theplains

From a seminary manual: Doctrine and Covenants 77:11. “Sealing the one hundred and forty-four thousand” Some have supposed that the sealing of the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7:3–8 refers to the total number of people who will be exalted in the celestial kingdom. However, the Lord clarified that this is the number of high priests who are “ordained out of every nation, kindred, tongue, and people” to “administer the everlasting gospel” and help bring people “to the church of the Firstborn” (D&C 77:11). The Prophet Joseph Smith learned that the Church of the Firstborn refers to the Savior's heavenly Church, which comprises all those who are exalted in the celestial kingdom of God (see D&C 76:54; 88:4–5). Thus, the 144,000 are those who minister in the latter days to bring people to Jesus Christ and help them obtain exaltation (Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual, Religion 324–325, 2017). Is this ministry of the exalted 144,000 ones currently in progress or does it begin in the Millennium?

Was it September 11 of 1836 or 1837 that was the appointed time for the redemption of Zion? "But, in case the excitement continues to be allayed, and peace prevails, use every effort to prevail on the churches to gather to those regions and locate themselves, to be in readiness to move into Jackson county in two years from the eleventh of September next, which is the appointed time for the redemption of Zion. If—verily I say unto you—if the Church with one united effort perform their duties; if they do this, the work shall be complete—if they do not this in all humility, making preparation from this time forth, like Joseph in Egypt, laying up store against the time of famine, every man having his tent, his horses, his chariots, his armory, his cattle, his family, and his whole substance in readiness against the time when it shall be said: 'To your tents, O Israel! Let not this be noised abroad; let every heart beat in silence, and every mouth be shut. Now, my beloved brethren, you will learn by this we have a great work to do, and but little time to do it in; and if we do not exert ourselves to the utmost in gathering up the strength of the Lord's house that this thing may be accomplished, behold there remaineth a scourge for the Church, even that they shall be driven from city to city, and but few shall remain to receive an inheritance; if those things are not kept, there remaineth a scourge also; therefore, be wise this once, O ye children of Zion! and give heed to my counsel, saith the Lord" (History of the Church, Volume 2, chapter 10, August 16, 1834).

The curse in Alma 3:6-10 and 2 Nephi 5:20-24 could be viewed as punishment.

From the Letter to Oliver Cowdery, published in the Messenger and Advocate (April 1836), recorded in the Joseph Smith Papers. "It is my privilege then, to name certain passages from the bible, and examine the teachings of the ancients upon this matter, as the fact is uncontrovertable, that the first mention we have of slavery is found in the holy bible, pronounced by a man who was perfect in his generation and walked with God. And so far from that prediction's being averse from the mind of God it remains as a lasting monument of the decree of Jehovah, to the shame and confusion of all who have cried out against the South, in consequence of their holding the sons of Ham in servitude!"10 "Trace the history of the world from this notable event down to this day, and you will find the fulfilment of this singular prophecy. What could have been the design of the Almighty in this wonderful occurrence is not for me to say; but I can say, that the curse is not yet taken off the sons of Canaan, neither will be until it is affected by as great power as caused it to come;13 and the people who interfere the least with the decrees and purposes of God in this matter, will come under the least condemnation before him; and those who are determined to pursue a course which shows an opposition and a feverish restlessness against the designs of the Lord, will learn, when perhaps it is too late for their own good, that God can do his own work without the aid of those who are not dictated by his counsel". Sources: [10]The notion that black slaves descended from the sons of Ham, who were cursed by Ham's father, Noah, had been a part of some Christian, Jewish, and Muslim traditions for centuries, and nineteenth-century slaveholders often cited the biblical story as a justification for the practice of slavery in the United States. (Haynes, Noah's Curse, 7–8; Goldenberg, Curse of Ham, 168–177.) [13]The two other authors of anti-abolitionist articles in the April 1836 Messenger and Advocate expressed similar sentiments. (See Warren Parrish, "For the Messenger and Advocate"; and "The Abolitionists," LDS Messenger and Advocate, Apr. 1836, 2:295–296, 301.) Joseph Smith would later call for their emancipation. See "General Smith's Views of the Powers and Policy of the Government of the United States". "Petition also, ye goodly inhabitants of the slave states, your legislators to abolish slavery by the year 1850, or now, and save the abolitionist from reproach and ruin, infamy and shame. Pray Congress to pay every man a reasonable price for his slaves out of the surplus revenue arising from the sale of public lands, and from the deduction of pay from the members of Congress".

How does the Book of Mormon contain the fulness of the gospel? The second death will have power on all who are not in the first resurrection (Revelation 20:1-6).

