Uncomfortable Doctrine

[Vanhin]

Originally Posted by ceeboo

Hi again Vanhin,

I greatly appreciate your efforts and perspective

Why you claim there was an apostasy- Yes, I fully realize the importance of the apostasy claim by LDS leading to " restore " ( thank you for that )
I was simply offering a different view that there was not a Great Apostasy " nor is there any evidence in NT for it.

I will try " abomination " ( short answer as to not get caught up in nor divert from the topic at hand ) Nicene Creed, year 520 or so, adopted by the only Christian Church that was available on the planet. JS implies in 1820ish that the Creed is an abomination.
Try, if you would, understand how some may find that enormously insulting especially when you consider that many do not adhere to the " first vision " or the next several things that followed. Not sure I did a very good job with that but I did try.

I would absolutly agree that the " first vision " is indeed paramount to what the LDS faith is built on. I would further suggest that all following visions by all prophets, from first ( JS )
to current ( Monson sp?? sorry ) should be completly accepted without contradiction or " speculation " as to the evaluation of the authenticity of all it's total claims.

I would agree that the evaluation of the authenticty of the first vision claim is a large part of your religion, but all the following prophetic claims and doctrine are certainly a part of that " restoration ".

Thanks for your ear,

God bless,
Carl

Thanks. Let's talk about "abomination". I agree that the words can be insulting to some.

I will quote the passage in question:

...the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

According to the narrative, it is not Joseph Smith who is implying that "their creeds were an abomination" and that "those professors were all corrupt", it is the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. Obviously, one would be less likely to be insulted, if they knew for sure that Christ said that, and not Joseph. So, without knowing the answer to the question I posed in my previous post, it is premature for anyone to feel insulted in my opinion.

Obviously none of us were there when it happened. So where does that leave someone who is introduced to the account of the First Vision? I think it leaves them with the following options. They can-

1) ...outright reject it without investigating it further, and conclude, without really knowing for sure, that it DID NOT happen.

2) ...outright accept it without investigating it further, and conclude, without really knowing for sure, that it DID happen.

3) ...investigate the claim to determine for themselves, if at all possible, the truth about it.

4) ...ignore the implications, and not care whether it is true or false.

Are there other options? And where do you see yourself, having had the account of the First Vision presented to you?

Sincerely,
Vanhin

[jazzy225]

Originally Posted by Misshalfway

And that ever famous statement "As man is God once was....as God is man may become" is something we talk about NOT something we teach. YOu get that? We don't know! We just think.

Blessings of Exaltation

Our Heavenly Father is perfect. However, he is not jealous of his wisdom and perfection. He glories in the fact that it is possible for his children to become like him. He has said, "This is my work and my glory--to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man" (Moses 1:39).

Those who receive exaltation in the celestial kingdom through faith in Jesus Christ will receive special blessings. The Lord has promised, "All things are theirs" (D&C 76:59). These are some of the blessings given to exalted people:

They will live eternally in the presence of Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ (see D&C 76).

They will become gods.

They will have their righteous family members with them and will be able to have spirit children also. These spirit children will have the same relationship to them as we do to our Heavenly Father. They will be an eternal family.

They will receive a fulness of joy.

They will have everything that our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ have--all power, glory, dominion, and knowledge. President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: "The Father has promised through the Son that all that he has shall be given to those who are obedient to his commandments. They shall increase in knowledge, wisdom, and power, going from grace to grace, until the fulness of the perfect day shall burst upon them" (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:36).

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Publication Notes

Gospel Principles

Published by
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Salt Lake City, Utah

© 1978, 1979, 1981, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1992, 1995, 1997
by Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America.

English approval: 6/96

From the introduction page, LDS.ORG--Gospel Principles was written both as a personal study guide and as a teacher’s manual. Therefore, you can use this manual in many ways. It can help you—

• Build your knowledge and testimony of the gospel.

• Answer questions about the gospel.

• Study scriptures by topics.

• Prepare talks.

• Prepare lessons for family home evening.

• Prepare lessons for Church meetings.





Misshalfway,

Take a look at the copyright above, I tend to disagree with your statement at the top about "it is something we talk about NOT something we teach". Clearly, above it is used as a "a personal study guide and as a teacher’s manual"

[candyprpl]

Originally Posted by ceeboo

bytor,

NOW THAT was a post ( elphaba like )

Very bias Interpretation would be my short reply.

