Was God ever a sinner?

[robuchan]

You think this speaks of G or g...? Big G or little g, the above is what the doctrine of the Church is and will not change. Let me see the quote from the "new" manual on exaltation... I have yet to see it. There would need to be a lot of deleting going on in order for your theory to prove true.

There does appear to be a lot of deletion.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

There does appear to be a lot of deletion.

Just not the deletions that LB is looking for.

[Lightbearer]

Just not the deletions that LB is looking for.

You are correct Mola Ram, in fact the deletions mostly look like getting rid of redundancies, but not necessarily changing doctrine. I provide a few quotes from that thread:

"When we lived with our Heavenly Father, he explained a plan for our progression. We could become like him, an exalted being." "Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life God lives. He lives in great glory. He is perfect. He possesses all knowledge and all wisdom. He is the Father of spirit children. He is a creator. We can become like our Heavenly Father. This is exaltation." "Joseph Smith taught: â??It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. . . . He was once a man like us; . . .God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did"

Big G or little g? Does not matter, I think these quotes alone cause my so-called "bet" to have been won, by me! So I await your $200!

You had me going there for a minute, but thanks for the link so I could know for a certainty that I was vindicated.

P.S. Oh since there is already precedence, I add one more quote from the movie: "The Outlaw Josey Wales" in the immortal words of Mr. Fletcher: "There's another old saying, Senator: Don't *** down my back and tell me it's raining."

[robuchan]

You are correct Mola Ram, in fact the deletions mostly look like getting rid of redundancies, but not necessarily changing doctrine. I provide a few quotes from that thread:Big G or little g? Does not matter, I think these quotes alone cause my so-called "bet" to have been won, by me! So I await your $200!

You had me going there for a minute, but thanks for the link so I could know for a certainty that I was vindicated.

P.S. Oh since there is already precedence, I add one more quote from the movie: "The Outlaw Josey Wales" in the immortal words of Mr. Fletcher: "There's another old saying, Senator: Don't *** down my back and tell me it's raining."

This just goes to show people see what they want to see. Bottom line is that G is taught clearly in the old version. In the new version you can see it if you're LOOKING for it, but if you're not it's not there.

[Damien the Leper]

In the San Francisco Chronicle interview,President Hinckley was asked:

Q: There are some significant differences in your beliefs. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a man?

A: I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about (San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997. p. 3/Z1).

Most ever "Prophet" before Mr Hinckley took the office was sure about this point..

God the Father was once a man on another planet who "passed the ordeals we are now passing through; he has received an experience, has suffered and enjoyed, and knows all that we know regarding the toils, sufferings, life and death of this mortality" (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young, 1997, p. 29).

God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. . . . (Teachings of the Presidents: Joseph Smith, 2007, p. 221).

"The Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon meâ??the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the sun at noon-day, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man." Elder Snow expressed this new found understanding in these words: "As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be." Later the Prophet Joseph Smith assured him: "Brother Snow, that is true gospel doctrine, and it is a revelation from God to you. . ." (Search These Commandments, Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, 1984, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, pp. 151-152)

I rescently asked this question based on this subject:

Are you a sinner, Can you perceive a time when you could be exalted and become as God was when He was first exalted? Can you perceive that you would advance in that exaltation? That you might have the opportunity to organize a world and populate it with your own Spirit children? But Heston you are a sinner that much I have seen you admit!!! So if you grow to that priesthood office of godhood wouldn't the mortals in your "creation" say that once their father in heaven was a sinner? Wouldn't they be right? Therefore in mormon theology isn't it right to believe that the Father was once a sinner?

I never gor ans answer so now I bring this question here.. May I please have an answer? IHS jim

Simply put, James...NO!

Valentinus

[Pahoran]

That wasn't an apology. I was seeking clarification on your view before I determined if I needed to apologize. Now that we're clear, I maintain my prior position.

So you choose to knowingly maintain your false accusation that I was "lying about the doctrine." Got it.

Every time little g is referred to in the church, it's my definition, including the DCP article here.

Call for references, please. You're up to two.

You still don't get to (1) invent your own categories, (2) impose them on our doctrine, and (3) call us liars for not falling in with your lexical imperialism.

All that does is demonstrate how arrogant you are.

It's a lie to put out that definition but then hold onto the G definition and then when pushed into a corner to say there is actually no difference.

CFR that anyone has actually done that.