It seems I am not able to answer the question to your satisfaction. The Latter-day Saints teach some things about Christ which are not coming from either the Book of Mormon or the Bible. For example, he is taught to be the first spirit child of a heavenly mother who became a God prior to coming to earth in a mortal body. Different religions have their own versions of Christ. In Islam, he's only a prophet. In the Watchtower, he is Michael the Archangel. Do you believe these people are saved because they believe some things about him but reject other important things, and what is your authority for saying yes or no? I can find nothing in the King Follett Discourse which shows that Heavenly Father became God "in the sense" of him having spirit children with one or more of his wives. Do you? If yes, then provide something to support that belief. I did read your reply on 05/26/2025 but it basically is summarized in your statement "we always need to consider the context of what is said in a revelation or in a particular sermon", but it did not address what I was seeking. Don't conflate the "God became God when he became our Parent" argument with Joseph Smith saying "We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see". I already provided LDS teachings, beyond the King Follett Discourse, which show Heavenly Father was not always God and he was not always a Heavenly Father. And I agree with you - none of these teachings are supported by scripture. They are not new; they go back decades. Here are 10 of them. None of them are portrayed as speculation. I don't believe any of them represent the truth. While you may not classify them as "official doctrine", let me know which number(s) you believe are speculative (and why?), true, or false. 1] "Through a continual course of progression, our Heavenly Father has received exaltation and glory; and He points us out the same path” (Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual). 2] "His work and His glory, He told us, is “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” He has already achieved godhood. Now His only objective is to help us—to enable us to return to Him and be like Him and live His kind of life eternally" ("But If Not ...", By Elder Dennis E. Simmons Of the Seventy, April 2004 General Conference). 3] “Less well understood, however, is the fact that God is an exalted man who once lived on an earth and underwent experiences of mortality . The Prophet Joseph Smith refers to this as "the great secret." (Times and Seasons 5:613, August 15 1844). See also Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345.) The progression of our Father in heaven to godhood, or exaltation, was strictly in accordance with eternal principles” (Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual). 4] "Long before our God began his creations, he dwelt on a mortal world like ours, one of the creations that his Father had created for him and his brethren. He, with many of his brethren, was obedient to the principles of the eternal gospel. One among these, it is presumed, was a savior for them, and through him they obtained a resurrection and an exaltation on an eternal, celestial world.[8] Then they gained the power and godhood of their Father and were made heirs of all that he had, continuing his works and creating worlds of their own for their own posterity—the same as their Father had done before, and his Father, and his Father, and on and on" (1971 New Era, People on Other Worlds). [8] Brigham Young, in Journal of Discourses, vol. 14, p. 71. 5] "Man is a soul, that is, a dual being, a spirit person clothed in a tangible body of flesh and bones. God is a perfected, saved soul enjoying eternal life. He is both immortal and exalted to the highest glory. He is enjoying that blessed condition which men may attain to by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel" (How Men Are Saved, President Marion G. Romney, Second Counselor in the First Presidency, October 1974 General Conference). 6] "The Prophet explained that “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens”; that “he was once a man like us; Along with these concepts is the concept of divine parents, including an exalted Mother who stands beside God the Father. From revelations given to Joseph Smith (see D&C 131–32) and from his own comments about them, plus subsequent statements from later prophets,[30] we know that spirit bodies are procreated by resurrected, exalted couples who have “a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.” (D&C 132:19.) Spirits are “begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father.[31] (January 1989 Ensign). [30] See Teachings, pp. 300–301; “Origin of Man,” pp. 203, 205; Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954–56), 2:68–69. [31] “Origin of Man,” p. 205. 7] Indeed, the formal pronouncement of the Church, issued by the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve, states: ‘So far as the stages of eternal progression and attainment have been made known through divine revelation, we are to understand that only resurrected and glorified beings can become parents of spirit offspring.’ (Man: His Origin and Destiny, p. 129.)” (Mormon Doctrine, 517). Preparing for an Eternal Marriage, Religion 234 Building an Eternal Marriage, Religion 235 8] "Men and women cannot be exalted without each other. Just as we have a Father in Heaven, we have a Mother in Heaven" (Essays, Mother in Heaven). 9] "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity. God Himself is an exalted man, perfected, enthroned, and supreme" (February 2002 Ensign). 10] "These spirit beings, the offspring of exalted parents, were men and women, appearing in all respects as mortal persons do, excepting only that their spirit bodies were made of a more pure and refined substance than the elements from which mortal bodies are made" (Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual). Then we have all these teachings from "Gospel Principles" which reveal other things about the LDS heavenly parents. Here are 6 of them. None of them are portrayed as speculation. I don't believe any of them represent the truth. While you may not classify them as "official doctrine", let me know which number(s) you believe are speculative (and why?), true, or false. 1] "If we passed our tests, we would receive the fulness of joy that our heavenly parents have received". (See D&C 93:30–34.) My takeaway: heavenly parents received a fulness of joy. 2] "We would have a resurrected body; we would have all power in heaven and on earth; we would become heavenly parents and have spirit children just as he does (see D&C 132:19–20). My takeaway: we would also have a resurrected body like Heavenly Father. 3] "Because we are made in his image (see Moses 6:9), we know that God has a body that looks like ours. His eternal spirit is housed in a tangible body of flesh and bones (see D&C 130:22). God's body, however, is perfected and glorified, with a glory beyond all description". My takeaway: the body of Heavenly Father was perfected. 4] "Our Heavenly Father is a real person with a tangible, perfected body of flesh and bones". My takeaway: the body of Heavenly Father was perfected. 5] "We learned that if we placed our faith in him, obeying his word and following his example, we would be exalted and become like our heavenly parents. We would receive a fulness of joy". My takeaway: the LDS Heavenly Mother and Father received their fulness of joy. This is associated with exaltation, becoming a God. This is the LDS plan of salvation, following the example set by heavenly parents. 6] "We can be exalted as God is and receive a fulness of joy. We can, at some future time, increase our family by having spirit children". My takeaway: exaltation brings a fulness of joy. We can receive it, as our heavenly parents also received it. But Mosiah 15:2-3 says Jesus is the Father "because he was conceived by the power of God" and is the Son "because of the flesh". What conception makes Jesus the Father? Isn't Jesus the Son before the flesh? I wish the LDS Church would jettison a lot of what it currently teaches in seminary manuals and what it has taught in past general conferences, magazines, and books. We can't do much with all the ways Joseph added and removed from the Bible. They are either true or false. The list is quite extensive. We need to examine all teachings, whether they are classified as official doctrine or not. The earliest origin about the existence of a heavenly mother comes from Joseph Smith. It is mentioned in an Ensign article ("The Lord as a Role Model for Men and Women"). "Building upon the foundation laid by Joseph Smith, subsequent prophets taught that God was not single, but married; that there is a Heavenly Father and a Heavenly Mother; and that we were made in their image: male and female children" (See James R. Clark, comp., Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6 vols., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1965–75, 4:203, 205.) The so-called foundation laid by Joseph Smith would eventually become official doctrine in "The Family: Proclamation to the World" on September 23, 1995. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world?lang=eng I found some teachings on what is considered doctrine. "What God teaches is called doctrine. God supplies doctrine for His children by way of commandments and instructions that will bless them and bring them happiness. Just as He did in Old Testament times, God continues to reveal doctrine through prophet" (What is Doctrine?). I suppose the instruction that "we should not shop, hunt, fish, attend sports events, or participate in similar activities on that day [the Sabbath]" would be one of these doctrines. But I understand some things come with a caveat: At the same time it should be remembered that not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church" (April 2012 General Conference). It may not constitute doctrine, but is it true or false? Then we have this other admonition: "True principles are taught frequently and by many. Our doctrine is not difficult to find" (November 2012 General Conference). "Gospel Principles" comes to mind. These principles are regarded as LDS truth, right? Then another: "We feast on the word of God in the scriptures and study the words of the living prophets. Because we need the Holy Ghost, we must be cautious and careful not to go beyond teaching true doctrine. The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of Truth" (May 1999 Ensign). The words of the dead and living prophets are found in many places. Obviously you don't want to feast on false words. If "Gospel Principles", other publications of the LDS Church, and General Conference talks do not contain true doctrine, then one is found in violation. There's also an article entitled "What is Mormon Doctrine?" on FAIRLDS. It focuses more on "official doctrine" and mentions that the LDS leaders are fallible. So they can teach errors and lead members astray. It doesn't touch on the subject of "unofficial doctrine". So I routinely reference publications like "Gospel Doctrine", "Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual", or "Gospel Principles". The first two, I would say, are regarded as teaching the truth as understood by the LDS Church. After all, why would it teach something it believed was false or speculation? Also, why teach a bunch of things, put it in a book with the term "doctrine" in the title and then say one shouldn't view the contents as doctrine? Then we have "Doctrines of Salvation". Do you see what I mean? Then add "Gospel Principles". Are the principles true or false? I would say the LDS Church believes them to be true. Then we have speeches at General Conference. Why convey it to the crowd if you don't believe what you are saying is the truth? Do we lump it all in the "it's not official doctrine so it's not true" pile? Of course not. If I were a Latter-day Saint, I would be expecting to be hearing the truth instead of being led astray. I assume you feel the same way about what you hear and what you read, past present and future from the LDS Church. Thank you for providing the other verses about Jesus (God) taking on human flesh (Mosiah 3:5-9, 2 Nephi 9:5, 2 Nephi 9:20-22). In Alma 11, this salvation (eternal life; ie. exaltation) does not apply to the two lower divisions of the celestial kingdom, and the telestial/terrestrial inhabitants. Mosiah provides an explanation for those who are redeemed. "And now, the resurrection of all the prophets, and all those that have believed in their words, or all those that have kept the commandments of God, shall come forth in the first resurrection; therefore, they are the first resurrection. They are raised to dwell with God who has redeemed them; thus they have eternal life through Christ, who has broken the bands of death. And these are those who have part in the first resurrection; and these are they that have died before Christ came, in their ignorance, not having salvation declared unto them. And thus the Lord bringeth about the restoration of these; and they have a part in the first resurrection, or have eternal life, being redeemed by the Lord. And little children also have eternal life. But behold, and fear, and tremble before God, for ye ought to tremble; for the Lord redeemeth none such that rebel against him and die in their sins; yea, even all those that have perished in their sins ever since the world began, that have wilfully rebelled against God, that have known the commandments of God, and would not keep them; these are they that have no part in the first resurrection. Therefore ought ye not to tremble? For salvation cometh to none such; for the Lord hath redeemed none such; yea, neither can the Lord redeem such; for he cannot deny himself; for he cannot deny justice when it has its claim" (Mosiah 15:22-27). It's explained in a more shorter form with John 3:16 ("For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life", ESV). This would mean that all who fail to reach exaltation will perish.

