| CONVERSATIONS WITH A MORMON |
| HOME | WRITINGS | ORGANIZATIONS | Q & A | NEWSLETTER | FAQS | CONTACT | ABOUT | BELIEFS | LINKS | ARCHIVE | FREE BIBLE | STORE |
|
| CONVERSATIONS WITH A MORMON |
| Nine Points Of Difference Between The Bible And Mormon Doctrine Retrospective |
The Mormon Challenge Wednesday, December 5 Whoever wrote the 9 points of difference between the Bible and Mormon doctrine certainly didn't do much research and certainly isn't very familiar with "Mormon" doctrine. 1. Mormons state there is no trinity? The first Article of Faith states; "We believe in God the Eternal Father, in his son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost. Sounds like a trinity to me. We do believe they are seperate beings . . . as the Bible teaches. Did Christ pray to himself in the Garden of Gethsemane? 2. Mormons believe that Christ was once a man like all human beings, but became a god. His father was Elohim, and his mother was Mary. He had both human and godly characteristics while living in mortality. He couldn't have performed his mission if he didn't. 3. Mormons believed that the father of Jesus Christ was Adam. That is a phony claim that some non- Mormons tried to foist on us by a misunderstood discourse by Brigham Young. It was proven false long ago. 4. Mormons believe there is no "original sin". "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ are all made alive." However, we believe that we will personally be punished for our own sins and not Adam's transgression. 5. Mormons believe there is no hell for the unrepentant? That's the first I've heard of it. I suppose you believe we wear long hair to hide our horns too? 6. Mormons believe a person can be "saved" by proxy baptism for the dead. No, but like the Christians of Biblical times we do proxy baptisms for the dead. 1 Cor. 15:29. What happens to all the billions of people that lived their lives without ever hearing of Christ? Christ visited the spirits in prison while his body lay in the tomb. There he preached the gospel as well. Baptism is an earthly ordinance, just like marriage. When they except it on the other side, they must wait for us here to perform the ordinances for them. That is what the great work of the millenium will be, and why it will take 1000 years. 7. Mormons believe that after death they will be Gods. Only if we are judged faithful in all things. After all, Jesus promised us that we could be co-inheritors with him in all things, and of all the father has. 8. Mormons believe in the process of continuing revelation. FINALLY YOU HAVE GOTTEN SOMETHING RIGHT!!! As for polygamy, it was ordained of God for Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses as well. They were all prophets of God. What God ordains is not a sin. It served God's purpose for a time in the early years of the Church. After it had fulfilled its purpose, God rescinded it, as he must have done at some time in ancient history as well don't you think? Otherwise we would all be practicing it to this day. 9. We believe in the Bible as far as it is translated correctly. That is true. For instance, the King James version of the Bible has the 6th commandment listed as "Thou shalt not kill." However the original Hebrew word was berosheit, more correctly translated as murder. That is pretty universally accepted among biblical scholars today. On Doctrine Reply Did you read the companion article? "The Nine Points Revisited" www.ondoctrine.com/conversa/3morm004.htm I will review your comments, but most of them have been considered in the two articles and in other articles on the website. POINT 1: If you understood the concept of the Christian Trinity then you would not use a criticism that Christians are claiming that Jesus Christ prayed to Himself. That is not what is being described in the Trinitarian relationship and would be denied by any legitimate Trinitarian believer. The Christian Trinity is a unity of beings within and as one God, and is properly defined as: "Within the one eternal being of God there exists three eternally existing persons." Mormons cannot point to an eternally existing god because he had to be just a man before becoming a god and he then had to procreate the second person of the godhead who did not previously exist. It is unclear whether the third person of the godhead, the Holy Ghost, is a son of the father or has some other relationship. Mormons must claim that the elements (living "intelligences") that compose the spirit, body and physical components of the universe have always existed never having been created, but that is not the same as saying that the Mormon god who is composed of the association of unnumbered "intelligences" has existed as god for eternity. In reality, Mormons believe in an animate world, in which everything that exists is composed of the living "intelligences" that associate with each other of their own volition in order to form everything that is, and they existed prior to the existence of any universe, any man, any god or the Mormon gospel message. They are, in fact, the god makers and can also disassociate themselves from each other in order to remove from existence any entity that they have created by their association together, which includes man, god, spirit and material. Mormon theology denies that there is a Trinity by the Christian definition and instead substitutes a triumvirate for a godhead, in which there are three separate individuals who are not a unity of being but are only a unity of purpose. It is not a proper definition to say that the Mormon triumvirate is a trinity. Any three individuals can associate as a triumvirate, but only the beings of the Christian Godhood are a Trinity. Current Mormon teaching regarding the godhead is not the same as that found in the Book of Mormon which has very Trinitarian overtones but is more closely aligned with modalistic belief, which asserts that there is one god who appears, assumes the role of or expresses himself as the father, the son or the Holy Ghost, depending on which role he wishes to portray. ". . . Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. . ."You must also consider the following verses that have been changed in the Book of Mormon from the first printing in 1830 to say something completely different in current editions: "And the angel spake unto me, saying: These last records, which thou hast seen among the Gentiles, shall establish the truth of the first, which are of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them; and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Savior of the world; and that all men must come unto him, or they cannot be saved."In the Book of Mormon, god is neither a trinity or a triumvirate, but a single being of modality who simply appears in different forms. It is often pointed out that in Joseph Smith's First Vision, he saw both the father and the son standing beside each other, so it is concluded that a modalistic godhood cannot be correct since there were two separate beings in view. However, the First Vision being noted is not the first account that Joseph Smith wrote regarding his claim to have had a vision. In his actual first account of the First Vision, Joseph Smith describes only one person appearing in the vision, with reference to a Father that is not seen. It is only in later versions of the First Vision that the appearance of the Father and Son together has been inserted: ". . . and the Lord opened the heavens upon me and I saw the Lord and he spake unto me saying Joseph my son they sins are forgiven thee, go [sic] they way walk in my statutes and keep my commandments behold I am the Lord of glory I was crucifyed [sic] for the world that all those who believe on my name may have Eternal life. . . . behold and lo I come quickly as it was w[r]itten of me in the cloud clothed in the glory of my Father. . . ."However, even in the Book of Mormon, there is no modalistic trinity, because early Mormons (including Joseph Smith) did not believe that the Holy Ghost was a person, but was simply an emanation or the mind of god. "There are two personages . . . the Father and the son: The Father being a personage of spirit, glory and power: possessing all perfection and fulness: The Son, who was in the bosom of the Father a personage of tabernacle, . . . called the Son because of the flesh . . . possessing the same mind with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit, . . ."It is taught by Mormons that the father and Jesus Christ are related as literal and biological father and son, but it is unknown how the Holy Ghost relates to the other two. Is he also a son of the father and therefore a brother of Jesus Christ just like Satan, or is he related in some other manner or is he not related at all? I maintain that to be true to Mormon theology, he is a son of the father but Mormon theology has not determined the final answer to those issues. Heber C. Kimbal did have an opinion and said, ". . . the Holy Ghost is a man; he is one of the sons of our Father and our God . . ," Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 179. The reason that the Holy Ghost was left out of the equation by Joseph Smith and early Mormons, was because they did not believe him to be a person, so he was left undefined as a being. It is only in later times that it has been concluded that the Holy Ghost is an actual personage of spirit and that the Holy Spirit is the mind of God rather than the Holy Ghost. However, the term Holy Ghost, is a King Jamesian term that is actually the same as the Holy Spirit and refers to the Holy Spirit as a person. Most orthodox believers understand that the names Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit refer to the same person, even though the name Holy Ghost is a misnomer. Joseph Smith simply picked up the terms used in the King James Bible and applied an erroneous definition to them and included them in the Book of Mormon, just as Mormon theologians have defined them to be two separate entities, which is not the case in the Bible. There is no such being as a ghost, so the name Holy Ghost is a misnomer and the name Holy Spirit should be used instead, which precludes that the Holy Spirit is a force or mind instead of a person. POINT 2: You have repeated what I stated, so I must assume that you agree with my statement. I think that current Mormon teaching is that Jesus Christ attained to his godhood in the pre-existence without going through Eternal Progression. If that is the case, then there is more than one way for a person to be exalted that does not involve following the precepts of the church. The same is true for the Holy Ghost, who never even obtained a body and could not have had children, both of which are necessary for exaltation. So, perhaps