Throw away the g definition and be straight up with the G definition, if that's what you believe.

What I actually believe is that your attempt to make us offenders for a letter is brazenly dishonest.

You guys are hilarious with the "nothing could be more clear" stuff. I now have two aspects of the g definition that I'm told could not be a clearer reference to G. First was "joint heir" as if there is no other logical interpretation than that it = G. That's almost comical. Now you say that "a continuation of the seeds forever and ever." is also a clear reference to G. Almost more comical.

Here's what's really comical: I did not claim that it was "a clear reference to G." You made that up. My argument is that the reference shows that your letter-game is illegitimate.

How about two possible interpretations...one is that your children will live forever. two is that the generations of your seed will have no end as in your children will have children who will have children etc.

Yes, that's a fairly predictable apostate reworking of the doctrine.

And you are entitled to believe it, if you really want to. But anyone who tries to pretend that it is what our doctrine means would be, to coin a phrase, "lying about the doctrine."

Neither imply anything close to G.

g does not equal G. Stop acting like it does. g could be a subset of G. But they are not equal.

Ooh, trying to give orders now, are you?

The distinction you have tried to fabricate between "g" and "G" is artificial, polemical and dishonest. These are categories of your own invention. They have nothing whatsoever to do with us.

P.S. this is not apostate doctrine. You have good active LDS on this board who agree with me on this topic. I'm just being a little aggressive about it. Maybe I was just a more faithful follower of GBH and you were stuck in the 70's and never moved on like the church did.

Are you referring to the same President Hinckley who said that he was confident that Church members would not look to the secular media for their doctrine?

You really should apologise for your false accusation, Robuchan. Not to assuage my feelings -- I've had far worse accusation from your fellow haters -- but because it will create the impression that you actually have a functioning conscience about such things.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

Show me a reference to G in general conference over the last 20 years, or in current official church publications.

Your "G" is, of course, an invented category of your own that no Latter-day Saint has any obligation to defend.

That said, consider this, from President Henry B. Eyring, in the April 2008 General Conference:

The Lord has made those consequences clear. Rising to the possibilities of the oath and covenant brings the greatest of all the gifts of God: eternal life. That is a purpose of the Melchizedek Priesthood. Through keeping the covenants as we receive the priesthood and renewing them in the temple ceremonies, we are promised by an oath made by our Heavenly Father, Elohim, that we will gain the fulness of His glory and live as He lives. We will have the blessing of being sealed in a family forever with the promise of eternal increase.

To anticipate your response: you can lean back in your chair and invent any fancy redefinitions of "eternal increase" you please; but unless and until you are able to support them from actual sources, "eternal increase," along with "continuation of the seeds" continues to mean exactly what it always did.

Regards,

Pahoran

[daycat]

I rescently asked this question based on this subject:

Are you a sinner, Can you perceive a time when you could be exalted and become as God was when He was first exalted? Can you perceive that you would advance in that exaltation? That you might have the opportunity to organize a world and populate it with your own Spirit children? But Heston you are a sinner that much I have seen you admit!!! So if you grow to that priesthood office of godhood wouldn't the mortals in your "creation" say that once their father in heaven was a sinner? Wouldn't they be right? Therefore in mormon theology isn't it right to believe that the Father was once a sinner?

I never gor ans answer so now I bring this question here.. May I please have an answer? IHS jim

When Joseph Smith declared God himself was once like us he was really saying that God was once like Christ.

So the answer would be no. God the Father was as sinless as Jesus Christ when it was his turn to be a Christ.

What has been too little considered in LDS theology are the many scriptures that shed light upon the path of God the Very Eternal Father and that of exalted man who will continue the seeds both in the world and out of the world.

D&C 29:30-35 We understand that God the Eternal Father creates ONLY by the word of his power which is his Spirit.

Therefore, his path and eternal round does not involve the continuation of the seeds either in or out of the world. Except that he commands those who do multiply and replenish the many worlds he makes. Adam and Eve were the seed parents of our spirit bodies. The creation scriptures say this plainly. They finished all the hosts thereof before they were put into the Garden to continue seeds "in the world". And Eve needed to have here conceptions replenished and multiplied unto her because she had just used them all up in the spirit world conceptions of all those who were to be added upon by becoming their spirit children from the council of the organization of intelligence. This is not what LDS people are fond of thinking but it is beyond refutation that this is what the LDS scriptures say.