The Bible is the authority. Is the Jesus of the Jehovah's Witnesses (aka Michael the Archangel) a different Jesus than the what the LDS Church teaches? Do you believe putting your faith in Michael saves you? Didn't he "become God" in relation to us when we supposedly became his offspring, long before this plan of salvation was explained to us? Joseph Smith taught, "it is necessary we should understand the character and being of God and how He came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see". But this is not "becoming God in relation to us". If you can find it expressed in the King Follett discourse, then let me know. I think you are putting your own opinion of what it means to "become God" into his discourse. It's like the phrase "become like God" is substituted for "become a God". Do you also believe "exaltation" only applies to a resurrected, glorified being after he has his first spirit child through eternal increase? I just provide them. It's up to you to determine if they are false teachings, which lead people astray. By the way, they were considered official when spoken, although they were not canonized. This concept is also present in the April 1989 General Conference. "There are some of our members who practice selective obedience. A prophet is not one who displays a smorgasbord of truth from which we are free to pick and choose. However, some members become critical and suggest the prophet should change the menu. A prophet doesn't take a poll to see which way the wind of public opinion is blowing. He reveals the will of the Lord to us" (Ensign, May 1989). I think Mosiah 15:1–4 and 1 Nephi 11:18, 21 are the only places in the Book of Mormon which teaches that Jesus is God incarnate. Alma 11:39 and Ether 3:14 mention that Jesus is also the Father. From the Bible, we have it more clearly stated: John 1:1, 14 ("the Word was God ... the Word was made flesh"). Colossians 2:9 ("In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily"). Philippians 2:6–7 ("Jesus was in the form of God and took upon him the form of a servant"). Hebrews 1:8 ("Of the Son: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever"). Titus 2:13 ("the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"). 1 Timothy 3:16 ("God was manifest in the flesh"). Isaiah 9:6 ("the coming Messiah called Mighty God").

Jehovah's Witnesses teach Jesus is Michael the Archangel. Would you consider that a different Jesus? I don't consider their salvation by faith in that Jesus as valid. God is the ultimate authority but I state it as my opinion. What does the term "Eternal God" in reference to Jesus Christ in the Book of Mormon's Title page mean to you? Are you affirming your belief that Jesus has not always been God? I provided LDS sources which teach that the LDS Heavenly Father became a God and that he had a Father before him. Would you provide any scriptures or LDS teachings that you regard as being true which shows he did not become a God and did not have a Father before him? Jesus is God incarnate.

Change makes a difference. Differing key details of a person means people can be mistaken for someone else. Example 1: John: Did you hear what happened to Josh? Helen: Yes. It's too bad that he lost the game. John: What do you mean? Helen: He threw an interception and the game ended. John: What are you talking about? Josh doesn't play football for the Buffalo Bills. Helen: Sorry, I thought you were talking about Josh Allen. Example 2: Christian: I believe in Jesus in my salvation. Muslim: Me too. He was a great prophet. We follow his teachings for salvation. Christian: From the Bible? Muslim: From the Quran. Christian: He was God incarnate. Muslim: That's not the Jesus we believe in. He was sent by God but he was not God. Christian: You believe in a different Jesus for your salvation. The LDS teachings which indicate Jesus became a God do not nullify the other LDS teachings that Jesus is currently a God. It's a different Jesus. Jehovah's Witnesses teach Jesus is Michael the Archangel. Would believing in a false Jesus disqualify their salvation even though they believed he atoned for their sins? There are many held beliefs today that the Bible does not specifically label false teachings. The Bible affirms Jesus Christ's eternal divinity—His existence as God from all eternity, without beginning or change—in multiple passages that describe Him as the pre-existent Word, the Creator, the exact representation of God, and directly addressed as God. Key texts include John 1:1-3, Hebrews 1:8, and Colossians 1:15-20. God is from everlasting (Psalm 41:13, Psalm 90:2, Psalm 103:17, Isaiah 40:28). There is only one God (Isaiah 43:10, Isaiah 44:6). LDS canon contains no teaching which indicates Jesus or Heavenly Father became a God. But it is widespread in LDS Church teachings.

This reflects the LDS version of Jesus. He became a God. In our other thread, I provided sources teaching the belief, not taught as either speculation or opinion, that Heavenly Father was also once an eternal being who became a God. God the Father is the ultimate repository of all intelligence, "or, in other words, light and truth" (D&C 93:36); Jesus Christ, the Firstborn, who became a god in the premortal existence, the Father's steward over his creations, is the one source of light for us as individuals; and the Holy Ghost is the "gatekeeper," as it were, the dispenser of light to us according to worthiness and ability to receive it (Ensign, December 1975, "How to Receive Spiritual Gifts"). "By obedience and devotion to the truth he [Jesus] attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent state" (Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, chapter 4). "So far as the stages of eternal progression and attainment have been made known through divine revelation, we are to understand that only resurrected and glorified beings can become parents of spirit offspring. Only such exalted souls have reached maturity in the appointed course of eternal life; and the spirits born to them in the eternal worlds will pass in due sequence through the several stages or estates by which the glorified parents have attained exaltation" (April 2002 Ensign). "Christ, who is the firstborn in the Spirit of the children of God, was elevated to Godhood, and in the vision Abraham saw he describes him as being like unto God" (LDS President Joseph Fielding Smith, The Progress of Man, chapter 6, page 74). "Jesus was appointed to Godhood. In the Meridian of Time Christ came into the world, in fulfillment of the promise and appointment (LDS President Joseph Fielding Smith, The Progress of Man, chapter 43, pages 511-512). "When our Father in Heaven announced the need for a Savior, I believe all of us turned and looked at Jesus Christ, the Firstborn in the Spirit, the one who had progressed to the point of becoming like the Father [4]. I believe all of us knew it had to be Him, that none of the rest of us could do it, but that He could and that He would" ("Remembering in Whom We Have Trusted", By Elder Allen D. Haynie Of the Seventy, October 2015 General Conference). [4] See Lectures on Faith (1985), 59, 60. "What a glorious promise is held out to the children of God. … If Jesus Christ, the only begotten of the Father in the flesh, received not a fulness at first, and thereby was called the Son, but continued to receive grace for grace, adding grace unto grace until He received a fulness, it is clear that he that will walk in His footsteps, who will obey His precepts, and will adopt His plan for life and salvation, may receive grace for grace, may continue from grace to grace; may grow out of imperfection into perfection, and may receive here a little and there a little until he shall receive the fulness as the Son of God received a fulness; and thus become like Christ the Son of God, an heir of God, and joint heir with Jesus Christ" (Teachings of President of the Church, Joseph F. Smith, chapter 48). "How is the example of Christ’s development useful to us as we strive for our own development? Jesus’ example teaches the important truth that we cannot achieve a fulness in a single day. Just as Jesus received grace for grace until he had obtained a fulness, we must likewise receive line upon line, or grace for grace, a little at a time, until we ultimately receive a fulness. Such is his charge to us: “For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his [the Father’s] fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace” (D&C 93:20). As we progress, Luke’s testimony that Jesus grew intellectually, physically, spiritually, and socially (see Luke 2:52) shows us how to remain balanced in our growth and progression" (Religion 430 and 431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Teacher Manual, chapter 4). "Jesus grew until He had a fulness of grace, truth, glory, and power. John saw that Jesus “received a fulness of the glory of the Father” (D&C 93:16). Verse 17 of section 93 says that “he received all power both in heaven and on earth, and the glory of the Father was with him, for he dwelt in him.” Verses 19 and 20 indicate that all people may grow to the point of receiving a fulness if they will follow the example of the Savior" In short, grace refers to the gifts and power of God by which we can be brought to perfection. To come to a fulness by moving from grace to grace means that as we obey the commandments, the Father gives us more and more power until we receive a fulness of power" (Religion 324 and 325 - Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual).