there are two additional ways to obtain exaltation outside following the precepts of the church and the gospel message. However, the real issue in relation to the paternity of Jesus Christ, is that Mary was the spirit daughter/child of god the father and his wife in the pre-existence. So, in order to become the father of Jesus Christ, god the father came to earth and literally had physical sexual relations with his own daughter Mary in order to father the temporal body of Jesus Christ into which his pre-existent spirit would enter. Incest was the manner in which the temporal body of Jesus Christ was conceived and is prohibited by direct command of God in Leviticus 18:6. POINT 3: There has never been a misunderstanding regarding what Brigham Young taught in relation to the Adam-God Doctrine. The doctrine is false in relation to current Mormon belief, but it cannot be claimed that it was not taught in the Mormon church or that it was not originated and taught by Brigham Young. His statements are quite clear and not based on just one discourse. There has only been a denial from the Presidency and General Authorities, when they knew very well what he had taught. President Spencer W. Kimball confirmed that the doctrine was present and taught in the church. "We warn against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. Such, for instance in the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine."It is very hard to deny that there was in existence a complete doctrinal teaching regarding Adam as God that existed from the Presidency of Brigham Young but was not dealt with by future Presidents or declared to be heresy until 1976. You cannot blame non-Mormons for creating the doctrine which came directly from Brigham Young and was being taught in the church as noted in the statement by Spencer W. Kimball. He did not make the statement against an issue of doctrine that did not actually exist within the church. There is abundant evidence that Brigham Young taught the Adam-God doctrine, not only by his own recorded statements, but as a result of journal entries, articles in the Millennial Star, quotes by his special scribe and by persons teaching at Brigham Young University. "Was Brigham Young misquoted? It is the writer's opinion that the answer to this question is a categorical no. There is no the slightest evidence from Brigham Young, or any other source, that either his original remarks on April 9, 1852, or any of his subsequent statements were ever misquoted in the official publications of the Church. . . .The idea that Brigham Young did not teach the Adam-God Doctrine was a creation of the General Authorities in order the cover the fact that Brigham Young taught false doctrine, and allowed Spencer W. Kimball to claim that it was alleged that some unnamed General Authorities taught false doctrine (carefully leaving Brigham Young's name out of the issue) so that he would not have to be declared a false prophet, which would have destroyed the authority of the Presidency. If Brigham Young taught false doctrine, then the teachings and claims of any prophet of the Mormon church become suspect, including those of Joseph Smith. If you wish to accept the old denials regarding what Brigham Young actually taught, that will be your loss. But, if you really value and wish to know truth, then do your own research on the subject. You will be unable to prove that Brigham Young did not originate and teach the Adam-God doctrine. POINT 4 You have presented the contradiction in Mormon doctrine regarding original sin. Current Mormon theology states that Adam and Eve did not sin in the traditional sense, but that they deliberately transgressed a law, which was a direct command of God, without sinning and their fall was not downward but was upward, since the actions of Adam and Eve were their attempts to become gods, which is the point of the Eternal Progression and the belief that the most faithful of Mormons can attain godhood through their exaltation. Christian theology does not claim that people are judged for the sin of Adam and Eve but are judged as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, which is something very different. Christian theology states that the sin of Adam and Eve results in all of their future descendants being incapable of accomplishing any righteous act of their own volition or by their own actions which are defined as works, resulting in the reality that the only act that can be accomplished is that of sinning, which is an act in opposition to God. If Adam and Eve did not sin, then God was an unfair and unjust ogre for pronouncing the curses on both of them and on the serpent as well. If the actions of Adam and Eve were a fall upward, then they should have been praised by god rather than cursed, which was not the case. If there is no effect on future humanity for their sins and the curses pronounced by God, then every human being should be living in a perfect world and immune from disease and death and there should be numerous persons throughout history who have never sinned, since it is said by Mormons that even Adam and Eve did not sin. POINT 5 In Mormon theology, virtually every human being will be "saved" by the Mormon definition of the word, which means that they will be resurrected in the next life and will find themselves in one of the three levels of the Mormon