The Seven Deadly Heresies

[Billy the Law]

Yes he took it upon himself, but he still plays an essential role.  There must be opposition in all things.  Even Brigham Young conceded that Satan plays an essential role -- doesn't mean we should feel sorry for him though.

I still get the feeling that satan is like "Slugworth" in the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie (old one) whenever I think of the plan of salv. in its entirety. Maybe he's just a really nice guy that's is doing an excellent job at playing his role...superior acting skills.

Edited September 28, 2013 by Billy the Law

[Tacenda]

I wonder if Christianity is not a true church but a relationship with Christ. And Mormons believe in Christ but want to do one better and become as He is, not just have good attributes. But be a God, and it was a secret just like Freemasonry. And we are either pretty smart for catching on or we are going to have to do some explaining to why we believed Satan over God.

Edited September 28, 2013 by Tacenda

[JLHPROF]

I don't beleive the Fall HAD to happen. God certainly allowed for it. God also provided a way for A&E, along with their sons and daughters, to repent.

 

The first half of that couplet simply says that: As man is God once was... I think we get far into conjecture and speculation when we go beyond the example Jesus set.

 

Because Lucifer wanted all the glory, and to replace God with himself.

 

Well of course the fall had to happen.  How else would God have given us MORTAL bodies capable of death and resurrection?

The fall was always part of the plan from before the foundation of the world.  God makes a world for his spirit children.  Adam and Eve make them mortal, the chosen Savior provides the path back to immortality.  This is how God brings to pass our immortality and eternal life - his entire work.  No fall, no Savior and we know he was chosen BEFORE the Earth was.

The fall was not sin or mistake, but it was part of the plan from before the beginning.

 

(And sorry about the error on the Lorenzo Snow, I meant the BOM quote - Adam fell that man might be, men are that they have joy).

Edited September 28, 2013 by JLHPROF

[JLHPROF]

 

Heresy one: There are those who say that God is progressing in knowledge and is learning new truths.

This is likely a heresy. Though I kind of think it would get kind of boring to know everything. They quest for knowledge is half the fun. But I don't know everything so I don't know what it's like.

 

1. It's not a heresy.  It is illogical and nonsensical to imagine an end to information or that any being who started off as we did is in possession of all the knowledge there could ever be.  That's why Brigham and Orson nearly came to blows over it.  Orson couldn't let go of his sectarian upbringing of a God that had always existed and therefore knew everything.  He held on to his false traditions and apparently BRM agreed with him over Brigham.

 

Heresy Three: There are those who say that temple marriage assures us of an eventual exaltation. Some have supposed that couples married in the temple who commit all manner of sin, and who then pay the penalty, will gain their exaltation eventually.

D&C 132 may seem to insinuate this idea. But I can see good arguments against it. Anyone have any research regarding the early church's view towards this idea?

 

2. D&C 132 verse on this "heresy" refers to those who have had their higher ordinances, possibly even their calling and election - hence the Holy Spirit of Promise qualifier.  Marriage alone doesn't assure exaltation.  BRM is right on this one.

 

Heresy five: There are those who say that there is progression from one kingdom to another in the eternal worlds or that lower kingdoms eventually progress to where higher kingdoms once were.

To be fair, I think that BRM may have be clarifying that we don't know and it's a heresy to teach it as if you do know. I personally can't see a loving heavenly Father not allowing this. Eternity is a long time and life there are so many uncertainties in life. I would feel like a crappy dad if I put my children in a situation where so much depended on so little knowledge. Though, to let people know that they can progress to a higher kingdom might incentive poor living.

 

3. I could agree that we don't know exactly how this works, but I do believe that progression is eternal - you either progress or regress, no standing still.  And the D&C states clearly that the Higher Kingdoms minister to the lower Kingdoms.  The only purpose that can have would be to further their progression.  I disagree strongly that this is a heresy.  If we make their end state finite eventually they would have filled every requirement, made every action a million times, become absolutely the most perfect Terrestrial beings ever with no flaws at that level.  There simply has to be somewhere for them to go next, even if we don't know exactly what it is.

 

Heresy six: There are those who believe or say they believe that Adam is our father and our god, that he is the father of our spirits and our bodies, and that he is the one we worship.

I think this is just clean up after the category five hurricane known as Brigham Young swept through LDS doctrine. BY either taught or his scribes continuously did a bad job of portraying his teachings. Its teachings like this that make the "a prophet is only a prophet when he is speaking like a prophet" policy very convenient. 

 

4. Agree or disagree with the doctrine, but Brigham Young DID teach this, across the pulpit, in over 15 separate discourses/council meetings, and it was part of the Temple Endowment.  Whether we think it is true or not (heresy), it WAS official Church doctrine for about a couple of decades.  Claiming it was just an opinion he expressed once or was misquoted doesn't acknowledge how integrated into Church doctrine it was for a while.

