my posts but are mixed in with your other stuff to the point that I suspect readers have a hard time figuring out which is which. hl] >Mormons knew what their theology taught they might not believe it. Most >Mormons, he maintains, are decent, clean living folk, who are largely unaware >of the inconsistencies and outrageous blasphemies of their religion. While there is certainly room for most LDS to learn more about their religion, most do know enough to know that Walter Martin's version of it is rather distorted. You (and he) seem to think that we don't know what we believe. Are you claiming we believe something but don't know it? > I think >Mormons want to be Christians, and believe they are Christians, but the >theology of the Latter-day Saints is simply not Christianity. Perhaps, over >time, the Mormon Church will continue to repudiate so many of the outrageous >statements of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and others that they will rejoin >the ranks of Christianity. An assertion as to the truthfulness and accuracy of >the Apostles Creed would be a good start. I am less concerned if you or Walter Martin believe I am a Christian than I am about if the Lord does.