Posted on 05/08/2008 7:35:38 PM PDT by P-Marlowe
It DOES get confusing at times!
The time lags, the many threads, the various posters - we ALL tend to get a bit mixed up from time to time.
He DID!?
Amazing!
One word caught my attention. Bait. True.
There are rules against carrying a dispute from one thread to the another. Resolve the dispute on that thread, not this one.
I assumed rightly or wrongly that these LDS posts were anti-Mitt or Anti-Mormon.
These posts? Do you mean this thread? This thread was started merely by posting a sermon given by Brigham Young in 1852. This is the official transcript of that sermon taken down by scribes who were present at the sermon at the time it was given.
And when I asked a question I was attacked with statements implying I am a member of the LDS cult.
Interesting. You indicated earlier in this thread that you thought that I was somehow the leader of a cult of religious zealots, and here you are calling the LDS Church a cult. Hmmmm.
So, the attackers made me the issue as to why I would even ask a question.
Attackers?
Just look at a recent post on the thread, bassically saying anything you ask or any answer given makes you a member of LDS.
I must have missed that.
Would you consider being numbered among the LDS an insult or attack?
The post to me was in that context of the LDS and cults.
Isaiah 45:18:
“For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; …I am the Lord; and there is none else.”
“When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him.”
Just how many wives does Brigham Young think/read/make up that Adam had? Eve was his wife, made of his flesh, so that they could become one flesh. Does Adam have a wife made from each rib in the “updated” version?
I'm confused. I thought you said that you thought that I was a member of a cult of religious zealots. In fact, IIRC you said I was the leader of that cult.
Are you now suggesting that you think that the LDS Church is a cult?
I think that if you examine this sermon carefully, you will discover that the other wives that the Prophet Brigham Young is referring to came from another planet.
Thank you for your inquiry.
Did you enjoy this sermon?
Is there a God beside me?
I didn’t ask what the bible states, I asked if you believe there is only one God.
But did I not say that you are Gods......
“The Brides from Another Planet” sounds more like a B movie than any theology I would recognize.
Can’t say as how I enjoyed it much; but at least he left his “And so it came to pass” at home.
(Yeah, there was an old TV show called "Adam's Rib." In Utah, the TV stations had to change the name of the show to "Ribless Adam.") :)
Did Brigham Young prove the Bible false? [p-marlowe]
Fred, what’s your issue with the Bible? (Brigham at one point, at least, had absolutely no issue with it):
He said that they were at one point years before ”very anxious, in the days of Joseph [Smith], to get the new [Bible] translation; but the Bible is good enough just as it is, it will answer my purpose… (JoD, vol. 3, p. 118)
The Bible was ”good enough just as it is for Young. (So what’s your problem about its falsity?) Young didn’t (at least at that time) have any problems with it. Now I am using Brigham’s standard for the Bible. Do you have a problem with that? Do you openly disagree with him?
Gotta "love" all these "To Whom It May Concern" Mormon "Scriptural" manifestos about polygamy (1890) & blacks as priestholders (1978).
(Maybe "To Whom It May Concern" is the newer divine literary device meant to blow us away, kind of replacing the older one of "It came to pass..." Still, it reeks of lawyerese like alcohol "venting" from a beer commercial or local bar. I guess it's nice to know that we have a "cover-all-your-legal bases" god...Tho, I just can't imagine Ezekiel starting off talking about the new covenant to come with a "To whom it may concern" address)
=+=+=
Did Brigham Young prove the Bible false? [p-marlowe]
Fred, what’s your issue with the Bible? (Brigham at one point, at least, had absolutely no issue with it):
+++++++++++++
You need to read and understand.
p-marlowe said that Brigham young was not a Prophet.
I just applied his way of think, his standard to the Bible, and when the standard used on Brigham Young, is applied to the Bible, p-marlowe’s standard proves the Bible to be wrong.