[Billy the Law]

Also, I'm not sure how a guy who had a book recalled by the first presidency feels qualified to discourse on what he considers heresies. BRM was a piece of work. 

[Rivers]

Also, I'm not sure how a guy who had a book recalled by the first presidency feels qualified to discourse on what he considers heresies. BRM was a piece of work. 

And it doesn't look like we'll be getting another like him anytime soon.

[Stone holm]

Heresy one: There are those who say that God is progressing in knowledge and is learning new truths.

This is likely a heresy. Though I kind of think it would get kind of boring to know everything. They quest for knowledge is half the fun. But I don't know everything so I don't know what it's like.

 

1. It's not a heresy.  It is illogical and nonsensical to imagine an end to information or that any being who started off as we did is in possession of all the knowledge there could ever be.  That's why Brigham and Orson nearly came to blows over it.  Orson couldn't let go of his sectarian upbringing of a God that had always existed and therefore knew everything.  He held on to his false traditions and apparently BRM agreed with him over Brigham.

 

Heresy Three: There are those who say that temple marriage assures us of an eventual exaltation. Some have supposed that couples married in the temple who commit all manner of sin, and who then pay the penalty, will gain their exaltation eventually.

D&C 132 may seem to insinuate this idea. But I can see good arguments against it. Anyone have any research regarding the early church's view towards this idea?

 

2. D&C 132 verse on this "heresy" refers to those who have had their higher ordinances, possibly even their calling and election - hence the Holy Spirit of Promise qualifier.  Marriage alone doesn't assure exaltation.  BRM is right on this one.

 

Heresy five: There are those who say that there is progression from one kingdom to another in the eternal worlds or that lower kingdoms eventually progress to where higher kingdoms once were.

To be fair, I think that BRM may have be clarifying that we don't know and it's a heresy to teach it as if you do know. I personally can't see a loving heavenly Father not allowing this. Eternity is a long time and life there are so many uncertainties in life. I would feel like a crappy dad if I put my children in a situation where so much depended on so little knowledge. Though, to let people know that they can progress to a higher kingdom might incentive poor living.

 

3. I could agree that we don't know exactly how this works, but I do believe that progression is eternal - you either progress or regress, no standing still.  And the D&C states clearly that the Higher Kingdoms minister to the lower Kingdoms.  The only purpose that can have would be to further their progression.  I disagree strongly that this is a heresy.  If we make their end state finite eventually they would have filled every requirement, made every action a million times, become absolutely the most perfect Terrestrial beings ever with no flaws at that level.  There simply has to be somewhere for them to go next, even if we don't know exactly what it is.

 

Heresy six: There are those who believe or say they believe that Adam is our father and our god, that he is the father of our spirits and our bodies, and that he is the one we worship.

I think this is just clean up after the category five hurricane known as Brigham Young swept through LDS doctrine. BY either taught or his scribes continuously did a bad job of portraying his teachings. Its teachings like this that make the "a prophet is only a prophet when he is speaking like a prophet" policy very convenient. 

 

4. Agree or disagree with the doctrine, but Brigham Young DID teach this, across the pulpit, in over 15 separate discourses/council meetings, and it was part of the Temple Endowment.  Whether we think it is true or not (heresy), it WAS official Church doctrine for about a couple of decades.  Claiming it was just an opinion he expressed once or was misquoted doesn't acknowledge how integrated into Church doctrine it was for a while.

Heresy three. The Brethren have repeatedly said that Temple Marriage still requires a righteous life and repentance for wrong doing. At one time, however, I was of the opinion that if a person was sealed in the Temple and committed a serious sin, that even if they repented in this life and had their blessings restored that they were still consigned to hell until the resurrection. However, CASteinman indicated that such only applied if the person had received the Second Annointing. That was the first time that I had ever heard of the second Annointing but it immediately clicked as sound doctrine. Unfortunately, have not seen CASteinman on the board for a long time, I miss arguing with him.

[thesometimesaint]

Also, I'm not sure how a guy who had a book recalled by the first presidency feels qualified to discourse on what he considers heresies. BRM was a piece of work. 

 

Lest anyone misunderstand I deeply admire and respect BRM. But he is not the decider of LDS thought.

[Stone holm]

Lest anyone misunderstand I deeply admire and respect BRM. But he is not the decider of LDS thought.

That may not be the case now, but he was for quite a long while for quite a few Mormons

[thesometimesaint]

Take what is good and true. Discard the rest. I can only hope to be the scriptorian he was. His last public testamony still brings me to tears.

[Damien the Leper]

What were the explicit instructions give to Adam and Eve to gain knowledge in the Genesis narrative? Anything outside of the narrative doesn't really count.

 

 

See Genesis 3:22

 

I quoted my question and issued a CFR. Your answer does not answer the question nor does it even come close to a reasonable answer.