Jump to content

God the Father was a Savior


Larry nance

Recommended Posts

God the Father was a Savior on his planet:

Three prophets and two general authorities said absolutely No!. It is false Doctrine.No room for discussion.  The   problem  is with the scripture ' Jesus said: I do nothing save I ave see my Father do'

Pres. John Taylor and Brigham Young received this revelation just after Joseph did.  It scared Taylor so he ran over to ask Youngi if  it true".  Brigham said yes, it is true, but do not mention it to anyone until Joseph makes i known to Churc.h.

Contrary to those who believed Joseph coined the phrase that  'As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become'. It was Pres. Taylor that coined it.  When Joseph in Teachings of the JOseph Smith,  he added  that God The Father was an ordinary may and embraced the gospel and listened to his Father in Heaven and was Exalted like we would like to be.." IT is eternal principle that has been goining on fo ever - without beginning.  Joseph saed there has always been people who were in a cycle to becoming gods.  Internity is without beginning and without end.  Then he said this is a great secret!!! What is the secret?  It is not blasphmy to say' if God could do it, so can we! He was not a savoir or had any speical talents that we do not have.     President Packer and Neil Maxwell stated  publicaly in talks.  "That it was a false doctrine to believe the God-Savior platform. "There is no scripture present or past,;, no statement  from any prophet living or dead to give credance to that false teaching.'   Hope that helps... YOu can look up the sites.   I did. Background: I am 75 and have study everything or 10,000 hours since I was 12.  Read every word of every prophet living and dead. Went to hundreds of Education week lectures and Know your religion ( outside of Utah since I was 14. I was ordaind a Seventy by Elder Packard  1971 and was told in my ordination paryer that I was to speakout agains false doctrine where I found it.  A scary thing happened 6 year ago when I called out a great guy with lots of knowledge.  After Preiesthood meeting he tried to kill me!!! Recenly, this doctrine rose its ugly head in priestood meeting.  The statement was intimated, but was short of stating it, I stated that God the Father was no savior, but the person  was addiment  and did not want to duscuss it, but just said "let it go!! He is a great guy too.  So I did not aurgue it  to have peace in the meeting  and not decention (Satan is the author of all decention!  I really don't want any arguments on this.  I have known the above  for 40 years .but I do have 1,000's files on every gospel subject, and a system for organizing all your  notes and papers so you can find anything instantly and give any talk  subject, all in the same place!   I grew up with no computer so I had to type things out, include the 18 volumes of the Nibley series. In Brazil, I taught the High priests which had 4 mission Presidents and 2 general authorities... I was fabulous...l Thank for your attention.  Like the Mormon forum to share... 
"

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Larry nance said:

God the Father was a Savior on his planet:

Three prophets and two general authorities said absolutely No!. It is false Doctrine.No room for discussion.  The   problem  is with the scripture ' Jesus said: I do nothing save I ave see my Father do'

Pres. John Taylor and Brigham Young received this revelation just after Joseph did.  It scared Taylor so he ran over to ask Youngi if  it true".  Brigham said yes, it is true, but do not mention it to anyone until Joseph makes i known to Churc.h.

