Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

The uniqueness of the LDS Church


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, theplains said:

That's what puzzled me about what McConkie wrote ... that Heavenly Father steps down from his
throne to become the Father of Christ.

McConkie's work has been largely discredited. There was a squabble about the publication of Mormon Doctrine as I recall.

Link to comment
On 3/28/2022 at 4:44 PM, theplains said:

Psalm 41:13  Blessed be the Lord God of Israel from everlasting, and to everlasting. Amen, and Amen.

Psalm 90:2 - Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth 
and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.

Psalm 103:17 - But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that 
fear him, and his righteousness unto children’s children.

Joseph Smith taught otherwise - "In order to understand the subject of the dead, for consolation
of those who mourn for the loss of their friends, 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
." 
(History of the Church, volume 6 - http://www.boap.org/LDS/History/History_of_the_Church/Vol_VI).

For those who accept the Book of Mormon as the word of God, you have Moroni 7:22 and
Mosiah 3:5 (which say God is from eternity to eternity, from everlasting to everlasting).

Well Joseph believed God was from everlasting to everlasting for quite some time. Then he seemed to change his mind and "refuted" the idea.....

Link to comment
On 12/27/2021 at 12:45 PM, theplains said:

I have a question about this Ensign article.

The uniqueness of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rests upon 
several basic principles and ordinances that the world has long forsaken in 
whole or in part. These unique features are taught in the Bible, but through
misinterpretation and misunderstanding they have been gradually deleted from 
the tenets of modern Christianity.

The most important principle, of course, is acceptance of Jesus Christ as the 
literal Son of God and the Savior of the world.

Since this teaching (referred to as the "most important principle") is found in 
the Bible, how does the Book of Mormon explain the phrase "literal Son of God" 
differently than how non-LDS churches believe Jesus is the Only Begotten of the 
Father?  Or is the different understanding of "literal Son of God" also missing 
from the Book of Mormon?

Jim

I think you may be conflating a couple of ideas presented in the article, and this seemingly has gone on for four months so maybe it's time to take a step back. The article  presents two ideas:

The first is that The Book of Mormon is the most correct book; there are several evidences of this.

The second is that The Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion. It accomplishes this in three ways:  1. It restores lost tenets and incorporates them into our religion; the most important tenet is that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world. 2. Not all of splintered Christianity accepts this tenet, and as a second witness to the Bible, the Book of Mormon drives acceptance of the correct belief. 3. It contains tenets pertaining to authority and practice such as ordinances and discipleship and conversion.

While you may believe the bolded part above, much of Christendom does not. You are not a Church member, so obviously this does not require the Book of Mormon to understand -- and that isn’t the point of the article. The point is that as a second witness, the Book of Mormon establishes the truthfulness of the first (the Bible) on this point while Christendom on the whole does not (1 Nephi 13:40).

As to your #1 concern, Luke 1:35 describes a couple of steps: the Holy Ghost sanctifies and quickens Mary, and she is endowed by the priesthood of the Highest. I take these steps to involve ordinances. Later in the chapter, we learn that she anticipates motherhood in due time, and we understand legitimacy requires a marriage. The Magnificat carries elements of bridehood and motherhood. Just because other Christians do not believe as you do on the points of doctrine, authority, practice and  discipleship does not mean the Book of Mormon does not establish the truthfulness of the Bible in testifying that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world. It means you agree with the Church and the Book of Mormon on this point.

Edited by CV75
Link to comment
14 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

McConkie's work has been largely discredited. There was a squabble about the publication of Mormon Doctrine as I recall.

Re: Mc Conkie

https://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=/ci_15137409

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment
On 4/18/2022 at 4:07 PM, mfbukowski said:

From the link it is stated that Mark E. Petersen and Marion G. Romney made a list:

Quote

McKay asked two senior apostles, Mark E. Petersen and Marion G. Romney, to review Mormon Doctrine soon after its release and propose a list of corrections, according to David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism by Gregory Prince and Robert Wright.

Petersen recommended 1,067 changes "that affected most of the 776 pages of the book," the biography says.

McKay feared that if the corrections were made, it would seriously affect McConkie's credibility, so he preferred not to see the book republished at all.

I would love to see that list!

Link to comment
3 hours ago, longview said:

From the link it is stated that Mark E. Petersen and Marion G. Romney made a list:

I would love to see that list!

