The Book of Mormon contridicts Mormonism

[_ludwigm]

Joseph Smith taught: “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” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 345–46).

Again, I take it that neither of you can provide for me the words that fit in after this: " He was once a man like us; …"

Please tell me. What was said right after that? What was taken out of that quote?

While I let you look that up, consider the following:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
... some blabber about reinterpeting the word "god" ...

-7up

God an Exalted Man
Section Six 1843-44, p.345

I will go back to the beginning before the world was, to show what kind of being God is. What sort of a being was God in the beginning? Open your ears and hear, all ye ends of the earth, for I am going to prove it to you by the Bible, and to tell you the designs of God in relation to the human race, and why He interferes with the affairs of man.

God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible,--I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form--like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with another.

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.

These are incomprehensible ideas to some, but they are simple. It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did; and I will show it from the Bible.

Power of the Father and the Son
Section Six 1843-44, p.346

I wish I was in a suitable place to tell it, and that I had the Trump of an archangel, so that I could tell the story in such a manner that persecution would cease for ever. What did Jesus say? (Mark it, Elder Rigdon!) The Scriptures inform us that Jesus said, As the Father hath power in Himself, even so hath the Son power--to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious--in a manner to lay down His body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again. Do we believe it? I you do not believe it, you do not believe the Bible.2 The Scriptures say it, and I defy all the learning and wisdom and all the combined powers of earth and hell together to refute it.

Here, then, is eternal life--to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power. And I want you to know that God, in the last days, while certain individuals are proclaiming his name, is not trifling with you or me.

From http://www.boap.org/LDS/Joseph-Smith/Teachings/ :
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith
Compiled by Joseph Fielding Smith and the church historian's staff


Another reference - see all the sources below
http://www.boap.org/LDS/Parallel/1844/7Apr44-copy.html :
Sermon delivered at the funeral of King Follett held at the General Conference of the Church at Nauvoo, Ill. on Sunday Afternoon April 7, 1844.

Sources: Joseph Smith diary (Willard Richards), Samuel W. Richards record, Thomas Bullock report, Wilford Woodruff journal, William Clayton report, George Laub record and Thomas Bullock's official conference minutes compiled from his and Clayton's minutes and published in Times and Seasons, 5 (August 15, 1844)

It can not be copypasted to here, because of width and multicolumn view.

[_Bazooka]

Joseph Smith taught: “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” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 345–46).

Again, I take it that neither of you can provide for me the words that fit in after this: " He was once a man like us; …"

Please tell me. What was said right after that (and before it)? What was taken out of that quote? What was the context?

Why are you asking me? It's a quote from a Church manual - if you disagree with it or think it's intellectually dishonest take it up with your Bishop.

While I let you look that up, consider the following:

I did look it up, I even quoted it verbatim from the Church manual I looked it up in. Now what?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The term “gods” is used in at least 3 different ways in scripture.

1) God (as in Elohim – the plural Hebrew term which refers to the true God and is used to describe the Deity of the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit)

2 ) men who have been given authority to act and judge on behalf of God or in the name of God

3) false gods (false idols)

So, often LDS are accused of believing in the “plurality of gods”, which is true in a certain sense, but it is a loaded statement; one that needs to be explained in much more detail.

My understanding of “polytheism” is a system of worship whereby one worships a different being depending on what they are looking for. If you want help with your crops, you worship that god. If you want help with war, you worship another god. Etc.

Mormons will say they “worship God the Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit” and that is how they worship, period. I don't think that is the same as polytheism. I suppose that Henotheism is an acceptable term for Mormons, especially when you consider the 3 different scriptural uses for the term "gods" seen above as well as other aspects of Mormon theology.

LDS will also say that even though each of these persons are distinct individual beings, “these three are one God.” Therefore, I believe that being “one God” is not meant to be taken as a literal “metaphysical oneness of being”. Nor is it meant to say that no other persons exist who can hold the title of god. Scripture says they can.

-7up

*sigh*
Did you miss the bit where I pointed out that the intellectual dishonesty you were challenging was the Church's, not mine?
(You owe me either an apology or proof that what I quoted was me, Bazooka, being intellectually dishonest, as opposed to me, Bazooka quoting the Church being, from your perspective, intellectually dishonest).

Let me help you grasp that awkward realisation.

For the point(s) you are trying to make along the lines of "God was once a man..." does not mean that God was once a man like us, or that we can become God's like God - please show us from official Church sources (FAIR is not an official Church source) where your definition and explanations are accepted as doctrinally correct.