Contrary to those who believed Joseph coined the phrase that  'As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become'. It was Pres. Taylor that coined it.  When Joseph in Teachings of the JOseph Smith,  he added  that God The Father was an ordinary may and embraced the gospel and listened to his Father in Heaven and was Exalted like we would like to be.." IT is eternal principle that has been goining on fo ever - without beginning.  Joseph saed there has always been people who were in a cycle to becoming gods.  Internity is without beginning and without end.  Then he said this is a great secret!!! What is the secret?  It is not blasphmy to say' if God could do it, so can we! He was not a savoir or had any speical talents that we do not have.     President Packer and Neil Maxwell stated  publicaly in talks.  "That it was a false doctrine to believe the God-Savior platform. "There is no scripture present or past,;, no statement  from any prophet living or dead to give credance to that false teaching.'   Hope that helps... YOu can look up the sites.   I did. Background: I am 75 and have study everything or 10,000 hours since I was 12.  Read every word of every prophet living and dead. Went to hundreds of Education week lectures and Know your religion ( outside of Utah since I was 14. I was ordaind a Seventy by Elder Packard  1971 and was told in my ordination paryer that I was to speakout agains false doctrine where I found it.  A scary thing happened 6 year ago when I called out a great guy with lots of knowledge.  After Preiesthood meeting he tried to kill me!!! Recenly, this doctrine rose its ugly head in priestood meeting.  The statement was intimated, but was short of stating it, I stated that God the Father was no savior, but the person  was addiment  and did not want to duscuss it, but just said "let it go!! He is a great guy too.  So I did not aurgue it  to have peace in the meeting  and not decention (Satan is the author of all decention!  I really don't want any arguments on this.  I have known the above  for 40 years .but I do have 1,000's files on every gospel subject, and a system for organizing all your  notes and papers so you can find anything instantly and give any talk  subject, all in the same place!   I grew up with no computer so I had to type things out, include the 18 volumes of the Nibley series. In Brazil, I taught the High priests which had 4 mission Presidents and 2 general authorities... I was fabulous...l Thank for your attention.  Like the Mormon forum to share... 
"

So basically you don't believe Heavenly Father was a Savior on his earth.  And you REALLY don't believe the Grand Order of Saviors doctrine.
Fair enough.

But your post is full of errors either way.  It was Lorenzo Snow, not John Taylor that coined the phrase "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become"
And there are teachings from numerous prophets that Heavenly Father was and was not a Savior on his world.  Which means the truth probably hasn't been revealed yet so it is all speculation.

Link to comment
29 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is very important.  The mysteries, not so much.  In fact, the mysteries can be a major problem for some, and can create controversy and division in the Church.  So, by all means discuss them here, but don't broach them at church.

I do believe this.  
But I also believe
"A man is saved no faster than he gets knowledge, for if he does not get knowledge, he will be brought into captivity by some evil power in the other world, as evil spirits will have more knowledge, and consequently more power than many men who are on the earth. "
AND
"“Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection. And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.”
https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-22?lang=eng

Be careful with the mysteries doesn't mean we don't study and learn as much about the gospel as we can.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Larry nance said:

 I am 75 and have study everything or 10,000 hours since I was 12.

After Preiesthood meeting he tried to kill me!!!

In Brazil, I taught the High priests which had 4 mission Presidents and 2 general authorities... I was fabulous...l Thank for your attention.  

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTi2J_gWILTXgg6At5Mi17

75 minus 12 means 63 years of studying the gospel. 10,000 hours divided by 63 and you get about 158.7 hours a year. That is less then a half hour reading the scriptures a day many apostles have recommended......amateur.

And someone tried to kill you for talking about a nebulous point of doctrine of almost no practical importance?

Oh, and anyone who thinks they are a fabulous teacher and brags about the 'high rank' of those who attended their class is probably insufferable. Just saying......

Edited by The Nehor
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Similar Content