heaven. The most faithful and perfect Mormons, after the "morning" of the first resurrection, will find themselves in the Celestial Heaven where they can be exalted to Godhood. Other Mormons who have not applied themselves diligently to the precepts of the church will not attain to the highest heaven, but after their resurrection will find themselves in the Terrestrial Heaven. Also, persons who have rejected the Mormon gospel during their mortal life but who have lived honorable lives will also find themselves in the Terrestrial Heaven after the second resurrection, after having spent their time in the spirit prison, a form of the Catholic purgatory, during which time they will accept the Mormon gospel. All other human beings, who are considered to be the wicked of the world, will find themselves in the Telestial Heaven (which in itself is a paradise) after they have spent the entire thousand years in spirit prison atoning for their sins and have gone through the second resurrection. Only a minute portion of humanity eventually find themselves in the hell of the Lake of Fire. The devil and his angels find themselves there, the spirit prison will be placed there after it is empty, and also the sons of perdition who are resurrected with shameful bodies at the second resurrection. The sons of perdition are defined as those who held the Melchizedek priesthood, had personal knowledge of God, went through the temple ceremonies and then became apostate. In other words, out of all humanity, only apostate Mormons will go to a final hell and everyone else will end up in the Telestial or Terrestrial heavens. Mormon theology does not state whether the Lake of Fire is a place where the inhabitants are eternally punished, or whether the individuals who find themselves there are eventually annihilated when the little "intelligences" disassociate themselves from each other, rendering the individuals out of existence. Apostle John A. Widtsoe taught that the sons of perdition will eventually have their bodies and spirits disassociated back into their basic composition as the "intelligences" that compose the physical and spiritual world and have existed prior to man and prior to god. POINT 6: 1 Corinthians 15:29 makes no statement that Christians baptized for the dead. The apostle Paul makes no statement that it was Christians to which he referred who baptized for the dead, or that the persons to which he wrote the letter were the ones who were baptizing for the dead. You presume by equivocation that the verse refers to the Mormon practice of baptism for the dead, and as a consequence you insert into the verse the Mormon theology regarding baptism for the dead, so you redact the verse, imposing a theology from outside the confines of the verse by which you interpret it through an eisegetical insertion of your belief into the verse in which it does not originally exist. Because baptism is the means by which an individual becomes a member of the Mormon church, and being a member is necessary in order to be resurrected; it is baptism that insures resurrection, which Mormons define as being "saved." ". . . we are the only people that know how to save our progenitors, . . . we in fact are the saviours of the world, if they ever are saved . . ."In Mormon theology it is not possible for a person to be "saved," which is resurrection, until they have been baptized, by choice in their temporal life or by proxy after death or after they have had their sins purged in spirit prison, at which time they can be baptized in the millennium and then qualify for resurrection, which is why you use 1 Corinthians 15:29 in the attempt to support the practice. POINT 7: I am not sure how you characterize exaltation to godhood as being an inheritance, because it is something that you earn by your conduct, which is defined as the performance of works. Exaltation to godhood is not a gift and not even a part of the atonement of Jesus Christ, which only guarantees resurrection, which is an event that will eventually happen to every human being, because it is assumed that every human being will eventually accept the Mormon gospel, with the exception of the sons of perdition. In relation to this point, you have repeated what I have stated, so like point #2, I presume you agree with what I posted. POINT 8: Joseph Smith stated in his 1843 revelation that god ordained polygamy for Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, and Solomon. The Book of Mormon makes no such statement and the Bible specifically forbids polygamy in Leviticus 18:18. Jacob 2:27-30 is used by Mormons as the foundational justification for why god can condemn and portray polygamy as a despicable conduct in one instance and then claim that it is an honorable spiritual act in another instance. A Mormon has stated the following to me, "Here polygamy is condemned; however, the Lord leaves himself an out in saying that if it be wisdom in him to raise up seed, he can command it referring to polygamy; but until that time the people are forbidden." Jacob 2:27-30 is used in order to justify Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy and also bolster the claim that polygamy is legitimate. The "out" that it is claimed that god uses is the claim that polygamy can be practiced in order to create temporal bodies into which spirits from the pre-existence can enter, presumably