Do you believe they are teaching Jesus became a God?

I can understand that God the Father is the "head of the Gods" (maybe the 2 Gods being Jesus and the Holy Ghost), but not that he is the "heads of the Gods". Who are the "heads of the Gods"? The Joseph Smith Papers also mentioned "the perfection of the Gods". How was Heavenly Father perfected? That was in regards to my question "where did Heavenly Mother come from and how did she become a God?" So I assume that you believe Heavenly Father was a being who always existed as a God, who created a woman in his image without the involvement of a female Goddess to create her in her image. Then he, this God, married his creation, and made her into a God after he resurrected her? I'll give you examples from both "Gospel Principles" and supporting teachings from several other sources. "If we passed our tests, we would receive the fulness of joy that our heavenly parents have received". (See D&C 93:30–34.) Key teaching: heavenly parents received a fulness of joy. "We would have a resurrected body; we would have all power in heaven and on earth; we would become heavenly parents and have spirit children just as he does (see D&C 132:19–20). Key teaching: we would also have a resurrected body like Heavenly Father. "Because we are made in his image (see Moses 6:9), we know that God has a body that looks like ours. His eternal spirit is housed in a tangible body of flesh and bones (see D&C 130:22). God's body, however, is perfected and glorified, with a glory beyond all description". Key teaching: the body of Heavenly Father was perfected. "Our Heavenly Father is a real person with a tangible, perfected body of flesh and bones". Key teaching: the body of Heavenly Father was perfected. "We learned that if we placed our faith in him, obeying his word and following his example, we would be exalted and become like our heavenly parents. We would receive a fulness of joy". Key teaching: the LDS Heavenly Mother and Father received their fulness of joy. This is associate with exaltation, becoming a God. This is the LDS plan of salvation, following the example set by heavenly parents. "We can be exalted as God is and receive a fulness of joy. We can, at some future time, increase our family by having spirit children". Key teaching: exaltation brings a fulness of joy. We can receive it, as our heavenly parents also received it. "2. We can be exalted as God is and receive a fulness of joy". "4. They will receive a fulness of joy". Then we have similar connections with other teachings. "Man is a soul, that is, a dual being, a spirit person clothed in a tangible body of flesh and bones. God is a perfected, saved soul enjoying eternal life. He is both immortal and exalted to the highest glory. He is enjoying that blessed condition which men may attain to by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. The Almighty is not alone in his eternal glory. Myriads of saved souls enjoy his society. Family relationships prevail there; spirit offspring are born there; our spirits were born there". (President Marion G. Romney, Second Counselor in the First Presidency). https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1974/10/how-men-are-saved?lang=eng Key teaching: Heavenly Father is a perfected, saved soul. "Less well understood, however, is the fact that God is an exalted man who once lived on an earth and underwent experiences of mortality . The Prophet Joseph Smith refers to this as "the great secret." (Times and Seasons 5:613, August 15 1844). See also Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345.) The progression of our Father in heaven to godhood, or exaltation, was strictly in accordance with eternal principles". (source: "Achieving a Celestial Marriage" manual). Key teaching: his progression to godhood. "Three glorified, exalted, and perfected personages comprise the Godhead or supreme presidency of the universe. . . . They are: God the Father; God the Son; God the Holy Ghost". "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity. God Himself is an exalted man, perfected, enthroned, and supreme. By His almighty power He organized the earth, and all that it contains, from spirit and element, which exist co-eternally with Himself". (Religion 430–431, Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual). Key teaching: Heavenly Father was perfected/exalted. "In the premortal existence, Heavenly Father prepared a plan to enable us to become like Him and receive a fulness of joy". ("True to the Faith", topic "Plan of Salvation"). "Because of this plan, we can be perfected through the Atonement, receive a fulness of joy, and live forever in the presence of God". ("True to the Faith", topic "Plan of Salvation"). (Book of Mormon Seminary Teacher Manual, 2012). Key teaching: being perfected is made possible through an atonement, an atonement for heavenly parents too. Key teaching: Heavenly Father was perfected/exalted. "If men and women are to enter into a fulness of joy it must needs be that the family relationship should continue throughout eternity". (October 1928 General Conference). "We are physically separated from God during life on earth, but He wants every one of His children to find peace in this life and a fulness of joy in His presence after this life. He wants us to become like Him". "Our ultimate purpose is to prepare to return to God’s presence and receive a fulness of joy". "Those who have repented of their sins and received the ordinances of the gospel and kept the associated covenants will be cleansed by the Atonement of Christ. They will receive exaltation in the highest kingdom, also known as the celestial kingdom. They will live in God's presence, become like Him, and receive a fulness of joy. (Preach My Gospel) "We can obtain a fulness of joy only as we become like our Heavenly Father—which is a process that continues throughout this life and into the next". (Book of Mormon Seminary Teacher Manual, 2017). "I bear my witness that because of Heavenly Father’s great plan of happiness, each of us can be perfected through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. With our families we can live with our Heavenly Father eternally and receive a fulness of joy. Of these things I testify in the name of Jesus Christ, amen". (October 2011 General Conference). "To be entrusted with the power to create life carries with it the greatest of joys and dangerous temptations. The gift of mortal life and the capacity to kindle other lives is a supernal blessing. Through the righteous exercise of this power, as in nothing else, we may come close to our Father in Heaven and experience a fulness of joy. This power is not an incidental part of the plan of happiness. It is the key—the very key". (October 2010 General Conference, Agency and the Plan of Salvation) In summary, the LDS Heavenly Father received his fulness of joy and he received a perfected body. He is a saved and perfected soul. He became a God.

"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one" (Deuteronomy 6:4). "I am the LORD, and there is no other" (Isaiah 45:5). "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god" (Isaiah 44:6). "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Mark 12:29). "There is no God but one" (1 Corinthians 8:4). "One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all" (Ephesians 4:6). "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men" (1 Timothy 2:5).

Saved Christians are not left lingering in darkness. "He rescued us from the authority of the darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved Son". (Colossians 1:13). Taught again in 2 Corinthians 4. "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ". We don't need to become Gods to have this light.