The headiness of thinking you can become as great as God overcame the meekness of reading scriptures aright. I could expound a great deal more but should wait and see if anyone wants to know more.

[shousemouse]

If the doctrine of eternal progression is factual (I do not personally prescribe to it), what is it that we can progress from?

The LDS believe that God the Father was once like we are today. If we are sinful beings, couldn't he have been, too? If we (sinful people) can attain Godhood status, then The Heavenly Father of Mormonism could have also sinned.

Just because Christ was sinless, it doesn't mean God the Father wasn't.

The plan of salvation according to the Heavenly Father Mormons on this earth know, may not be the same plan that happened in order for Christ to have attained Godhood status. Are you confused yet?

Basically, if the LDS believe that other planets could be populated and that other Gods are in charge of them, the possibility of a once sinful God exists. Personally, the thought of God being sinful at all is blasphemous to me. God is the creator of ALL. He has always existed-not created or exalted. My God is an infinite-not finite-being. But that is just my opinion.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

If the doctrine of eternal progression is factual (I do not personally prescribe to it), what is it that we can progress from?

The LDS believe that God the Father was once like we are today. If we are sinful beings, couldn't he have been, too? If we (sinful people) can attain Godhood status, then The Heavenly Father of Mormonism could have also sinned.

Just because Christ was sinless, it doesn't mean God the Father wasn't.

The plan of salvation according to the Heavenly Father Mormons on this earth know, may not be the same plan that happened in order for Christ to have attained Godhood status. Are you confused yet?

Basically, if the LDS believe that other planets could be populated and that other Gods are in charge of them, the possibility of a once sinful God exists. Personally, the thought of God being sinful at all is blasphemous to me. God is the creator of ALL. He has always existed-not created or exalted. My God is an infinite-not finite-being. But that is just my opinion.

You do not have a very good understanding of "eternal progression" IT is comments like this one "Basically, if the LDS believe that other planets could be populated and that other Gods are in charge of them, the possibility of a once sinful God exists".

That is not what any one here believes. I suggest for your own benefit to read through the 10 pages and look at the arguments.

[thesometimesaint]

shousemouse:

The LDS have Scripture that God tells us that: "This is my work and my glory to bring to pass the Immortality and Eternal Life of man.".

As for God the Father being at one time a sinner. We have only one example. That example is Jesus the Christ. Whom we believe was not a sinner a sinner at any time, or in any sense of the word.

[Lightbearer]

If the doctrine of eternal progression is factual (I do not personally prescribe to it), what is it that we can progress from?

The LDS believe that God the Father was once like we are today. If we are sinful beings, couldn't he have been, too? If we (sinful people) can attain Godhood status, then The Heavenly Father of Mormonism could have also sinned.

Just because Christ was sinless, it doesn't mean God the Father wasn't.

The plan of salvation according to the Heavenly Father Mormons on this earth know, may not be the same plan that happened in order for Christ to have attained Godhood status. Are you confused yet?

Basically, if the LDS believe that other planets could be populated and that other Gods are in charge of them, the possibility of a once sinful God exists. Personally, the thought of God being sinful at all is blasphemous to me. God is the creator of ALL. He has always existed-not created or exalted. My God is an infinite-not finite-being. But that is just my opinion.

Are you a James Banta sock-puppet? This entire thread covers the answer to your post. But just in case you did not get it the first time around... Here is my question, do you believe that Christ can completely atone for our sins? Do you think that His blood can fully and completely cleanse us from all unrighteousness so that we can become Holy and without spot? If so, then your objection is entirely moot. If not then you are not a Christian. So it really does not matter if God was a "sinner" in mortal life or not! We are children of God, and thus are heirs of God and join-heirs with Christ if we follow Him our perfect example. When we are born again, we are changed from our lost and fallen state into a state of righteousness and thus we fulfill the scripture that says thus:

(1 John 3:1-3) "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure."

Now if you really believe these words you should not fain "horror" at the concept that God was once a man on a mortal sphere such as this and it is possible (not necessarily) that He could have sinned. If He were a Christ, as the KFD hints at, then He was without sin just as Jesus Christ was on this earth. If He was a son of God as we are, then He would have been purified every whit before He was ever exalted as God has promised us that we can be exalted if we overcome the world by the blood of the lamb.

