Jump to content

JLHPROF

Contributor
  • Content Count

    13,542
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JLHPROF

  1. I think you're being a bit unfair to Snowflake's point. He didn't say there was no revelation in the Book of Mormon. Only that it doesn't provide very many new doctrines not already found in the Bible. And that's as it should be. It's the second witness of Christ. They should and do mostly contain the same teachings. But we know there are some truths it restored and clarified vs the Bible too. Our focus on the Book of Mormon is a fairly recent thing if we look at Church history. While belief in its restoration and inspired nature have always been a keystone of our faith, the early Church focused on New Testament and D&C for most doctrine.
  2. Excactly. There could never be a first minute because the minute before it had to exist. There can never be a last fact to learn because the passage of time creates new information. There can't be an egg without a chicken or a chicken without an egg.
  3. Such concepts beggar logic. We can speculate on a first cause, on how the three omni's could work, how eternal progression could have an end, etc. And there's nothing wrong with that. But the fact remains such ideas are either incomprehensible or impossible. I lean towards them being impossible. Personally, I reject all of them.
  4. Apparently you don't know me very well. And I disagree with your post-Joseph theory on polytheism.
  5. I'll stick with Joseph and Brigham etc. Plus traditional Christian concepts on God and creation make no sense to me, but I recognize they do to others. I think the bigger question on this thread is why so many members of the Church are rejecting more and more revealed truths in favor of the old Christian traditions. And then writing about it as a step in their personal development and a progressive approach. How is rejecting further light and knowledge from heaven and returning to the doctrine of the apostasy progress?
  6. Is there a question here? Mormonism teaches that God was once a mortal man who achieved exaltation. Our Christian friends disagree but don't accept revelation beyond the Bible. Personally, I believe if eternity goes in both directions I see no need for a first cause.
  7. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Question:_Is_Jesus_Christ_the_savior_of_other_worlds%3F Your question itself is based on a question we don't have conclusive revelation concerning. It's important to note that as Calm said " IF it is possible a saviour can cover multiple worlds".
  8. Joseph was specific. The Mosaic law animal sacrifices aren't the ones returning. Christ was the last sacrifice for sin. But the principle of animal sacrifice as practiced by the Patriarchs, Adam, Abraham, etc will be restored for a purpose.
  9. I'm not upset. But when the first ordinance promises a future blessing and the second bestows it, I don't see how we can say we have completed the path with only the promise.
  10. Understandable. I didn't mean for it to get so close to the line. But I do feel the related doctrines should be better taught and understood.
  11. D&C 130:20-21, 131:1-3, D&C 132: 3-5,16-17, and Matthew 3:15 would imply he'd have to be. There is no exception clause in scripture I know of.
  12. This. Our endowment is incomplete without it, only half the ordinance.
  13. Yeah, but if no requirements are taught and the ordinance is barely acknowledged to exist how are we supposed to become ready?
  14. Ordinances previously restored to man can't be given by immortal beings. Hence work for the dead. But you knew that. 😉
  15. Well if you doubt everything man ever wrote about God I don't see how you can have any knowledge of God's character at all. You'd basically be creating God from your imagination. As for references, I can tell you which NT scriptures relate to the second anointing but you would simply state that they don't. Like this one: Revelation 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
  16. They didn't hint back then. They outright said it. Yes, if we believe Mary anointing Christ was the same as the second anointing then Mary was his wife. (And probably Martha and Mary Magdalene too).
  17. Well it has a preparatory Aaronic half that in some ways mirror the OT temples. And it has a Melchizedek eternal half that teaches us to enter God's presence (or used to) and creates eternal families.
  18. Actually to me the first endowment (what you call the Nauvoo endowment) bridges the OT and NT perfectly. Which is why it points us to Christ, the meridian himself.
  19. I intentionally didn't post this as I think it comes close on the specific temple content prohibition. You might want to reconsider. At least you didn't post the words used that are in those records.
  20. I believe this is true. There is a story in Church history of some member in Idaho or Wyoming telling a bunch of people that he had his and they should get their's. That was around the time Pres. Grant let it mostly go by the wayside.
  21. Agreed. Although my honest opinion is that we as members don't generally want to meet the conditions for it. The requirements of sacrifice and obedience that used to be attached would make most of us too uncomfortable these days.
  22. That's too bad since it's more directly based in your favorite the New Testament than the first endowment. Every aspect of the second anointing is found in the NT. I don't know what the aversion to hierarchy in the next life is. I don't know why pass/fail is a preferable model.
  23. Yes, many of them, if by modern you mean this dispensation. If you mean the past 50 years the Church today doesn't even acknowledge the ordinance is practiced.
  24. Correct. As is the anointing of Christ by Mary, his wife. The first step of three in that ordinance.
  25. You are only half right. It's not external social pressure. It only happens when it's internal. The Church can withstand outside pressure relatively easily. But when the commoners no longer consent that's when things seem to change quickly. The changes to the garments, the endowment, the recent rapid November policy reversal, the shorter meeting blocks, and yes, polygamy. ALL primarily following internal pressure, not the world. God gives us the revelation were deserve and desire. Occasionally he might even agree with it. I think you may be compacting the timeline a bit with the word "soon". Eventually might be better.
×
×
  • Create New...