As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_zeezrom
_Emeritus
Posts: 11938
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:57 pm

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _zeezrom »

harmony wrote:When you put old men on the throne, you get old ideas. Forgetfulness. Confusion.

Hi Harmony,

Have you ever considered joining a church where women and men (old and young) hold positions of authority? It seems you would be pretty happy there. Maybe since you have been so accommodating for DH, he could do the same for you?

Just curious.

Zee.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)

The Holy Sacrament.
_zeezrom
_Emeritus
Posts: 11938
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:57 pm

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _zeezrom »

I lost track of why it is so scary to believe God was once a man. Can someone remind me why people hold an aversion to this idea?

Is it because it means there was a God before God? What's so bad about that?
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)

The Holy Sacrament.
_stemelbow
_Emeritus
Posts: 5872
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:40 pm

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _stemelbow »

Themis wrote:I have no idea what unintentional lying would be. Lying is knowing what you are saying is not true. The very definition is that it is intentional.


Pep pep...good point. I didn't explain my thinking on that. I'd say it goes like this, he was caught off guard, didn't really know how to explain it or how to put it, wished to make it easy on himself and make the religion appear nice. So he did his best to meet those type of purposes. He fibbed. He didn't come out and say the teaching or idea was wrong so it wasn't necessarily some straight up lie. It was merely him making it appear the teaching in question wasn't that big a deal for LDS.

Then you do not understand LDS teachings about repentance when it come to restitution. I suggest you read up on it. You can start here http://LDS.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?locale=0&sourceId=51969daac5d98010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=bbd508f54922d010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD


Oh come on...What in this link suggests I'm wrong. Lets not fight about whether you know more than me. Let's discuss it.

You admitted he lied. We both agree on that. Lying is intentional. Remember It's not a lie if YOU believe it. Grosskreutz


Indeed. I admitted it, from my perspective. And I don't make a fuss about one man's lie. That's probably true too. Normally I simply like to be positive and forgiving of people.
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
_stemelbow
_Emeritus
Posts: 5872
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:40 pm

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _stemelbow »

Quasimodo wrote:It wasn't an "oopssie". It was an intentional attempt to misdirect. He knew that this belief would be denounced by most Christians and tried to hide it. If he was a true believer, shouldn't he have been proud of the Church's doctrines?

PR over piety. I don't think he was a TBM.


I think even lies and misdirections can be considered oopssies. He was perhaps caught a little off-guard and tried to make things appear different then they are for some reason, any reason. Oppsie. he could very well have taken a different tack. I don't see the purpose of worrying about it now, though.
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _Runtu »

stemelbow wrote:Because they don't have anything to do with the topic of the thread. But, I get his point more clearly now. He wishes to discuss whether Hinckley lied frequently or not. Even if he lied three or four times, it hardly means he lies a lot. And I don't wish to discuss every instance in which DJ thinks he lied. Not really something I"m interested in.


Well, I have to agree with DJ that he was just responding to your statement that Gordon Hinckley wasn't the kind of man who would lie. Everyone lies, even prophets, sometimes.

As for the OP, I was a little taken aback when he made that statement originally. But I thought his reference to it in the following conference was just plain odd. He didn't say, "I misspoke" or "I was misquoted or misunderstood." He said, as I recall, "Don't worry about me. I know the doctrines of the church." Struck me as weird at the time.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_AtticusFinch
_Emeritus
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:48 am

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _AtticusFinch »

Hinkley lied. Bottom line. Just as he lied to investigators during Hoffman debacle.

Mormons taught God was once a sinful man and have spent the last many years trying to distance themselves from that awful doctrine.
“What really goes on in the minds of Church leadership who know of the the truth. It would devastate the Church if a top leader were to announce the facts.” Thomas Ferguson, Mormon archaeologist
_stemelbow
_Emeritus
Posts: 5872
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:40 pm

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _stemelbow »

Everyone lies, even prophets, sometimes.


That was my point long ago in this thread. that's why I don't see the big deal in trying to make this all about a lie.

Struck me as weird at the time.


Indeed. And it very well could have been another mistake by ol' Hinckley. I've already agreed to that posibility in this thread too, just so you know.
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
_stemelbow
_Emeritus
Posts: 5872
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:40 pm

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _stemelbow »

AtticusFinch wrote:Hinkley lied. Bottom line. Just as he lied to investigators during Hoffman debacle.

Mormons taught God was once a sinful man and have spent the last many years trying to distance themselves from that awful doctrine.


I don't know about trying to distance themselves part. and I woudln't just say its awful because some other Chrisitians assume sa much. but that is just me.
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
_Quasimodo
_Emeritus
Posts: 11784
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:11 am

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _Quasimodo »

stemelbow wrote:I don't see the purpose of worrying about it now, though.


There are some very good reasons to be concerned about it.

If the President and Prophet of the Church is more concerned about perceptions than he is about the tenets of his Church, why should the average member believe those tenets? This was the number one Mormon and he was denying his own beliefs. What does that say about the religion in general?

A very good reason not to be a member. I think it has had that effect to some degree.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
_stemelbow
_Emeritus
Posts: 5872
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:40 pm

Re: As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.

Post by _stemelbow »

Quasimodo wrote:There are some very good reasons to be concerned about it.

If the President and Prophet of the Church is more concerned about perceptions than he is about the tenets of his Church, why should the average member believe those tenets?


I don't think this instance proves he was more concerned about perceptions than he was about the tenets of his Church. Indeed he did not deny the whole concept altogether. He just realizes its a confusing, even among many members, questionable idea. He tried...and all these years laters its still something to fuss about. Ooppss...that attempt at PR failed him, it seems.

This was the number one Mormon and he was denying his own beliefs. What does that say about the religion in general?


Nothing really, at least in my view. He wasn't denying the belief...he denied that it was a teaching per se. He was trying to minimize it as some standard LDS fare.

A very good reason not to be a member. I think it has had that effect to some degree.


And some people will not agree with your conclusion here--that its a good reason not to be a member. So we'll still have members. Complaining about it now, isn't going to work, I think.
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
Post Reply