Oh I am sure that many contribute to the regularly apparent doctrinal conflicts we see on this board- we are still slogging through that muddy legacy.  He learned it all at his father's and grandfather's knee, then preached it as if it was infallible doctrine.  For him, it was- it was what he had learned from his forebearers.

Again, a spiritual giant without doubt, but he sure needed a little more education in the philosophies of men IF he wanted to communicate to real humans and not spirits.  In a sense I think he was TOO innocent in declaring what he earnestly believed were the Laws of God.  And he was a humble man who reversed all he had said about the issues of blacks and the priesthood- in one talk.   Imagine that!   Telling the world that he was wrong, but those words are still out there causing this discussion and hundreds everywhere.

We lived in Utah for a short time and he spoke in our stake while we were there and I shook his hand and heard his testimony and cried like a baby!   I love that man for his spirituality and the direct link he had to God, but he espoused ideas that he had learned, from generation to generation, ideas that little old me happens to disagree with.   I  cannot blame his lack of worldliness - it really was his strength and spirituality and what worked in his life in his construction of his world!!   And the hymns he wrote are breathtaking.

And none of us can do better than that in constructing a life of service and doing the best we can to fill the measure of our creation!   He was a great man who lived an even greater life- and who can do more to live the measure of your creation and have joy therein?

Link to comment
On 4/18/2022 at 11:00 AM, teddyaware said:

Some questions: Do you believe the Lord had DNA and was therefore fully human, or do you believe he was only a partially human humanoid with DNA only from his mother’s side of the family? Do you believe the Lord had sex organs and that they were functional, or do you believe he was a sterile, non sexual being with no seed in his body? (I know I’ve heard many non LDS Christians throughout the years proclaim that Christ was fully human, and for that reason it would be strange to me if the Lord was a non sexual being who never had to learn how to control his naturally occurring sexual drive.) Finally, have you ever heard of artificial insemination?

I have heard of artificial insemination. Jesus is fully God and fully man so yes to some of your
other questions.  I don't believe Heavenly Father is an exalted man.

Link to comment
On 4/18/2022 at 3:56 PM, CV75 said:

The first is that The Book of Mormon is the most correct book; there are several evidences of this.

The second is that The Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion. It accomplishes this in three ways:  1. It restores lost tenets and incorporates them into our religion; the most important tenet is that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world.

How does the Book of Mormon explain literal Son of God and Savior of the world differently
than the Bible?

Link to comment
On 4/18/2022 at 3:56 PM, CV75 said:

2. Not all of splintered Christianity accepts this tenet, and as a second witness to the Bible, the Book of Mormon drives acceptance of the correct belief. 3. It contains tenets pertaining to authority and practice such as ordinances and discipleship and conversion.

Not all splintered LDS groups accept some tenets of the main sect.  From what I have seen, the Book of
Mormon does not contain key tenets as pertaining to what the LDS Church considers the gospel. The Word
of Wisdom, Celestial Marriage, proxy baptism for the dead, second anointing.  There might be others but
these are some of the significant ones I think.

While the previous BOM has included a line in its introduction indicating that the Book of Mormon, as does
the Bible, contains the fulness of the gospel, the newer online version omits this positive statement of the
Bible.

Link to comment
54 minutes ago, theplains said:

How does the Book of Mormon explain literal Son of God and Savior of the world differently
than the Bible?

I’m assuming you believe that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world; if so, of what specifically do you require an explanation, and what kind of explanation? I’m not sure the purest tenets even have explanations, but there is a good deal of prophesy, clarification and expounding in the Book or Mormon on this particular tenet. For example, Christ attests to it as a pre-mortal spirit and as a resurrected being, and also many prophets before and after His birth. All of these are testimonies the Old and New Testaments lost or lack, hence the Book of Mormon contains a fulness of the gospel.

48 minutes ago, theplains said:

Not all splintered LDS groups accept some tenets of the main sect.  From what I have seen, the Book of
Mormon does not contain key tenets as pertaining to what the LDS Church considers the gospel. The Word
of Wisdom, Celestial Marriage, proxy baptism for the dead, second anointing.  There might be others but
these are some of the significant ones I think.

While the previous BOM has included a line in its introduction indicating that the Book of Mormon, as does
the Bible, contains the fulness of the gospel, the newer online version omits this positive statement of the
Bible.