because current production of temporal bodies is not proceeding quickly enough. However, in the case of Joseph Smith, his first revelation that he claimed to have received on polygamy was not for raising up seed but was for Mormon men to cohabit with Indian women so that their progeny would become "white and delightsome." Effecting a change of skin color was the purpose. That is not part of the "out" specified in Jacob 2:27-30. So, it seems apparent that his first revelation from god on the subject of polygamy was not from god at all, since god did not follow his own criteria established in Jacob 2:27-30, which calls into question his second revelation as well, because the second revelation did not mention that the practice was for the purpose of raising up seed. In fact, it is stated in the revelation that the purpose is for obtaining exaltation: ". . . and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things . . ."There are issues in relation to Joseph Smith and polygamy which are as follows: 1. He lied publicly about the charge that he and the church practiced and taught polygamy, when he did have multiple wives, taught and originated the doctrine, and if he had received the 1843 revelation on polygamy as early as 1831, as the church wishes to claim, then his lies become even more pervasive. It is claimed that Joseph Smith lied as a result of the command of god to remain silent on the subject. However, the lie that Joseph Smith told was not just in relation to himself by which he would be required to accept his own responsibility for being a liar, but was extended to other individuals as well, since he stated that people who claimed that he was a polygamist were liars themselves. So it is a liar who stated that those who speak the truth are liars which is much different than a simple false denial that confirms a person as a liar, because it impugns the character of those who are actually speaking honorably. He specifically stated that William Law had lied when he made charges that Joseph Smith had committed polygamy, when William Law had told the truth. (Helaman 7:21, 2 Nephi 9:34) However god had already stated the conditions under which polygamy could be discontinued without a direct revelation from him to do so, and it would have then been unnecessary to lie under any circumstances, but that condition was conveniently ignored by Joseph Smith. "Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land." Doctrine and Covenants, sect. 58, verse 21God commands that the Mormon obey the laws of the land but at the same time He commands the Mormon to practice polygamy in Joseph Smith's revelation or else exaltation will be forfeited, which was a direct violation of the laws of the land. God commands that the Mormon refrain from lying but at the same time commands that lies be stated at will in order to deny the practice of polygamy. God places the Mormon in an impossible moral position from which there is no escape and He did it by direct command. God is endowed with two deviant human characteristics, which is not surprising since he was once just a man himself. Did God forget what he said so that He was confused, calling on Mormons to obey two conflicting commands? Or was it Joseph Smith who was the author of the confusion, presenting his own agenda as a revelation from god? 2. Joseph Smith did not just practice polygamy, he also practiced polyandry on at least 11 occasions: the taking to wife of a woman who is already married, which by any definition is bigamy, a violation of the 10th Commandment and prohibited in Deuteronomy 22:22. He specifically made a request to husbands to give him their wives in polyandrous relationships. Nothing is stated in Jacob 2:27-30 about polyandry being acceptable and the 1843 revelation regarding polygamy that Joseph Smith claimed to have received says nothing about it either. 3. He polygamously married at least five pairs of sisters, specifically prohibited in Leviticus 18:18. Nothing is stated in Jacob 2:27-30 or in the revelation claimed to have been received that justifies those actions. 4. He polygamously married a mother and daughter, specifically prohibited in Leviticus 20:14. Nothing is stated in Jacob 2:27-30 or in the revelation claimed to have been received that justifies those actions. After the Manifesto of 1890 in which it was "recommended" that Mormons refrain from polygamy, Mormon leadership made sure that they were not in danger of damnation, by violating the "revelation" from god commanding the practice of polygamy. The Mormon hierarchy continued to personally practice the act while, at the same time, telling the members of the Mormon church not to do so. Testimony given to the United States Congress by the Mormon leadership in the Reed Smoot Case, 1891, revealed the corruption at the highest levels of the Mormon church. LDS Prophet and President Joseph Fielding Smith revealed that he was a practicing polygamist after the Manifesto of 1890. Apostle Marriner W. Merrill performed a polygamous marriage for his son Charles E. Merrill after the Manifesto of 1890. Many polygamous marriages were performed on the high seas, in Canada and in Mexico, not only with the blessing of the Mormon Presidency, but the plans were initiated through the Presidency. It is interesting that Prophets and Presidents Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, Joseph