I would readily agree that there are many warnings in the NT that caution us of a variety of things including your offerings. What I do not agree with is that those cautions had to do with the " Church " that Jesus built on the " rock of Peter " in which Jesus himself said would prevail over ALL.

If you believe it has not prevailed ( went into Great Apostasy ), you would have to say Jesus was wrong or was not telling the truth. Furthermore, if this apostasy took place, where is there historical support for such an enormous claim. Certainly you would be able to point to a year or atleast a decade or century for such a monumental event.


God bless,
Carl

Hi ceeboo/Carl,
I would really like to know how you interpret these scriptures. What does the Catholic church teach about these times? I'm not as learned as you and it's a little embarrassing asking you to explain. I know a little world history and it seems that the 'Dark Ages' explain a lot, and for me, give proof that something horrible happened after the death of the original apostles. What happened to the church after Peter?

I guess you can see that these are the questions I had in the thread I started, but more learned LDS have more experience with this kind of conversation, so I've popped in here.
Hope that's okay

[Misshalfway]

Hey Jazzy...... Thanks for your input. I think you and I may be looking at things a little differently. I see what you have cited and agree that we DO teach eternal progression. I don't necessarily in my mind equate every single idea and interpretation concerning this idea as doctrine. I see what you have cited and am in full agreement and acknowledgement that we do indeed teach the concept. But the idea that what God is man may become....and what man is God once was tends to bring more speculatory doctrines to the table that we don't teach....that we don't put into our manuals. I notice that those parts are missing from your quotes. There are pieces and parts to our understanding of what this all means that are speculatory. These are the parts that I am referring to when I say we talk of it, and wonder about it, and read much of what others have said on the subject, BUT we don't teach it and we put that into its proper place when it comes to what is sanctioned by the church as official doctrine. And I will say.....that many are confused about where the doctrine ends and speculation begins. I hope that helps you understand more precisely what I meant by my statement.

Please understand that I do absolutely believe that exhaltation means that there will be wonderful inheritance including becoming Priests and Priestesses etc. and 'gods' as the D&C outlines. But as I understand it, we will attain such "offices" only "unto the most high God". I don't know that God ever learned or progressed. That idea is speculation and against the official position of the church today. I don't know yet exactly what parts of the creative process with be open to the exalted. Most of the answers are logical assumptions.....intelligent speculation, as I call it, but I feel nervous saying that we officially know the answers to all these questions. I can't imagine in my heart that I will ever become independant of the influence of the Savior. For it is thru the Savior, as Jacob says, that all things are made possible. IT is thru the savior that I am forgiven and saved and exalted and brought into the state of eternal progression. In my mind, I guess that it will be thru him that I will do whatever it is I will do there. I can't imagine it any other way. My God is what the scriptures say he is. The same yesterday today and forever. These ideas of Eternal progression seem to beget question after question and some answers make sense and other answers feel quite incomplete. And so.....I say again. I think we are in the areas of deep doctrine.....and area of the vineyard that we must tread lightly....especially when posting on this type of public forum.

[Misshalfway]

Traveler.....my friend....

I feel the sincerity with which you have answered my post. The truth is that I love the Lord as you do and want my life to emulate the Lord in any way that is his will for me and whatever mission I have here on the earth. I don't think much about being worshipped one day. If you knew me, such a thought wouldn't surprise you. I am so very flawed!!! For me, that piece of the puzzle has never sat right and my spirit starts to feel slight warning feelings when I hear people discuss it as if it is absolutely true and so....I don't go there. But I am not worried about it either and don't use my energies on answering the question. I choose to let God order and provide and lead my life wherever he will. I have so many weaknesses. I have so much pride and fear and weakness that I have yet to overcome....not mention learning to understand the core revealed doctrines in our current cannon that I have yet to translate into the "who" of who I am. If there is anything that I see that we have in common, it is our righteous desires. And perhaps on this one very miniscule doctrinal idea, you can say you know.....and I can say I don't know about that.....and we can leave it in peace. And then of course have cake together!!!

[Misshalfway]

ANd to the rest of you......

I turn my back for two seconds and you all sail forward with this wonderful conversation without me! Well don't I feel left out!!!

Seriously, this is a great conversation. I don't know what else I could add other than to say, "would anyone like a beverage?" and sit down at your feet and join in the listening.

[Misshalfway]

Ceeboo.....I just have one thing to say to you. HELLLOO.....AVATAR!!!!