Either we use his standard on both, or none,
Would you like to use the same standards, or will you continue to use higher standards for Mormons then you use on your own religion?
All I did was post this powerful Sermon given by the Mormon Prophet Brigham Young.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So, again, you are saying that you care not to study more to see if you might be wrong.
How can you come to that conclusion...?
When P-Marlowe clearly at least twice stated in later posts that reading the B. Young sermon was a watershed moment for her/him, and concluded that they could no longer be a mormon.
How is that possible....when you just replied to post 96?
Hello, I just created an account. I was reading what many of you had to say and found it intriguing. I love talking about Mormon apologetics. I am a Mormon and am proud to be such. However I disagree with some people of my faith’s views. Many in my religion when reading the article just posted dismiss it as “Adam=God theory is not correct.” I agree with them on this point.
I profess myself a Christian. But that depends on how you define the term Christian. I believe that Jesus was and is the son of God and as such is the only one that could lay down his life and take it up again. He died spiritually for me in Gethsemane and he died physically on Calvary’s hill, and in both instances was raised up again. Yes “We Believe the bible to be the word of god, so far as it is translated correctly. We also Believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God”
(And speaking on the cult thing...I don’t consider my self a cutest...but what definition of “cult” are you using. That term has so many definitions I think it has lost all meaning.)
However I do not believe in the creeds. I understand many attacks against my religion. And I find it sad that other members of my faith say “Why are you attacking us when we don’t attack you” kind of silly. We do profess to be the only true church of God. Even in our Pearl of Great Price Joseph Smith History 1:19
(forgive me if there are slight mistakes) “I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and 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 bower thereof” (King James edition Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrine and Covenants can all be found at the scripture link at www.lds.org )
To me that is an attack on other faiths. I like what one person on this form said about Brigham, that he was a bold man. And the message of the LDS faith is a bold one.
I like the humor that many of you posses on this form because reading the posts has been very amusing. Yes I have read and watched everything that has been posted (with the exception of the video that was posted on the garment ... I have a feeling I don’t want to see what it is.) now with that being said (sorry for “beating around the bush”) I will talk about how I feel about this address given by Brigham.
It is true. Every word of it. There is nothing in it that I would deny. However I do not speculate as to what certain titles mean. That is that I believe that Adam is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do. (sorry bout the caps :-) its just how it is ) explanation...
“He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken-He is our FATHER and our GOD” ... however he is not Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael. He is just Michael. I have not ever found any sermon about Elohim being Adam. But as a Mormon I believe that as god once was man is and as god is now man may become.
By the way I would like to address the reason why this speech was given. “It is in regard to the character of the well-beloved Son of God, upon which subject the Elders of Israel have conflicting views.” in this Brigham uses his humor to “prove” that Jesus is not the son of the Holy Ghost but the son of God. To explain he has to touch upon the nature of Adam. I have a testimony that Jesus is the only begotten son of god in the flesh... yet I believe that Adam is the literal physical son of God...but not in the flesh. He was in celestial glory when he came to this earth and yet fell. (This is in my opinion why Job glorifies Christ as his redeemer. Even though he is perfect he is fallen physically)
as to eve being one of his wives I think Brigham is saying that he very well may have more than one wife. (men and women can be sealed for eternity and not earth life, or both, or just earth) but the details are kinda fuzzy and if you want to talk about it you should post a discussion on a polygamy form (BTW it is actually polygyny)
And to clarify that he is “the only God with whom WE have to do” I believe that there will be a huge priesthood council held at Adam-ondi-Ahman and there those that hold priesthood keys will be held accountable as stewards to Adam. I believe that Adam is a God of this world. Even as much as if you are exalted you shall be a God of this world. (I say that as in Eloheim is a God of Kolob)
Hope that clarifies things. You can still believe what you will. If you think that Brigham is really saying that Michael is Eloheim go for it. But that is not what I believe he is professing. Nor would he ever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.