If God is a god (or if you prefer a God) and we are all the same kind of being as God is, then all spirit children were already deities (or if you prefer Deities) before coming to earth in physical bodies. Any spiritual teaching that lacks clear scriptural support shouldn't be promoted or taught. In LDS theology, the nature of angels equals the nature of Gods. As far as I know, there are no LDS teachings that angels are not spirit children of heavenly parents. If you explain what you mean by nature (composition, power, intelligence, etc), then maybe I can make some biblical comments. I believe Jesus created all things. This would include Satan, the seraphim, the cherubim, and the four beasts of revelation for example (Colossians 1:16). In religious (especially Christian) contexts, a doctrine is a teaching drawn from Scripture and articulated by the church to clarify what it believes about God, humanity, salvation, and reality. In this case, one could state that "Gospel Principles" contains doctrine. Speculation and opinion should not be taught regarding spiritual matters. For instance, Joseph Smith taught we could detect a false angel by the color of his hair. He did not say this as speculation or opinion. He taught it as reality. It has no scriptural support. https://byustudies.byu.edu/online-book/history-of-the-church-volume-4/volume-4-chapter-33 https://www.centerplace.org/history/ts/v3n11.htm As for Paul, he was laying out the proper principle on how women should be adorned, not drawing attention to themselves. The same could be extended to males too.

The quotes you provided are the LDS teachings to confirm Jesus is presently a God. I was referring to all the other LDS teachings which indicate that Jesus became a God. He [the LDS version of Christ] eternally existed as an uncreated intelligence, became the first spirit child of heavenly parents, and then progressed into becoming a God before his incarnation. The seminary manual says he was ranked as a God when he attained some pinnacle of intelligence. It's the same path as worthy Latter-day Saints hope to follow someday, becoming a God. But before that point in their lives arrives, they are considered to have eternally existed as uncreated intelligences, are taught to have become spirit children of heavenly parents, who then came to earth in a physical body. Caveat: some of these teachings are not explicitly classified as "official" doctrine but they are not classified as "speculation" or "opinion" either.