Here is the link to the relevant section of the Gospel Principles manual
http://www.LDS.org/manual/gospel-princi ... n?lang=eng

Let's see if you have the intellectual honesty to recognise your errant criticism of me and the moral minerals to acknowledge it....

[Guest]

(quotes the full context)

Thank you ludwigm. By posting the whole thing, you reminded me of another portion which reinforces my point. First note that we are in the context of Christ's power of resurrection in John Chapter 5 verse 24-26, which states:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself"

Now, Joseph Smith says this in the King Follett discourse:

"Scriptures inform us that Jesus said, As the Father hath power in Himself, even so hath the Son power--to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious--in a manner to lay down His body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again."

Here is how I understand LDS doctrine on this subject:

In the planning of this universe, Christ was spiritually perfect, and was therefore Deity by nature. Under the direction of God the Father, Jesus created all things in this universe. Jesus was perfectly obedient to the Father in all things, acting as the “Angel of God's presence” or “Yahwheh/Jehovah” or “Lord” of the old testament and was obedient to the Father including being sent into mortality to become a man; this is known by many as the incarnation. Jesus was born after a real pregnancy, grew up as a real child, and grew up to be a real flesh and blood man, and in that sense, was “like us” as a spirit son of God dwelling in a mortal body and experiencing the trials that we face in mortality (and more so). After the atonement and death, Jesus resurrected to stand again at the right hand of the Father in an exalted state.

Now, when Mormons say God the Father was “once a man” or “as man is, God once was”, they are referring to it in the same sense that Jesus was a man. This is the explanation for why “the Father has a body of flesh and bones, the Son also; the Holy Spirit is a personage of spirit”.

How I see it is this: God the Father may have been the “Christ” of another universe. In that creation, God the Father was once God the Son and, in the words of Joseph Smith, the God of us all “lived on an Earth, even as Jesus Christ himself did.” Also, the discourse says:

"What did Jesus do? Why, I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence. My Father worked out His kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom, I shall present it to My Father, so that He may obtain kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt Him in glory. He will then take a higher exaltation, and I will take His place, and thereby become exalted myself. So that Jesus treads in the tracks of His Father, and inherits what God did before; and God is thus glorified and exalted in the salvation and exaltation of all His children."

While I have found no solid official LDS statements of doctrine on the matter, some Mormons will take this even further and say that God the Father had a father, and he had a father and so on. I don't have a problem with that possibility.

Likewise, it is possible that Christ will then become the God the Father of a new inflated Universe/Creation and will be the "Most High God" , the "God of gods and Lord of lords" who is at the head of the exalted saints who will have eternal life , live the same kind of life that God lives, and enjoy the blessing of having spiritual children who may dwell in the created worlds.

- 7up

[_seven7up]

(You owe me either an apology or proof that what I quoted was me, Bazooka, being intellectually dishonest, as opposed to me, Bazooka quoting the Church being, from your perspective, intellectually dishonest).

Both you (and Mittens) first provided the quote out of context. That was the intellectually dishonest act.

You originally provided the quote like this:

Why are you trying to reinterpret what Joseph Smith clearly and explicitly stated - "God was once a man like us....". I interpret that to mean that God was once a man like us. Which supports the Mormon notion that we can become God's.

Mittens provided the quote like this:

It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God and to know...that he was once a man like us.... Here, then, is eternal life -

The full context has now been provided, so everyone can clearly see what you and mittens were trying to do. It was an attempt to mislead by cutting out context and take advantage of assumptions.

-7up

[_ludwigm]

(You owe me either an apology or proof that what I quoted was me, Bazooka, being intellectually dishonest, as opposed to me, Bazooka quoting the Church being, from your perspective, intellectually dishonest).

Both you (and Mittens) first provided the quote out of context. That was the intellectually dishonest act.
-7up

As far as I remember (and one can check it on the previous page) :

Joseph Smith taught: “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” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 345–46).

This is word by word from Chapter 47: Exaltation, Gospel Principles, (2011), 275–80 - quoted out of context there, in an official document.
According to You, this is intellectually dishonest act. Committed by the church itself...


by the way a little English lesson by a nonenglish:
"God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did"
What does "the same" mean?
You tried to say that it is "the same way that JC did".

Sorry, it is not the case.
It is "the same earth".

It is reading comprehension...
Reading comprehension involves two levels of processing, shallow (low-level) processing and deep (high-level) processing. Deep processing involves semantic processing, which happens when we encode the meaning of a word and relate it to similar words. Shallow processing involves structural and phonemic recognition, the processing of sentence and word structure and their associated sounds.