Originally Posted by candyprpl

Hi ceeboo/Carl,
I would really like to know how you interpret these scriptures. What does the Catholic church teach about these times? I'm not as learned as you and it's a little embarrassing asking you to explain. I know a little world history and it seems that the 'Dark Ages' explain a lot, and for me, give proof that something horrible happened after the death of the original apostles. What happened to the church after Peter?

I guess you can see that these are the questions I had in the thread I started, but more learned LDS have more experience with this kind of conversation, so I've popped in here.
Hope that's okay

Hello candyprpl,

Me ( ceeboo ) learned ??? thanks but I think more acurate to label me " slightly knowledgable with a hint of Catholic bias" )
Please do not be embarrassed to ask me to explain, I have asked you and others to explain about 645,982 times. ( I will add that my questions to you ( LDS ) were always answered with sincerity and kindness ) thanks.

CONTEXT AND DEFINITIONS ARE CRITICAL FOR THIS DISCUSSION:
Apostasy- a falling away from the Church Jesus built
COMPLETE OR TOTAL APOSTASY- JESUS' Church gone, lights out, no more authority

I do understand the commitment that LDS MUST have in a " total " or " Great " apostasy
but I must reply that it IMHO the complete apostasy claim does not exist.

First, regarding my interpretation of these scriptures. Many of them do indeed speak of apostasy ( people falling away from the Church ) NOT ONE of them speak of a complete apostasy, total darkness of the Church, lights out etc. In addition, when the scriptures do speak of apostasy they tell us that it will be in the end times ( IMHO the end times do not mean the year 200 or 300 or whatever " shortly after the original 12 apostles passed" implies.

I am not a Biblical scholar ( just a 40 year old sinner like the rest of us ) but since I was asked about my interpretation of scripture, I think I will suggest a few of my own that I feel is directly related to this " total apostasy thread " thus " restoration".
Matthew 16:18, ( Jesus' promise of his Church ) " on this rock ( Peter ) I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
Matthew 28:20 ( Jesus' words to all of us ) " Behold I will be with you always "
( there are many many more )

If JS was right about a total apostasy then Jesus was a failure in regard to HIS CHURCH.
Jesus would also be not telling the truth and misleading us with his promises.

" What happened to the Church after Peter " IT IS STILL THE SAME CHURCH THAT JESUS PROMISED US ALL WOULD NOT EVER FALL". Yes indeed it is a FACT that there have been immoral members in the Church and still are there today. Jesus promised the Church would stand to the end and he also taught that there would indeed be good and evil members sitting side by side in HIS CHURCH until that end.

I think I will stop at this point to be fair to others who may want to contribute or rebute my crazy Catholic perspective.

I hope, candyprpl, I have answered your questions to me.

God bless,
Carl

Originally Posted by Vanhin

Thanks. Let's talk about "abomination". I agree that the words can be insulting to some.

I will quote the passage in question:

...the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

According to the narrative, it is not Joseph Smith who is implying that "their creeds were an abomination" and that "those professors were all corrupt", it is the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. Obviously, one would be less likely to be insulted, if they knew for sure that Christ said that, and not Joseph. So, without knowing the answer to the question I posed in my previous post, it is premature for anyone to feel insulted in my opinion.

Obviously none of us were there when it happened. So where does that leave someone who is introduced to the account of the First Vision? I think it leaves them with the following options. They can-

1) ...outright reject it without investigating it further, and conclude, without really knowing for sure, that it DID NOT happen.

2) ...outright accept it without investigating it further, and conclude, without really knowing for sure, that it DID happen.

3) ...investigate the claim to determine for themselves, if at all possible, the truth about it.

4) ...ignore the implications, and not care whether it is true or false.

Are there other options? And where do you see yourself, having had the account of the First Vision presented to you?

Sincerely,
Vanhin

Hello again Vanhin,

I must admit, you were probably a great missionary ( To be clear that was truly a compliment )

I realize concerning " abomination " JS claimed to be only the mouthpiece but I promise you, my new friend Vanhin, because of my opinion on the matter, it would not add anything of use to all who are involved in this thread to beat on that horse.

Your 4 options that you offer me, ok I will play ( because you have been more than fair and generous with me ) I will choose # 3 with no hesitation.


God bless,
Carl

Originally Posted by Misshalfway

Ceeboo.....I just have one thing to say to you. HELLLOO.....AVATAR!!!!

Hi Misshalfway,

I have no idea how to do that, I click on the avatar thingy and it says I must first log in or something and I get real frustrated. When I try to log in or whatever it says, it tells me I have to email or something??

Anyway what is wrong with my current avatar " Ceeboo ( green dot ) "