"There are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected personages, having bodies of flesh and bones—For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, but inherit the same glory". This is how I read it – there are two types of heavenly beings. Not one, not three or more. Those of the second type inherit the same glory as the first type. There is nothing about those in the celestial kingdom inheriting different glories from what like Jesus possesses either. The "spirits of just men made perfect" would seem to exclude those of the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms, since they do not inherit that same glory either. The "angels-type" would presumably include the LDS Heavenly Mother. From whom did she obtain her resurrected, immortal body? What do you mean? Do stars (telestial) having a lesser glory than the Moon (terrestrial) not apply to the star Kolob? Or are stars that we cannot see excluded from their being assigned a telestial glory? That's a convenient way to discard many LDS Church teachings of the past and present. The Prophet says: "If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and John discovered that God the Father of Jesus Christ had a Father, you may suppose that he had a Father also." Then he asks: "Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son?" The Prophet taught that our Father had a Father and so on. Is not this a reasonable thought, especially when we remember that the promises are made to us that we may become like him? Evidently his Father passed through a period of mortality even as he passed through mortality, and as we all are doing. Our Father in heaven, according to the Prophet, had a Father, and since there has been a condition of this kind through all eternity, each Father had a Father, until we come to a stop where we cannot go further, because of our limited capacity to understand" (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3-volume set). Let me know if you believe the above teachings are open to misinterpretation, are incomplete, or inaccurate. There is no record of temples, altars, or their remains among the Jaredites after their land was supposedly discovered by the Nephites. "And Moses told his father in law all that the Lord had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel's sake, and all the travail that had come upon them by the way, and how the Lord delivered them. And Jethro rejoiced for all the goodness which the Lord had done to Israel, whom he had delivered out of the hand of the Egyptians. And Jethro said, Blessed be the Lord, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh, who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods: for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them". You're right. It's an expression of acknowledging who the Lord is and what he has done, but there's a negative component in there too. Even in his admission he doesn't deny his belief in the other gods, who he regards as true deities. He just puts one specific God (the LORD in this case) as being greater than all the other gods, whom he still regards as true gods. He never says "the Lord is the true God and all the others gods that people worship are false gods". His belief is still that all these other worshipped gods are true gods. Jethro is apparently familiar with the Egyptian gods or maybe he held to the belief that the Midianite gods were the same as the Egyptian gods. In either case, he regards them as true gods, the LORD being above them, but they (those gods) were really false gods (idols). Scripture does not reveal who Jethro believed was the highest of all the gods he believed existed before he learned about Moses' experience in Egypt. Jethro is never described as entering Israel's covenant. He receives no command to worship Yahweh alone (unlike Israel in Exodus 20). After Exodus 18, he returns to Midian (Exodus 18:27), implying continued Midianite identity. Since the Bible does not say that Abraham was a Melchizedek or Levitical priest, I cannot infer that he was. Even when he meets Melchizedek, there is no biblical record of him being baptized or ordained by Melchizedek. Who commanded Heavenly Father, when he was a man of some other world, to offer sacrifices? In Nedarim 32b, the Talmud explains that Shem (Melchizedek) lost the priesthood to Abraham because he blessed Abraham before blessing God. Once Melchizedek, traditionally identified as Shem, placed the blessing of Abraham before the blessing of the Omnipresent, He had the priesthood emerge from Abraham in particular, and not from any other descendant of Shem. Due to the improper words [divrati] of Melchizedek, the offspring of Abraham shall be priests of God forever. The Gemara comments: And this is as it is written: "And he was priest of God the Most High" (Genesis 14:18), which emphasizes that he, Melchizedek, is a priest, but his children will not be priests. https://www.sefaria.org/Nedarim.32b.6?lang=bi Do you believe Shem is the same person as Melchizedek and that none of Shem's children were priests? I don't believe that Talmudic tradition. All the descendants of Abraham did not hold the priesthood. From Jacob, the priesthood is formed through the tribe of Levi, specifically through Aaron and his descendants, who held the Aaronic Priesthood. The Lord declares that he has taken the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the children of Israel (Numbers 3:12-13). The Levites are taken for the Lord instead of all the firstborn among the children of Israel (Numbers 3:41). The Levites are separated from among the children of Israel and are given to the Lord in place of the firstborn. The Lord reiterates that all the firstborn are his, and he has taken the Levites instead (Numbers 8:14-18). "For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood". Not even Judah had the Melchizedek priesthood. You can also add "of Ephraim; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood". The priesthood is changed with the advent of Christ. You can try to associate the Melchizedek or Levitical priesthood with Ephraim the son of Joseph or with the tribe of Ephraim, but the Bible does not specifically attribute priesthood authority to either of them. If you believe there's an "official" doctrine of the LDS Church stating that Ephraim the individual or Ephraim the tribe held either the Melchizedek or Levitical Priesthood, then please provide a source that explicitly teaches that. In the New Testament, no individual Christian leader (apostle, bishop, elder) is explicitly called a priest in the later clerical sense. Instead, the New Testament applies priestly language to all Christians as a group. Here are the key passages. Christians explicitly called priests (Collectively) 1. All believers "You yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." "You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation" (1 Peter 2:5,9). 2. The Church as a kingdom of priests "He has made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father..." (Revelation 1:6). "You have made them a kingdom and priests to our God..." (Revelation 5:10). "...they will be priests of God and of Christ..." (Revelation 20:6). There is one explicit High Priest, Jesus Christ (Hebrews 4–10). But I understand that high priests exist in the LDS Church (D&C 107). The Bible doesn't specify the lineage of the seventy elders who went up Mount Sinai with Moses, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu in Exodus 24. Neither does it indicate that they held the Melchizedek priesthood. If you believe that is "official" doctrine, then please provide the source. According to LDS teachings, the Melchizedek priesthood was taken away after Moses. That is taught in several places – Doctrines and Covenants 84:25-26 and a seminary manual called "Duties and Blessings of the Priesthood: Basic Manual for Priesthood Holders" (lesson 2). So Joshua was not a Melchizedek priest. The focus during his leadership was on the continuation of the law of Moses and the administration of the Aaronic Priesthood. Which many other leaders of Israel of the tribe of Ephraim do you believe came after Joshua? I can mention several notable ones. Jeroboam was the first king of the northern kingdom of Israel after the division of the united monarchy. Jeroboam was an Ephraimite and played a significant role in leading the ten northern tribes in rebellion against Rehoboam. Jeroboam was succeeded by his son Nadab. Both of these two kings are remembered for their roles in leading Israel (the northern kingdom) into idolatry. Things did not improve with the next two kings, Baasha and Elah (from the tribe of Issachar). After Joshua's death and before the institution of kings, the leadership of Israel transitioned to a period known as the time of the judges. There wasn't a single successor to Joshua in the same way that Joshua succeeded Moses. Instead, Israel was led by a series of judges who were raised up by God to deliver the Israelites from oppression and to lead them during times of crisis. The first judge mentioned after Joshua's time is Othniel, from the tribe of Judah. He delivered Israel from the oppression of the king of Mesopotamia (Judges 3:7-11). Othniel did not hold the Melchizedek priesthood. Priesthood functions during this time were associated with the Aaronic Priesthood, which was responsible for the religious and ceremonial aspects of the law of Moses. Yes. This was true for the Old Testament, then the Israelites fell away. That is why God instituted the New Covenant. Remember what I said previously: "If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. For the [Mosaic] law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore". Yes. We've discussed Abraham 2 from the Pearl of Great Price before. Verse 11 says, "And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, in thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal". This for the Old Testament, while the Israelites had remained faithful to the covenant. When they did not, the New Covenant was instituted by Christ. Also, this is for literal seed, not those who are supposedly declared to be literally a descendant of Abraham through Isaac. This "seed" doesn't include LDS females, for they don't have the priesthood. The "seed of Abraham" has more than one meaning, depending on the passage and context. Here are the main ways it's used: 1. Abraham's physical descendants Most basically, seed means offspring or descendants. God promised Abraham many descendants (Genesis 12:7; 15:5). This includes Isaac, Jacob (Israel), and the nation of Israel. In this sense, "the seed of Abraham" refers to his family line by birth. Example: "I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth." (Genesis 13:16) 2. The promised line through Isaac The Bible also narrows the promise to a specific line: God says the covenant promise goes through Isaac, not Ishmael (Genesis 17:19–21). Later, it continues through Jacob, not Esau. So sometimes "the seed of Abraham" means the covenant people, not every biological descendant. 3. A single "seed", the Messiah In the New Testament, the apostle Paul explains that seed can also be singular: Galatians 3:16 says the promise ultimately refers to one seed: Christ (the Messiah). This means Jesus is the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham. 4. Spiritual descendants, people of faith The Bible also teaches that anyone who shares Abraham's faith is counted as his seed: Jews and Gentiles who trust God are included. Faith, not ethnicity alone, is the key. "If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Galatians 3:29) Those who belong to Christ are not heirs in the sense of being Gods as the LDS Church teaches in its interpretation of Romans 8:14-17. The Latter-day Saints don't understand how the Old Covenant is replaced by the New Covenant. In the Old, only Levitical priests made up the priesthood organized under the Mosaic Law. In the New, all believers are priests of the royal priesthood. In the Old, one high priest would eventually be replaced by another high priest. In the New, Christ is our High Priest. Abraham 2:6 also includes a mention about their inheritance in the land of Israel, not the United States. It also alters a command recorded in the Bible and widens the scope of "seed". "But I, Abraham, and Lot, my brother's son, prayed unto the Lord, and the Lord appeared unto me, and said unto me: Arise, and take Lot with thee; for I have purposed to take thee away out of Haran, and to make of thee a minister to bear my name in a strange land which I will give unto thy seed after thee for an everlasting possession, when they hearken to my voice". This is not for all of Abraham's seed. Abraham's seed is accounted through Isaac. The Bible does not say God commanded Abraham to take Lot. Here's how the text lays it out: "Go from your country, your kindred, and your father's house to the land that I will show you". This command emphasizes leaving, not bringing relatives along. Just a few verses later, we're told: "So Abram went, as the Lord had told him... And Lot went with him." The text states "Lot went", but it does not say God told Abram to take Lot. Eventually, Abram and Lot separate because their households become too large. After Lot leaves, God reaffirms and expands His promise to Abram (Genesis 13:14–17). God's renewed promise comes after Abram is fully separated from Lot. Lot's presence appears to be Abram's choice, not God's instruction. This fits the original command to leave his kindred behind. Scripture doesn't criticize Abram directly, but the narrative implies that Lot's inclusion was not commanded by God. When does the LDS Church believe Joseph steps forward to claim his birthright and exercise the responsibility of the priesthood? Where is this "official" doctrine taught? We've discussed this "push" before. It's actually "gore", a negative. It's not a "pushing together", a positive as the LDS Church believes. Worthy LDS women do not have the right to hold the priesthood. While do you mention a "generic" priesthood held by seventy elders, you never explicitly showed how Ephraim the individual, Ephraim the tribe, or other non-Levites exercised either the Melchizedek or Levitical priesthood during the Old Testament or New Testament. If you believe your statement is an "official" LDS doctrine, then please provide the source. "By all Israel", I'm assuming you are speaking of "spiritual" Israel – faithful believers in Christ. But faithful LDS women are not considered as being in the priesthood of believers, offering up spiritual sacrifices (1 Peter 2:5,9). "Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ". "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light". It seems you are determined to eliminate women from the royal, holy priesthood in the New Covenant. The portrayal of "push" as in a positive "pushing" together is not the negative portrayal of "gore" as the scripture shows. Let me recap briefly. "His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh". Some other translations have "gore" instead of "push" and "wild ox" instead of "unicorns". See https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/deu/33/17/t_bibles_186017 Even the seminary manual Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel – Teacher Manual, which I referenced before, acknowledges this with "3. Unicorn = wild ox". But "5. Pushing the people = gathering Israel" is not explicitly teaching that this will happen in the New Testament. It's actually "goring" the people. The manual also makes mention of "2. Bullock = domestic ox". This is not used to describe either Ephraim or Manasseh. What I say is taught elsewhere: https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/exo/21/32/t_conc_71032 https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h5055/kjv/wlc/0-1/ https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/exo/21/36/t_conc_71036 https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h5056/kjv/wlc/0-1/ Do you believe "5. Pushing the people = gathering Israel" and "the birthright as the firstborn son includes the responsibility of the priesthood" is "official" doctrine? Deuteronomy 33:29 is where Moses blesses the tribes of Israel before his death. "Happy art thou, O Israel: who is like unto thee, O people saved by the Lord, the shield of thy help, and who is the sword of thy excellency! and thine enemies shall be found liars unto thee; and thou shalt tread upon their high places". Moses knows Israel will face fear, uncertainty, and resistance. He wants to anchor them in confidence in God, not themselves, and instill hope as they enter the promised land. This has nothing to do with Israelites who would eventually put their faith in Christ as Savior in the New Testament. While LDS women as said to benefit from the priesthood through their male counterparts, they do not have a right to the priesthood. Are you specifically referring to the Melchizedek Priesthood or do you believe all worthy male seed of Abraham have a right to the Levitical Priesthood? The LDS Church has not interpreted things for Ephraim that would preclude Jesus from being the High Priest. While the office of "high priest" is mentioned in the Book of Mormon, it does not specifically identify that a Nephite or Lamanite was from the tribe of Ephraim. The office of "high priest" is not an office in the New Testament church. You don't need more than one. Doctrine and Covenants 107:40-42 says, "The order of this priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made. This order was instituted in the days of Adam, and came down by lineage in the following manner: From Adam to Seth, who was ordained by Adam..." Why "from father to son" and not "from father to sons or grandsons"? Why "from Adam to Seth" and not "from Adam to Abel" since Abel is said to have been ordained by Adam in Doctrine and Covenants 84:16? Is this became Abel is not recorded as ordaining anyone? Other people were ordained by Adam, even though they were not his sons (examples: Enos, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, and Methuselah). Lamech is not ordained by Adam, but rather by his father, Methuselah. The scriptures do not specifically mention Seth ordaining anyone either. Before it was called the Melchizedek Priesthood, it was known as the "Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God". The name was changed to avoid the frequent repetition of the name of the Son of God, as explained in Doctrine and Covenants 107:3-4. I don't see anything inappropriate about the frequent use of Christ's name. It appears repeatedly in hymns and in numerous books of the Bible. LDS missionaries even prominently display it on name tags. Joshua did not hold the Melchizedek Priesthood if you follow Doctrine and Covenants 84:23-27 ("Now this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness, and sought diligently to sanctify his people that they might behold the face of God; But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory. Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also; And the lesser priesthood continued"). A "partially" or "less fully" remaining Melchizedek priesthood is not implied. We have no record of Melchizedek's lineage. He is listed as "without father, without mother" (Hebrews 7:3). But in your reference to Talmudic literature, Melchizedek is supposedly Seth and his children lost the priesthood. I don't believe that. All the verses you provided point to Christ, not anyone other than Melchizedek. But I understand that it's taught in the Doctrine and Covenants. As you know, no Christian is specifically identified as being a Melchizedek priest or a high priest in the New Testament. Two people are identified in the New Testament as holding the office of high priest. They are Caiaphas and Annas, but they did not hold the Melchizedek priesthood. Two people called Alma are identified as high priests in the Book of Mormon before the supposed appearance of Jesus to the Nephites. This is found in Mosiah 23:16 and Alma 4:4. They did not hold the Melchizedek priesthood as Doctrine and Covenants says it was removed with Moses and replaced with the lesser priesthood. No person in the Book of Ether (a record of the Jaredites) is mentioned as holding the office of high priest. What did all non-firstborn males from Adam all the way down to Moses, which you believe held the priesthood, do with their priesthood? In Noah's case, do you believe the Melchizedek priesthood passed "from father to son" like D&C 107:40-41 says or "from father to sons"? Did all his 3 sons hold the priesthood? Page 172 said, "For example, the posterity of Jacob's (Israel's) son Joseph were promised a special land beyond Canaan where they would "push the people together to the ends of the earth" (Deuteronomy 33:17; see verses 13–17; see also Genesis 49:22–26)". This would tie together with what I mentioned earlier from Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel – Teacher Manual, chapter 21, page 76. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/32499_eng.pdf It's in the section discussing "push" / "gore" and "unicorn" / "wild ox". "This verse is being fulfilled in this, the last dispensation, as Joseph steps forward to claim his birthright as the firstborn son, which includes the responsibility of the priesthood. It is by the power of the priesthood that Israel will be gathered and that the saving ordinances will be administered under the direction of the tribe of Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh)". There is no record of Joseph ever building an altar or offering sacrifices. If you can provide any "official" LDS doctrine about these aspects of Joseph, then please let me know. No one specific mortal on earth, but only Jesus in heaven and the Word he has given to us, and the Spirit he has sent to be our Comforter. If I am not mistaken, the current President of the LDS Church speaks for it, but not for all of Christianity. This is supposedly true for all LDS Presidents of the past. I believe they have not always taught the truth to their members. My primary example is Joseph Smith, Jr. They teach things and then people scramble to label these teachings as opinions or speculations when it seems farfetched. "Oh no, it's not official doctrine though" is the usual mantra. The Bible. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness". God has provided us the means to detect a false god or false Christ. Do you view the Jesus of Jehovah's Witnesses (aka Michael the Archangel) as the true Christ? The person that delivered the sermon may not have the credentials of a church or stake president or a General Authority, but is the message true or false? Don't judge the book by its cover, but rather discern the content. When Joseph Smith taught God is not God from all eternity, it is either true or false. When Gospel Principles taught "The Prophet Joseph Smith taught: When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; and so it is with the principles of the Gospel ... This is the way our Heavenly Father became God", it is either true or false. The difference is between a false god and the true God. In context, the chapter is about love being greater than spiritual gifts. Paul's point is that prophecy, knowledge, and tongues are temporary and limited, but love lasts. So the verse isn't saying knowledge is bad—it's saying humility is needed, because full understanding comes later. Earlier in the chapter (13:8–10), Paul says prophecy will pass away, tongues will cease, knowledge will pass away because they are partial, and something complete is coming. Verse 12 is Paul restating that same idea with a metaphor (blurred mirror vs. face-to-face). The way the New Testament apostles talk about the Second Coming often sounds more like hope or expectation than a clear statement that it would definitely happen in their lifetime. Take Paul, for example. His letters have a strong sense of urgency, and he tells believers to stay ready, but he never claims to know exactly when Jesus will return. In 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17, Paul uses phrases like "we who are alive and remain," which sounds more like he's including himself as a possibility, not making a firm prediction. Peter makes a similar point in 2 Peter 3:8–9, reminding people that God's sense of timing doesn't work the same way ours does, and encouraging patience instead of speculation. So overall, while early Christians clearly hoped the return might be soon, the consistent message in the New Testament is less about dates and more about staying faithful and prepared whenever it happens. This being unlike Jehovah's Witnesses, who have set various dates for the return of Christ: 1914, 1925, and 1975. When I hear or read about teachings in General Conference and published books in past and present, it seems LDS leaders actually believe that what they are teaching is really true. The principle of 1 Corinthians 13:12 becomes "Before 1830 we saw through a glass, darkly; but afterwards we would know the truth as in face to face: Before 1830, we knew only in part, but after that we would know what God has or will make known to us". I cannot provide LDS doctrines where it says Heavenly Mother "officially" exists (using that key word) or that she "officially" became a God (using that key word). As for the phrase "God was a spirit child of heavenly parents", maybe I should have added more context to it. I see that the LDS God (you can pick either Jesus or Heavenly Father) in a sense was not a God when he became a spirit child of his heavenly parents. He would become a God at some later point of his existence. A doctrine taught in "Religion 430-431 – Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual", even though the word "official" is not used of anything taught in that seminary manual, teaches Jesus was ranked as a God when he reached some pinnacle of intelligence. Maybe the manual will be renamed to "Religion 430-431 – Opinions and Speculations of the Gospel Student Manual" someday. Maybe the same for "Doctrines of Salvation" by Joseph Fielding Smith. I'm not sure how one would rename "Gospel Principles" or "Gospel Truth" by George Q. Cannon though. Let's apply the analogy to you. InCognitus is supposedly a spirit child of a heavenly father or mother but InCognitus is not a spirit child of heavenly parents who is also presently a God. If you reach what LDS believes is exaltation, then the statement "God (Incognitus) is a spirit child of heavenly parents" is more accurate. Was the LDS Heavenly Mother a spirit child of her heavenly parents? If no, where does she come from? Doctrine and Covenants 121:32 says, "According to that which was ordained in the midst of the Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world was, that should be reserved unto the finishing and the end thereof, when every man shall enter into his eternal presence and into his immortal rest". Several other teachings say Gods. One of them uses Doctrine and Covenants 121:32 in its footnote for Gods. Does this mean "gods" = "Gods" ? "... the heads of the Gods appointed one God for us" (Joseph Smith Papers). "Thus the head God brought forth the Gods in the grand council". "The head God called together the Gods and sat in grand council to bring forth the world. The grand councilors sat at the head in yonder heavens and contemplated the creation of the worlds which were created at the time" (King Follett discourse). https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1971/04/the-king-follett-sermon?lang=eng "Thus the head God brought forth the Gods in the grand council [14]". "The head God called together the Gods and sat in grand council [17]". [14] D&C 121:32 [17] Abr. 4:1 (Teachings of Joseph Smith, 1938). https://scriptures.byu.edu/tpjs/STPJS.pdf "Gods" are said to have created the heavens, the earth, and man (Abraham 4:1, 26-27), but Religion 430-431 – Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual says, "We know that Jehovah-Christ, assisted by many of the noble and great ones did in fact create the earth and all forms of plant and animal life. But when it came to placing man on earth, there was a change in Creators. That is, the Father himself became personally involved". Another seminary manual says Joseph Smith and others were also thought to have helped God create the earth (Religion 327 – Pearl of Great Price Student Manual, pp. 7-8, 38). I don't see this ("that many others assisted Jesus to create the earth and all forms of plant and animal life") specifically labelled as "official" doctrine, an opinion, or a speculation. Is this a true or false teaching? It's not the only source. The Prophet says: "If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and John discovered that God the Father of Jesus Christ had a Father, you may suppose that he had a Father also." Then he asks: "Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son?" (page 9). The Prophet taught that our Father had a Father and so on. Is not this a reasonable thought, especially when we remember that the promises are made to us that we may become like him? Evidently his Father passed through a period of mortality even as he passed through mortality, and as we all are doing. Our Father in heaven, according to the Prophet, had a Father, and since there has been a condition of this kind through all eternity, each Father had a Father, until we come to a stop where we cannot go further, because of our limited capacity to understand" (page 249). Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation https://archive.org/download/JFSDoctrinesOfSalvation/JFSDoctrinesofSalvationv1-3.pdf "We were begotten by our Father in heaven; the person of our Father in Heaven was begotten on a previous heavenly world by His Father, and again He was begotten by a still more ancient father and so on from generation to generation" (page 132). Orson Pratt, The Seer https://ia904606.us.archive.org/29/items/seereditedbyorso01unse/seereditedbyorso01unse_bw.pdf "He came here, was born, had a father and mother like you have. Well, who was his father? Why God was His father; and who was God's father? Why God had a father like you and I have. Now, with this information children can begin to understand something about their Heavenly Father. They can see that if Jesus is His Son, and we are His sons and daughters, that He must be the Son of some other personage, for He could not beget Himself, but must have a father even as He is our Father". Gospel Truths, volume 1, George Q. Cannon, page 128. "Long before our God began his creations, he dwelt on a mortal world like ours, one of the creations that his Father had created for him and his brethren. He, with many of his brethren, was obedient to the principles of the eternal gospel. One among these, it is presumed, was a savior for them, and through him they obtained a resurrection and an exaltation on an eternal, celestial world.[8] Then they gained the power and godhood of their Father and were made heirs of all that he had, continuing his works and creating worlds of their own for their own posterity—the same as their Father had done before, and his Father, and his Father, and on and on". [8] Brigham Young, in Journal of Discourses, vol. 14, p. 71. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/new-era/1971/04/people-on-other-worlds?lang=eng These are not taught as opinion or speculation. The same principle is found in the King Follett Discourse. "We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see". "Here, then, is eternal life—to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God,10 the same as all Gods have done before you" (Teachings of Joseph Smith, 1938). This is not taught as opinion or speculation. Most, if not, everything taught in "Gospel Principles" or other church publications and General Conferences are not referenced as being "official" doctrine (using that key word). Which teachings in "Gospel Principles" do you consider speculations or opinions of the LDS Church? It seems I have not or am not able to express how I view the term "homoousious" so I will create a new post, detailing how ChatGPT would answer the question, so others on the forum can comment if they wish. The doctrine of a heavenly mother is not explicitly taught in any book of LDS canon. Gospel Principles, a hymn "O My Father", and other publications teach about her existence. Apparently they do contain doctrine, albeit not labelled as "official" doctrine, using that key word. From what I know, there is no historical context for church fathers teaching about a heavenly mother. I have no basis to believe in an LDS Heavenly Mother who was involved to create Eve or other spirit daughters in her image. Even an earthly mother is not solely capable of determining that she will form a female child in her womb in her image. Maybe the Latter-day Saints believe their Heavenly Mother has this capability, and somehow allows her husband some method to tweak the offspring in her womb so that the child is formed in his image instead. Maybe it's all determined with the X and Y chromosomes. The basic mechanism: the mother's egg always carries an X chromosome. The father's sperm carries either an X or a Y chromosome. At conception: X (egg) + X (sperm) results in XX -> female X (egg) + Y (sperm) results in XY -> male Maybe this is irrelevant for exalted beings as sperm may no longer be required.