[daycat]

Are you a James Banta sock-puppet? This entire thread covers the answer to your post. But just in case you did not get it the first time around... Here is my question, do you believe that Christ can completely atone for our sins? Do you think that His blood can fully and completely cleanse us from all unrighteousness so that we can become Holy and without spot? If so, then your objection is entirely moot. If not then you are not a Christian. So it really does not matter if God was a "sinner" in mortal life or not! We are children of God, and thus are heirs of God and join-heirs with Christ if we follow Him our perfect example. When we are born again, we are changed from our lost and fallen state into a state of righteousness and thus we fulfill the scripture that says thus:Now if you really believe these words you should not fain "horror" at the concept that God was once a man on a mortal sphere such as this and it is possible (not necessarily) that He could have sinned. If He were a Christ, as the KFD hints at, then He was without sin just as Jesus Christ was on this earth. If He was a son of God as we are, then He would have been purified every whit before He was ever exalted as God has promised us that we can be exalted if we overcome the world by the blood of the lamb.

Did anyone read my post. I verily put this issue to rest. Exaltation is not Godhood it is seedbearinghood that continues both in the world and out of the world. Because we lay down our lives in a Garden event we can be counted as one of the little "g" gods who go from exaltation to exaltation. Whereas God goes from glorification to glorification as he too continues to enter the world and accomplish the conception of his seed in a spiritual rebirth of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. Thereby we become the sons and daughters of God.

D&C 29:30 God ONLY creates by the word of his power. He is not a seed progenitor.

[Lightbearer]

Did anyone read my post. I verily put this issue to rest. Exaltation is not Godhood it is seedbearinghood that continues both in the world and out of the world. Because we lay down our lives in a Garden event we can be counted as one of the little "g" gods who go from exaltation to exaltation. Whereas God goes from glorification to glorification as he too continues to enter the world and accomplish the conception of his seed in a spiritual rebirth of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. Thereby we become the sons and daughters of God.

D&C 29:30 God ONLY creates by the word of his power. He is not a seed progenitor.

Yes I read it, but with all due respect, I did not understand what in the world you are talking about. That is not orthodox LDS doctrine. Exaltation and Godhood (big G) IS.

I refer to this to support my claim:

(â??Chapter 47: Exaltation,â? Gospel Principles, 301)"Our Heavenly Father is perfect. However, he is not jealous of his wisdom and perfection. He glories in the fact that it is possible for his children to become like him. He has said, â??This is my work and my gloryâ??to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of manâ? (Moses 1:39).

Those who receive exaltation in the celestial kingdom through faith in Jesus Christ will receive special blessings. The Lord has promised, â??All things are theirsâ? (D&C 76:59). These are some of the blessings given to exalted people:

1. They will live eternally in the presence of Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ (see D&C 76).

2. They will become gods.

3. They will have their righteous family members with them and will be able to have spirit children also. These spirit children will have the same relationship to them as we do to our Heavenly Father. They will be an eternal family.

4. They will receive a fulness of joy.

5. They will have everything that our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ haveâ??all power, glory, dominion, and knowledge. President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: â??The Father has promised through the Son that all that he has shall be given to those who are obedient to his commandments. They shall increase in knowledge, wisdom, and power, going from grace to grace, until the fulness of the perfect day shall burst upon themâ? (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:36)."

i think that puts the matter to rest as far as believing mainstream LDS are concerned.

[Lightbearer]

dupe post

[Lightbearer]

dupe post

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Yes I read it, but with all due respect, I did not understand what in the world you are talking about. That is not orthodox LDS doctrine. Exaltation and Godhood (big G) IS.

I refer to this to support my claim:i think that puts the matter to rest as far as believing mainstream LDS are concerned.

Getting a little savy with yout truplicate post LB? Lol.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Did anyone read my post. I verily put this issue to rest. Exaltation is not Godhood it is seedbearinghood that continues both in the world and out of the world. Because we lay down our lives in a Garden event we can be counted as one of the little "g" gods who go from exaltation to exaltation. Whereas God goes from glorification to glorification as he too continues to enter the world and accomplish the conception of his seed in a spiritual rebirth of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. Thereby we become the sons and daughters of God.

D&C 29:30 God ONLY creates by the word of his power. He is not a seed progenitor.

I did not read all of your post. For some reason I tend to post replies to posts that are critical of what teh LDS believe. I will have to finish reading your post as it had a different out look to the "issue" at hand.

Note: I use the term issue here in the general sense of the word, not that I think the LDS have an issue in their doctrine.