Fielding Smith and Heber J. Grant were all practicing polygamists after the Manifesto of 1890. Did god command the Manifesto of 1890 or not? If he did, then the presidents and general authorities of the church who continued the practice of polygamy had no defense and were liars without support from a command from god to do so, which means that they lied by their own choice and could only atone for that sin by means of Blood Atonement. If god didn't command the Manifesto of 1890, then the presidents of the church starting with Wilford Woodruff and continuing until this day have either lied regarding the issue or have been unable to determine the truth of the matter and have caused all Mormons who do not practice polygamy to lose any possibility of obtaining exaltation in the next life, and have broken the covenant with god to honor his commands and can only atone for that sin through Blood Atonement. POINT 9: If the reference to the use of kill instead of murder in the 10th commandment is the best you can do to support the claim that the entire KJV is in error and corrupted, then you have a very long way to go. You have chosen the wrong word to make your point. "Berosheit" is the word that Joseph Smith attempted to claim was the proper form to be used to indicate that the creation account indicated that god organized the universe from existing matter and that there was a plurality of gods who were involved in the creation. He accepted translations of the first verse of Genesis as follows, "In the beginning the head of the Gods brought forth the Gods," and also "The head of the Gods called the Gods together". The word refers to his claims in relation to Genesis 1:1 and not to the Commandment found in Exodus 20:13. The word translated in the KJV in Exodus 20:13 for kill is, "ratsach," Strong's #7523, and means: "to dash in pieces, i.e. kill (a human being), espc. to murder:-put to death, kill, (man-) slay (-er), murder (-er)." The term can be translated as "kill" but in the context of the 10 Commandments should be more properly translated as "murder". However, since you consider the use of "kill" in the KJV translation to be so egregious that it proves the erroneous nature of that entire translation, then perhaps you can start with the most famous and important Mormon prophet and translator, Joseph Smith, who said he translated the Bible by inspiration from god (from his own English KJV) and produced his JST or Inspired Version of the Bible. He translated Exodus 20:13 as follows: "Thou shalt not kill." So, perhaps his claims to have properly translated the Bible and the Book of Mormon are also in error? If you make the claim against the KJV translators then you must be honest in your criticism and make the same claim against Joseph Smith. The Mormon Challenge Wednesday, January 2 POINT 1: You say that the so-called Christian Trinity states that “Within the one eternal being of God there exists three eternally existing persons.” Mormon doctrine believes that “GOD” is an office in the Priesthood. This office is made up of three distinct beings; God the father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. Perhaps our differences here are a matter of semantics. However, we do believe that there are three distinct beings in the Godhead that are one in purpose. In the second part of your argument, you say that “Mormons cannot point to an eternally existing god because he had to be just a man before becoming a god.” We have all existed eternally as intelligences. God did not create the world from nothing. He took unorganized matter and organized it. The original Hebrew word was “berosheit”, which means to organize. Eienstein theorized that matter cannot be destroyed, only rearranged. Seems that the 18th century farm boy with only a 3rd grade education was 100 years ahead of his time. Jesus as Jehovah was the God of the Old Testament. Through the authority of his father, he is the God of this earth. With this authority he was in charge of creating this earth and the heavens that we see. In that sense he is both Father and Son. He is the Father of this earth. So, the Book of Mormon does not differ in any way with current Church teachings. POINT 2: It is argued that polygamy is wrong, but many Old Testament prophets practiced it. What is ordained of God is holy. How Jesus was fathered is immaterial to his gospel and our salvation. POINT 3: I must disagree with your statement that “there has never been a misunderstanding regarding what Brigham Young taught in relation to the Adam-God theory. By the way, it was never accepted doctrine, so the correct appellation is theory. Admittedly Brigham Young made some confusing statements concerning Adam and God. He made several statements in 1852 and 1857 that have resulted in the Adam-God theory. However, he made many more statements that show that he clearly believed Adam and God the Father to be two different beings. Here are a few. " . . . the Bible declares He has a corporeal body; that in His likeness, precisely, He created Adam." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1 p.238) What resemblance did our father Adam bear to his God, when he placed him in the Garden of Eden?" Before he had time to reply, I asked him what resemblance Jesus bore to man in his incarnation? and "Do your believe Moses, who said the Lord made Adam in his own image and after his own likeness? This may appear to you a curiosity; but do you not see, bona fide, that the Lord made Adam like himself; and the Saviour we read of was made to look so like him, that he was the express image of his person?" (Journal of Discourses, Vol.6, p.317 - p.318, Brigham Young, April 7, 1852, emphasis added) "The world may in vain ask the question, "Who are we?" But the Gospel tells us that we are the sons and daughters of that God whom we serve. Some say, "we are the children of Adam and Eve." So we are, and they are the children of our Heavenly Father. We are all the children of Adam and Eve, and they and we are the offspring of Him who dwells in the heavens, the highest Intelligence that dwells anywhere that we have any knowledge of. (Journal of Discourses, Vol.13, p.312, Brigham Young, April 17, 1870, emphasis added) Again, the Adam-God theory has never been accepted church doctrine. POINT 4: "Christian theology does not claim that people are judged for the sin of Adam and Eve but are judged as a result of the sin . . ." I believe that we can agree in part on this as far as it goes. However that statement that "future descendants being incapable of accomplishing any righteous act of their own volition or by their own actions" I will take exception with. I suppose that nothing the Apostles or Prophets did could be considered good? God's greatest gift to us is our free-agency. We can choose to do good or evil, and we will be judged by our deeds. Church doctrine does not state that there is no effect on humanity for Adam's fall. Au contraire, "Adam fell that man might be, and man is that he might have joy." (2 Nephi 2:25). "And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end. And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin." ( 2 Nephi 2: 22, 23.) The Church never stated that Adam and Eve did not sin. They had to break a commandment in order to bring sin and knowledge into the world. Everything has it’s opposites. We learn to appreciate things in relation to their opposites. POINT 5: "The sons of perdition are defined as those who held the Melchizedek priesthood, had personal knowledge of God, went through the temple ceremonies and then became apostate." No, this is not correct. A "son of perdition" is someone who has a perfect knowledge that Jesus is the Christ and then turns away from that knowledge . . . as did Judas and Cain. They not only become apostates, they become murderous in their hearts and fight against the truth. Many of the original witnesses to the Book of Mormon became apostates. Some of them rejoined the Church, some did not. None of them ever denied their testimonies. So none of them became "sons of perdition" by my understanding. POINT 6: I suggest you re-read 1 Corinthians. Paul is using baptism for the dead as a proof in an argument for a resurrection. ". . . if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then baptized for the dead?" He was talking to the church in Corinth. It is obvious that the church was familiar with the practice. "In Mormon theology it is not possible for a person to be "saved," which is resurrection, until they have been baptized." False, "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." Everyone is resurrected. Baptism is the key to the Celestial Kingdom. Nobody can enter into the highest kingdom without baptism. POINT 7: I don't know where you got the idea that exaltation to godhood is an inheritance. I do agree that it is something that must be earned by our conduct. It is a part of the atonement in that without the atonement it would be impossible for any of us to even be resurrected and we would all be lost to outer darkness. POINT 8: Do you deny that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were polygamists? Do you deny that they were prophets? Obviously God did not condemn them for their polygamy. Solomon was condemned not so much for his practice of polygamy but for they manner in which he practiced it. Joseph Smith was given the revelation on polygamy some 10 years before he revealed it or practiced it. It seemed as foreign to him as it does to us today. As to your claims that Joseph married five pairs of sisters and a mother and daughter, I have read a number of histories on him and that is the first that I’ve heard of it. At the time many women (at their request) were sealed to him in the temple, but he never lived with them. "Did god command the Manifesto of 1890 or not? If he did, then the presidents and general authorities of the church who continued the practice of polygamy had no defense and were liars without support from a command from god." Are we searching for straws here? The manifesto outlawed any new marriages. It did not effect those already in existence. POINT 9: You are putting words into my mouth that were never inferred, a common trait among anti-Mormon writers. The Church uses the KJV of the Bible, so it has never been claimed that it is entirely in error and corrupted. Some verses lack their original clarity, and there are books mentioned that don't exist in the current Bible. On Doctrine Reply Nine Points Of Difference Between The Bible And Mormon Doctrine Retrospective |
|
 COPYRIGHT © 2001 by ON
DOCTRINE & ONDOCTRINE.COM, All Rights Reserved
|
| HOME | WRITINGS | ORGANIZATIONS | Q & A | NEWSLETTER | FAQS | CONTACT | ABOUT | BELIEFS | LINKS | ARCHIVE | FREE Bible | STORE |