    • By mfbukowski
      One of my favorite daily rituals is reading "First Things" a daily commentary on religion which I nearly always find to be thought provoking and sometimes even profound.
      I found today's publication particularly interesting https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2018/01/the-catholic-church-doesnt-do-paradigm-shifts
      It discusses Kuhn's idea of "paradigm shifts" and the relevance of that idea to Catholicism, and by extension, I would like to apply it to Mormonism as well.  I will presume that most here are at least somewhat familiar with the notion of "paradigm shifts", and if you are not, just consult the article itself which gives a pretty fair if very brief explanation of the general idea of what a paradigm shift is.
      The author makes the point that as thoughts and ideas about the nature of the world shift, Catholicism seems to be in trouble because it has no internal mechanism to account for altering doctrines to fit changes in beliefs among its adherents.
      On the other hand, there have been a few threads touching on "objective truth" which does not change and how that is interpreted in Mormonism.   It seems to me that in Mormonism we have a mechanism to allow for paradigm shifts- the belief that we have the "true and living church" which is based on personal revelation.  We also have an open canon as most recently manifested by the Proclamation on the Family- a document which has not yet been canonized, but has certainly been treated as if it has been.  We have other examples as well of changing doctrine found in shifts in the practices of polygamy and of African Americans holding the priesthood.
      So it seems we are open to change whereas the Catholics are not.
      But are we really?  From the article regarding the Catholic view of doctrine:
      And the article continues discussing the fallout from the use of the term "paradigm shift".
      With our alleged "open canon" and belief in ongoing revelation are WE really ready for "paradigm shifts" or in practice are we having trouble with the idea just as Catholicism is??
      SHOULD we be more flexible?  We supposedly have the mechanisms in place, but do we really?
    • By hope_for_things
      I'm a big fan of Pope Francis, and it seems like he keeps making statements and implementing policies that are so important and prophetic for our time.  I really think he's an inspired leader, and sometimes he says something that just strikes me as so Mormon, its amazing.  I was thinking about this quote from a recent speech and I'm contrasting this with the statements that we hear from some of our church leaders recently about doctrines that will "never change". 
      I think the Pope sounds more Mormon than many of our current leaders to, when it comes to espousing a foundational Mormon doctrine (Article of faith #9) about continuing revelation.  
      http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2017/10/11/pope_francis_the_dynamic_word_of_god_cannot_be_moth-balled/1342352
      The Pope is leading the way in our troubled world.  Thoughts?  
    • By Mormons Talk
      Question about the Temple. In your responses, please uphold the sacred nature of the temple, and guidelines from the Church and this forum for discussing temple related matters. My questions are:
      (1) Is everything in the Temple ceremony "doctrine," or does doctrine "reside" in the temple ceremony much like it does in the scriptures (see Mormon Newsroom paragraph below)?
      (2) In reference to the paragraph below, does ALL doctrine reside somewhere in (i) the 4 standard works; (ii) official declarations and proclamations; and (iii) the Articles of Faith?  If not, can we create a list of things that DO contain ALL doctrine (recognizing that this list might also contain many non-doctrinal elements)?
      My reference point is the article "Approaching Mormon Doctrine" found at http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine.  It states, in part, "Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency(the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted."
      Interestingly, I do not find any mention of the temple in this article on Mormon Doctrine - perhaps it was omitted inadvertently. 
    • By mfbukowski
      I thought this was an excellent essay for those a faith crisis, and goes to the root of what many are learning here, and what many here have not yet learned, but should learn- that Mormonism is highly flexible in terms of acceptable "doctrine" and encourages us to find our own ways within the church.
      I have been a member 36 years and have never felt pressured about my perhaps non-traditional views.  Perhaps those raised as children in the church may feel differently, but frankly this essay captures precisely the feelings of those I know who have had a faith crisis and have returned.  It's a gem.
      http://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2016/03/how-i-failed-my-mormon-sabbatical/
    • By stephenpurdy
      I am a convert to the LDS church.  I was agnostic in my teenage years and began investigating Mormonism while in college.  I was very skeptical of organized religion.  When approached by my religious family members, I would tell them,
       
      "Why would God create me, and when I turn out to be defective or insufficient, He punishes me for not being good enough?  It is nonsense for God to punish me for being who and what God created me to be."
       
      Unfortunately, those who I said this to had no good answers for this logical response.  I will explain in more detail why this argument was so convincing, but in the mean time, I wanted to enter the discussion by referring to an old article in the Harvard Theological review, which I am sure that many of you all will appreciate.
       
      - - -  - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
       
      THE LOGIC OF BIBLICAL ANTHROPOMORPHISM
      In the Harvard Theological Review (Vol. 55, 1962)
       
      http://www.philosophy-religion.org/cherbonnier/logic-bible.htm
       
       
      This was followed up by another article, also written by Cherbonnier: 
      In Defense of Anthropomorphismhttp://rsc.byu.edu/archived/reflections-mormonism-judaeo-christian-parallels/9-defense-anthropomorphism
       
       
      - - - - - - -  - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - -  - - - - - -  - - - - - -
       
      This is not just about Anthropomorphism.  It is about the nature of God.  It is about the nature of existence, the nature of the Universe / Multiverse.  It is about the nature of man and our relationship with God.
       
      -Stephen
×
×
  • Create New...