[Pahoran]

When Joseph Smith declared God himself was once like us he was really saying that God was once like Christ.

So the answer would be no. God the Father was as sinless as Jesus Christ when it was his turn to be a Christ.

What has been too little considered in LDS theology are the many scriptures that shed light upon the path of God the Very Eternal Father and that of exalted man who will continue the seeds both in the world and out of the world.

D&C 29:30-35 We understand that God the Eternal Father creates ONLY by the word of his power which is his Spirit.

Therefore, his path and eternal round does not involve the continuation of the seeds either in or out of the world. Except that he commands those who do multiply and replenish the many worlds he makes. Adam and Eve were the seed parents of our spirit bodies. The creation scriptures say this plainly. They finished all the hosts thereof before they were put into the Garden to continue seeds "in the world". And Eve needed to have here conceptions replenished and multiplied unto her because she had just used them all up in the spirit world conceptions of all those who were to be added upon by becoming their spirit children from the council of the organization of intelligence. This is not what LDS people are fond of thinking but it is beyond refutation that this is what the LDS scriptures say.

Is it?

30 But remember that all my judgments are not given unto men; and as the words have gone forth out of my mouth even so shall they be fulfilled, that the first shall be last, and that the last shall be first in all things whatsoever I have created by the word of my power, which is the power of my Spirit.

31 For by the power of my Spirit created I them; yea, all things both spiritual and temporalâ??

32 First spiritual, secondly temporal, which is the beginning of my work; and again, first temporal, and secondly spiritual, which is the last of my workâ??

33 Speaking unto you that you may naturally understand; but unto myself my works have no end, neither beginning; but it is given unto you that ye may understand, because ye have asked it of me and are agreed.

34 Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; neither any man, nor the children of men; neither Adam, your father, whom I created.

35 Behold, I gave unto him that he should be an agent unto himself; and I gave unto him commandment, but no temporal commandment gave I unto him, for my commandments are spiritual; they are not natural nor temporal, neither carnal nor sensual.

That's the entire passage.

Look at the words I've highlighted. Think about them.

Then try to tell us, with a straight face, that "it is beyond refutation that" your unique interpretation of one passage "is what the LDS scriptures say."

Because maybe it isn't.

The headiness of thinking you can become as great as God overcame the meekness of reading scriptures aright. I could expound a great deal more but should wait and see if anyone wants to know more.

He said, meekly.

Because there's absolutely no "headiness" entailed in assuming that one is the first to ever be "reading scriptures aright."

Is that it?

Regards,

Pahoran

[convertmolly]

I did not read all of your post. For some reason I tend to post replies to posts that are critical of what teh LDS believe. I will have to finish reading your post as it had a different out look to the "issue" at hand.

Note: I use the term issue here in the general sense of the word, not that I think the LDS have an issue in their doctrine.

I don't think anyone can say that God was a sinner or not. However, I do believe that we already have a pattern here in our own families. Father creates son, son grows up and gets married, becomes like his father, develops a career, has children . . . those children grow up and do the same thing. From what Joseph Smith said in the King Follett discourses, God has a father, who has a father, who has a father, etc. We will grow up to become like our Father, and become like Him, although He will always be greater than we are. That means that everything that He does, we will eventually do, if we are worthy. Why is that so difficult to understand? God has the infinite ability to create us in His own image. What do cats beget? They beget cats. When we have children, we have human children. When God creates . . . well, He creates gods.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I don't think anyone can say that God was a sinner or not. However, I do believe that we already have a pattern here in our own families. Father creates son, son grows up and gets married, becomes like his father, develops a career, has children . . . those children grow up and do the same thing. From what Joseph Smith said in the King Follett discourses, God has a father, who has a father, who has a father, etc. We will grow up to become like our Father, and become like Him, although He will always be greater than we are. That means that everything that He does, we will eventually do, if we are worthy. Why is that so difficult to understand? God has the infinite ability to create us in His own image. What do cats beget? They beget cats. When we have children, we have human children. When God creates . . . well, He creates gods.

I think you get it. I think I get, there are others that don't seem to get it. THis makes perfect sense to me.

[daycat]

Yes I read it, but with all due respect, I did not understand what in the world you are talking about. That is not orthodox LDS doctrine. Exaltation and Godhood (big G) IS.

I refer to this to support my claim:i think that puts the matter to rest as far as believing mainstream LDS are concerned.