[Guest]

In LDS theology, a divine entity who has always existed can enter mortality, become resurrected, and still be considered "eternal". To demonstrate that other groups unfairly criticize LDS in this belief, I went through a lengthy exegesis of how "eternal" is used in scripture and how Joseph Smith was being consistent with how it is used in the Biblical text. Then I said:

Have you weighed all of this against what Joseph Smith was trying to explain in relation to God?

To this, Bazooka responded this response:

Why are you trying to reinterpret what Joseph Smith clearly and explicitly stated - "God was once a man like us....".
I interpret that to mean that God was once a man like us. Which supports the Mormon notion that we can become God's.
Are you saying you don't think the teaching on this is correct?

I pointed out that he likely doesn't understand the context and meaning of "God was once a man like us...." Nevertheless, I gave him an opportunity to demonstrate to the forum whether or not he understood the context. He did not do that.

Both you (and Mittens) first provided the quote out of context. That was the intellectually dishonest act.

As far as I remember (and one can check it on the previous page) :

Joseph Smith taught: “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” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 345–46).

He posted that text AFTER I called him out on it. You have to go further back in the thread to see his original statement.

AFTER I pointed out his misrepresentation, then he posted a quote that gave a little more context (ie it includes the words "the same as Jesus Christ himself did), but he refused to demonstrate understanding on why the context is important or demonstrate that he understands what was actually being taught by Joseph Smith. He just keeps pretending that he never quoted out of context to begin with, and worse, he claimed that I didn't know what Joseph Smith was teaching.

by the way a little English lesson by a nonenglish:
"God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did"
What does "the same" mean?
You tried to say that it is "the same way that JC did".
Sorry, it is not the case.
It is "the same earth".

It says AN earth. It does not say "this earth" or even just "earth". You are incorrect in your interpretation. Not just because you ignored the "an" in that statement, but also because in order to argue what you are saying, you would have to ignore the entire rest of the context, which has been provided in the last few posts.

-7up

[_ludwigm]

"dwelt on an earth, the same as" --- not "dwelt on an earth, the same way as"

Isn't it clear enough?

"d w e l t _ o n _ a n _ e a r t h , _ t h e _ s a m e _ a s"

Sentence. Structure. Main clause. Dependent/subordinate clause.

In linguistics, a dependent clause (or a subordinate clause) is a clause that augments an independent clause with additional information, but which cannot stand alone as a sentence.

I've never ever thought I would teach English speaking folks English.
Sorry, I don't like to contridict anybody...

[_seven7up]

Isn't it clear enough?

"d w e l t _ o n _ a n _ e a r t h , _ t h e _ s a m e _ a s"

Sentence. Structure. Main clause. Dependent/subordinate clause.

In linguistics, a dependent clause (or a subordinate clause) is a clause that augments an independent clause with additional information, but which cannot stand alone as a sentence.

I've never ever thought I would teach English speaking folks English.
Sorry, I don't like to contridict anybody...

Again, you are incorrect in your interpretation. The context of the conversation is "worlds" PLURAL and kingdoms PLURAL.

Not only that, but the idea of many earths and many worlds is just part of LDS theology: "worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; ... there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man."

"What did Jesus do? Why, I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence. My Father worked out His kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom, I shall present it to My Father, so that He may obtain kingdom upon kingdom,

Therefore, when Joseph Smith says that God the father "dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did" , the second part is modifying the past tense verb "dwelt". In other words, it is modifying the idea of dwelling on an earth.

Let me try and put this another way:
The "an earth" points to my interpretation in the local context, because if the dependent clause wanted to modify and say that it is the "same earth" , then it would have read. "lived on the earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did." OR simply "lived on Earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did." But he put the "an" in there to indicate that more than one earth exists and more than one earth is being referred to.

If there still remains any doubt, the idea that there is more than one earth and more than one kindgom being discussed is found in the global context of Joseph Smith's teaching, which makes it even more apparent.

Plus, the focus of conversation is about the past experiences/acts/actions of God the Father, and is not focused on the location. The dependent clause is meant to modify the past experiences/acts/actions of God the Father, not the location.

-7up

[_Bazooka]

The full context has now been provided, so everyone can clearly see what you and mittens were trying to do. It was an attempt to mislead by cutting out context and take advantage of assumptions.

-7up

Do you believe the doctrine that 'men like us' can be come Gods and obtain all the wisdom and knowledge that God The Father has and become perfect like Him?

[_Jay]

Maybe the question should be "why does the Mormon Church" contridict what was taught by Joseph Smith? In my mind, one who follows his teachings, he who brought forth the Book of Mormon, is the true Mormon. So if the Church has gone down another path, what does that make its followers?