The Church uses the term “gospel” in various ways. You’ll notice the article also uses the term in various ways. What do you mean by "gospel" for the purpose of your question?

The Book of Mormon does attest very often and clearly that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, theplains said:

From what I have seen, the Book of Mormon does not contain key tenets as pertaining to what the LDS Church considers the gospel. The Word of Wisdom, Celestial Marriage, proxy baptism for the dead, second anointing.  There might be others but
these are some of the significant ones I think.

Ironically, most of these things ARE mentioned in the Bible in one degree or another.

1 hour ago, theplains said:

While the previous BOM has included a line in its introduction indicating that the Book of Mormon, as does the Bible, contains the fulness of the gospel, the newer online version omits this positive statement of the Bible.

"The fulness of the gospel" does not now nor ever has meant EVERY doctrinal truth.
It refers to exactly what it says - the gospel, the good word, that Jesus came, paid for our sins, died, and was resurrected.  The atonement and plan of salvation is fully described in both books.
Not every law, ordinance, and doctrine is in every one of the 4 standard works.

Link to comment
On 4/26/2022 at 1:21 PM, CV75 said:

I’m assuming you believe that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world; if so, of what specifically do you require an explanation, and what kind of explanation? I’m not sure the purest tenets even have explanations, but there is a good deal of prophesy, clarification and expounding in the Book or Mormon on this particular tenet.

Yes. I believe Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God but not in a procreative sense.

How does the Book of Mormon clarify this particular tenet?

Link to comment
On 4/26/2022 at 2:24 PM, JLHPROF said:

Ironically, most of these things ARE mentioned in the Bible in one degree or another.

"The fulness of the gospel" does not now nor ever has meant EVERY doctrinal truth.
It refers to exactly what it says - the gospel, the good word, that Jesus came, paid for our sins, died, and was resurrected.  The atonement and plan of salvation is fully described in both books.
Not every law, ordinance, and doctrine is in every one of the 4 standard works.

Why would the church remove the part about the Bible containing the fulness of the gospel from the
newer online Book of Mormon (and possibly the printed version too)?

"It is a record of God’s dealings with ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains, as does the Bible,
the fulness of the everlasting gospel
."

has become

"It is a record of God’s dealings with ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains the fulness of the
everlasting gospel
."

Link to comment
1 hour ago, theplains said:

Yes. I believe Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God but not in a procreative sense.

How does the Book of Mormon clarify this particular tenet?

You keep asking this, but the article only points out that the Book of Mormon is the most correct book and the keystone of our religion as I summarized above. Where is your question coming from? Show me where the article says that the Book of Mormon clarifies that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world, as opposed to bearing to this truth as a second witness, and maybe the discussion can take a constructive turn, including the semantics of the literal nature of eternal matters.

From the article: “The most important principle, of course, is acceptance of Jesus Christ as the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world. To this principle, the Book of Mormon bears a second witness in dozens of instances. Its primary objective is to convince Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God. This correct second witness has become more and more valuable as the world [and Christendom] has increasingly entertained various alternate opinions of Jesus.”

Link to comment
2 hours ago, theplains said:

Yes. I believe Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God but not in a procreative sense.

Fine.

If the Spirit tells you something else, follow the spirit

I get a little squeamish at the idea myself, and lots of things our human prophets have said, especially McConkie and Bro Brigham.

I get squeamish at stuff in the bible, too, like killing off the Canaanites et al. ?

God committed genocide?

So follow the spirit and get baptized already!  ;) :)

IT'S about Jesus Christ, and the atonement not the crazy science interpretations like the sun going around the earth.

Jesus was born of a virgin and is the Son of God.

Don't worry about how God did it, we wouldn't understand it anyway 

It's about WHY it happened not HOW

 

 

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment
6 hours ago, theplains said:

Yes. I believe Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God but not in a procreative sense.

How does the Book of Mormon clarify this particular tenet?

Throughout the years, I’ve repeatedly heard. non-LDS Christians testify that Jesus was “fully human.” Do you believe Jesus was fully human? If you do believe he was fully human, do you believe Jesus had DNA? And if you do believe Jesus had DNA, do you believe he inherited 23 chromosomes from his mother and 23 chromosomes from his Father? If the answer to the last question is no, how could Jesus be fully human if he didn’t genetically inherit 46 chromosomes in his DNA from both his mother and his Father?