Everybody in the LDS Church knows that nothing written in any book carries any weight in matters of doctrine and it is always a matter of the author's opinion. Although it has even become fashionable these days for LDS to qualify scripture as time relevant which is a great error, only scripture can establish doctrine. Joseph Smith said that if there is only one word of scripture in support of a doctrine it is enough. (tpjs)201

It says in D&C 29:30-31

30. But remember that all my judgments are not given unto men; and as the words have gone forth out of my mouth even so shall they be fulfilled, that the first shall be last, and the last shall be first in ALL things whatsoever I have created by the word of my power, which is th epoer of my Spirit.

31. For by the poer of my Spirit created I them; yea, all things both spiritual and temporal.

That does not make any allowance for seed bearing progeny. No wife, only by the power of his Spirit he creates ALL THINGS. God spoke and man was created. How was that? He appointed us to an independent sphere of existence which is the organization of intelligence. How? By the power of his Spirit.

And the narrative and chronology of the creation scriptures clearly show that Adam and Eve were already married and were given a world and commanded to multiply and replenish it and that they did finish all the hosts thereof before they were put into the Garden of Eden. This was continuation of the seeds both in the world[garden] and out of the world [spirit children]

When Joseph Smith extended his arms for pillow that two men might see the vision of their heavenly parents who did they see? Adam and Eve!

I know LDS people do not think this. They are wrong and have been for a very long time. Get over it.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Everybody in the LDS Church knows that nothing written in any book carries any weight in matters of doctrine and it is always a matter of the author's opinion. Although it has even become fashionable these days for LDS to qualify scripture as time relevant which is a great error, only scripture can establish doctrine. Joseph Smith said that if there is only one word of scripture in support of a doctrine it is enough. (tpjs)201

And only a prophet has the authority to properly interpret scripture. As you know scipture is not for private interpretation. I think you are reading to much in to this verse of scripture as it is LDS doctrine that we have a Father and a Mother in heaven.

Good luck with it.

No were does that verse specifically state what it means to "create with His spirit" What does that all entail?

And the narrative and chronology of the creation scriptures clearly show that Adam and Eve were already married and were given a world and commanded to multiply and replenish it and that they did finish all the hosts thereof before they were put into the Garden of Eden. This was continuation of the seeds both in the world[garden] and out of the world [spirit children]

When Joseph Smith extended his arms for pillow that two men might see the vision of their heavenly parents who did they see? Adam and Eve!

I know LDS people do not think this. They are wrong and have been for a very long time. Get over it.

For instance what does the word "replenish" mean? I could read a whole lot into that word.

[Lightbearer]

Everybody in the LDS Church knows that nothing written in any book carries any weight in matters of doctrine and it is always a matter of the author's opinion. Although it has even become fashionable these days for LDS to qualify scripture as time relevant which is a great error, only scripture can establish doctrine. Joseph Smith said that if there is only one word of scripture in support of a doctrine it is enough. (tpjs)201

It says in D&C 29:30-31

30. But remember that all my judgments are not given unto men; and as the words have gone forth out of my mouth even so shall they be fulfilled, that the first shall be last, and the last shall be first in ALL things whatsoever I have created by the word of my power, which is th epoer of my Spirit.

31. For by the poer of my Spirit created I them; yea, all things both spiritual and temporal.

That does not make any allowance for seed bearing progeny. No wife, only by the power of his Spirit he creates ALL THINGS. God spoke and man was created. How was that? He appointed us to an independent sphere of existence which is the organization of intelligence. How? By the power of his Spirit.

And the narrative and chronology of the creation scriptures clearly show that Adam and Eve were already married and were given a world and commanded to multiply and replenish it and that they did finish all the hosts thereof before they were put into the Garden of Eden. This was continuation of the seeds both in the world[garden] and out of the world [spirit children]

When Joseph Smith extended his arms for pillow that two men might see the vision of their heavenly parents who did they see? Adam and Eve!

I know LDS people do not think this. They are wrong and have been for a very long time. Get over it.

By what authority do you proclaim your erroneous doctrine? Get over yourself...

[daycat]

By what authority do you proclaim your erroneous doctrine? Get over yourself...

By the authority of being able to read.

Why are you hiding behind a call for authority and others saying ONLY THE PROPHET can read?

Get off your hobby horse thinking you will be a God like our heavenly Father some day.

You fail to feel ashamed. Reading is an awesome responsibility. Do the best you can.