You are correct in a way. It's technically referred to as "SERMONS & WRITINGS OF JOSEPH FIELDING SMITH" compiled by Bruce R. McConkie. Another publication, "The Way of Perfection", is not specified in that manner.

The Joseph Smith Papers, on page 103, says https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-f-1-1-may-1844-8-august-1844/109#historical-intro https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-f-1-1-may-1844-8-august-1844/109#full-transcript <June 16> go away satisfied, well and good. [HC 6:475] In the very beginning <the bible shews> there is a plurality of Gods beyond the power of refutation. It is a great subject I am dwelling on; the word Eloheim ought to be the plural all the way through—Gods; the heads of the Gods appointed one God for us; and when you take a view of the subject, it sets one free to see all the beauty, holiness, and perfection of the Gods. Who are the heads of the Gods? Did they appoint Jesus or Heavenly Father as the one God for us? As for your believed view that there doesn't seem to be room for God the Father being a spirit child of heavenly parents, where did Heavenly Mother come from and how did she become a God? By the way, Gospel Principles (1997) mentions a few things which infer that the heavenly parents of our Earth became Gods. In the current version, they reduced the number of references to heavenly parents and instead focused on Heavenly Father.

I would say it means one in union (as in belief/purpose), but not one in the sense of becoming God or becoming a member of the Godhead.

In step 2, who formed and invited the spirit child (the future Heavenly Father of our Earth) into his First Estate? At which stage do you believe Heavenly Father became a God who was not FULLY God?

The church teaches many things in its manuals, past and present, which are not classified as doctrine. One needs to decide if they are true or false principles. I believe God provided us with scripture to detect falsehood from truth. I would discard speculation from being taught. Brushing off much of what the LDS Church teaches because it's not classified as "doctrine" is not a sincere way to hold it to account for what it does teach. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

Where did you get that idea? I suppose you believed both Heavenly Mother and Father became Gods when they were born to their heavenly parents. If you disagree, then tell me how you believe Heavenly Mother became a God.

Who Jesus is.

Discarding teachings from old magazines or books published by the LDS Church reminds me of what the Watchtower does with its "old light, new light" way to correct previously held false ones. Unfortunately they need to admit that the old light was not the true light. Your use of "evolution" sounds more pleasing to the ears though. As I repeat several times in my replies on various topics, "It isn’t a question of who said it or when; the question is whether it is true" (Boyd K. Packer, Follow the Rule).