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/3/2022 at 9:05 PM, teddyaware said:

Throughout the years, I’ve repeatedly heard. non-LDS Christians testify that Jesus was “fully human.” Do you believe Jesus was fully human? If you do believe he was fully human, do you believe Jesus had DNA? And if you do believe Jesus had DNA, do you believe he inherited 23 chromosomes from his mother and 23 chromosomes from his Father? If the answer to the last question is no, how could Jesus be fully human if he didn’t genetically inherit 46 chromosomes in his DNA from both his mother and his Father?

God's ways are above our ways.  He is fully God and fully man.  He is not part God from Heavenly Father
and part man from Mary.

Link to comment
On 5/3/2022 at 3:22 PM, CV75 said:

You keep asking this, but the article only points out that the Book of Mormon is the most correct book and the keystone of our religion as I summarized above. Where is your question coming from? Show me where the article says that the Book of Mormon clarifies that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world, as opposed to bearing to this truth as a second witness, and maybe the discussion can take a constructive turn, including the semantics of the literal nature of eternal matters.

From the article: “The most important principle, of course, is acceptance of Jesus Christ as the literal Son of God and the Savior of the world. To this principle, the Book of Mormon bears a second witness in dozens of instances. Its primary objective is to convince Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God. This correct second witness has become more and more valuable as the world [and Christendom] has increasingly entertained various alternate opinions of Jesus.”

The June 1984 Ensign article says

The uniqueness of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rests upon several basic principles and
ordinances that the world has long forsaken in whole or in part. These unique features are taught in the Bible,
but through misinterpretation and misunderstanding they have been gradually deleted from the tenets of
modern Christianity.

The most important principle, of course, is acceptance of Jesus Christ as the literal Son of God and the
Savior of the world.

How does the Book of Mormon explain the phrase "literal Son of God" so there is no misrepresentation
and misunderstanding if one reads the Bible?

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, theplains said:

God's ways are above our ways.  He is fully God and fully man.  He is not part God from Heavenly Father
and part man from Mary.

Another question: The Son of God’s mother could only supply his body with 23 of the 46 chromosomes he needed in order to be fully human,. This being the case, where did the other 23 human chromosomes come from that completed his DNA and made him fully human?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

Do you believe the earthly body of the Son of God was anatomically correct? 

Yes.

31 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

Another question: The Son of God’s mother could only supply his body with 23 of the 46 chromosomes he needed in order to be fully human,. This being the case, where did the other 23 human chromosomes come from that completed his DNA and made him fully human?

Do you believe in miracles? Or does this most sacred event (the Incarnation of God) have to have a scientific explanation and match our understanding of biology?

Link to comment
3 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Yes.

Do you believe in miracles? Or does this most sacred event (the Incarnation of God) have to have a scientific explanation and match our understanding of biology?

Do you believe that the earthly body of the Son of God had DNA,  as does every other human body, and that his mother supplied his body’s DNA with 23 chromosomes, and that his Father (in some way yet to be revealed) provided his body with the other 23 chromosomes needed in order to make the Son of God fully human? If not, how could the Son of God be fully human, with the necessary inclusion of a male reproductive system, if he was somehow  human but without human DNA?

Edited by teddyaware
Link to comment
26 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

Do you believe that the earthly body of the Son of God had DNA,  as does every other human body

Sure.

26 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

and that his mother supplied his body’s DNA with 23 chromosomes

I don't know if this is how it worked.

27 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

and that his Father (in some way yet revealed) provided his  body with the other 23 chromosomes needed in order to make the Son of God fully human?

No, I don't believe that Christ is the biological son of God.

29 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

If not, how could the Son of God be fully human

People with Down's Syndrome do not have exactly 46 chromosomes. Do you consider them fully human, or are we 46 only?

To answer your question, it is a miracle. I do not know Jesus' chromosome count, source, or DNA make-up. I do not need to know it. He was 100% human and 100% God (which is also a miracle).

31 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

with the necessary inclusion of a male reproductive system

Why have you focused on this twice now? It's pretty clear that Jesus was a man. I don't think that's a controversy.

I'm not sure why we try to apply science and biology to Jesus, whose whole life is a miracle. Are you going to use science to explain the atonement? The resurrection?

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...