Mormon Doctrine: The New and Everlasting Covenant Explained

[omiolo]

"Monk to Missionary," by R. Mani Seangsuwan, HTown Publishing, 2010, $15.00

Don't be deceived by the thinness of "Monk to Missionary."

While the book about the author's transformation from Buddhist monk to Mormon missionary is written on less than 100 pages, the story is one of magnitude

[riddick7819]

Joseph Smith was a False Prophet and was decieved by satan pretending to be an angel called Moroni, which is ironic because anyone that belives in the book of mormon is a moron, moroni is for morons :)

[MormonsLoveFamilies]

@riddick7819 I want you to know that God loves you.

[omiolo]

During one play against our biggest rival, I had an experience that has helped me over the years. We were on defense. I knew my assigned opponent, and as the play unfolded, he moved to my right into the line of scrimmage. There was a lot of noise from players and fans. I reacted as the coach had taught us and followed my man into the line, not knowing if he had the ball. To my surprise, I felt the ball partially in my hands. I gave it a tug, but my opponent didnt let go.

[omiolo]

As we tugged back and forth, amid all the noise I heard a voice yelling, Packer, tackle him! That was enough to bring me to my senses, so I dropped him on the spot.

[omiolo]

Our Church leaders have taught and we have felt the Spirit invite the use of inspired questions given of the Spirit to help us learn of God and His will for us

[omiolo]

Like Peter, we too love the Lord, so today's parents and leaders work diligently to instill in each heart a testimony of Jesus Christ and His gospel.

[omiolo]

and the "bread of life

[moparmonster1965]

"For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory. " (D&C 132:4)

The problem is that polygamy, temple marriage, and godhood are all indellibly connected. The "revelation" doesn't start to get into polygamy until verse 38, trying to establish its authority beforehand.

[omiolo]

For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory. " (D&C 132:4)

typical you, you can quote it but have NO idea what it means or REFUSE to do so!

[moparmonster1965]

No, it's actually pretty clear. JS sets the stage, goes on about the importance of marriage, comparing himself to Abraham along the way, then justifying polygamy and making it required. He then goes on to tell Emma to shut the hell up about it because he was already involved in polygamy.

I think that about covers it.

[omiolo]

"comparing himself to Abraham along the way"

actually if you READ the revelation, Joseph Smith compares him living the law of polygamy to Abraham sacrificing Isaac.

BTW, did Abraham sacrifice Isaac?

[moparmonster1965]

We've already covered this. The difference between the two examples is that God didn't have Abraham break God's law.

[omiolo]

"D&C 132"

BTW, no one had heard of D&C 132 until Edward partridge found it one day in one of his piles of papers. He said he had a copy of a copy that he quickly copied and never told anyone about.

[moparmonster1965]

It doesn't matter because the church still endorses it today. Keep in mind that there was a D&C 101 that was thrown out when 132 was added. 101 was decidedly against polygamy, even though the church was actively practicing it at the time.

[omiolo]

"It doesn't matter because the church still endorses it today"

actually President Hinckley when talking about parts of that section said

"it is NOT doctrine"

[moparmonster1965]

You should've said "it is NO LONGER doctrine" because the revelation is still published in its entirety, polygamy and all.

That said, the church has second-guessed God in altering his "everlasting" covenant. Either that, or the Mormon God's an idiot...

[omiolo]

"101 was decidedly against polygamy, even though the church was actively practicing it at the time. "

there is NO proof of such until ~1852, with the proclamation!

[moparmonster1965]

I happen to have a photocopy of the 1835 D&C (Book of Commandments back then). It reads:

"In as much as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband. (1835 BOC, 101:4, p 251

This section was printed from 1835-1876, when we know polygamy was being practiced. It was quietly removed when D&C 132 was added. 132 itself is proof that JS already a polygamist.

[omiolo]

"when we know polygamy was being practiced."

polygamy did NOT start until 1852! It always takes time for revelations to enter into the new canon

[omiolo]

Monster,

I know a lot of this stuff might be NEW to you and hard to put in historical and religious context, but many of us have been studying this since we were able to sunbeams. Then to have a hack like you come around and try to haphazardly piece it together, is LAUGHABLE!

[moparmonster1965]

Nah, it's not new to me at all. Again, I've been researching and reading about this since about '96 when a friend was sucked in. I fully support my argument and position in a logical way that makes sense, whereas Mormons are continually forced to manufacture support in order to maintain the illusion.

The only thing laughable is your dedication to a faith based on lies, deceit, and deliberate misinterpretation.

[omiolo]

"I fully support my argument and position in a logical way that makes sense"

I challenge that.

ALL you arguments and logics are self serving and ONLY build on your wishful thinking!

[omiolo]

The gospel of our Savior Jesus Christ has been restored to the earth.

[omiolo]

D&C 101:39

"When men are called unto mine everlasting gospel, and covenant with an everlasting covenant, they are accounted as the salt of the earth and the savor of men; "

[moparmonster1965]

It's also pretty ironic that this man speaks of a "new and everlasting covenant," the same exact language that polygamy was given in. That case, "everlasting" really meant 47 years.

I guess you're right, I don't understand.

I don't understand how "everlasting" can be finite.

[omiolo]

"It's also pretty ironic that this man speaks of a "new and everlasting covenant," the same exact language that polygamy was given in"

FAIL!

just because you do NOT understand things, there is NO reason for you to put things together in a matter that is sadly beneficial to your ANTImormon cause.

[moparmonster1965]

I don't understand it, eh? Says the liar to the fool.

[moparmonster1965]

Since the exact same phrase is used to describe Mormon baptism, how do Mormons know that one "new and everlasting covenant" means one thing in one revelation and another in the next one?

Taken at face value, they are exactly the same with no loopholes or amendments.

But then, you already know what all this means.

[omiolo]

"how do Mormons know that one "new and everlasting covenant" means one thing in one revelation and another in the next one? "

maybe you should rewatch this video so you do NOT ask such foolish questions!

[moparmonster1965]

In other words, omosis.

[omiolo]

"It's also pretty ironic"

I would NOT call it IRONIC, I would call it sad that you are determined to be the one to define our doctrine and beliefs. And YOU will NOT listen to what they actually are.

[moparmonster1965]

You show me a good Mormon and I'll show you a person who doesn't know their own history.

[omiolo]

"You show me a good Mormon and I'll show you a person who doesn't know their own history. "

you show me a TYPICAL ANTImormon and I will show you someone who wants to REWRITE Mormon History!

[moparmonster1965]

You have yet to prove that because you can't.

[omiolo]

I find this doctrine clear and concise. I think that is why the ANTImormons get it wrong!

[moparmonster1965]

"I find this doctrine clear and concise."

The problem is that the church muddies that with all of the other garbage it holds to be true, starting with the BOM.

But since "new and everlasting covenants" aren't truly everlasting, it could be renounced at any time.

[omiolo]

you obviously did NOT watch the video, I guess it makes it easier for you to decide what is LDS doctrine if you avoid what actually is.

[moparmonster1965]

Specifically, Jesus teaching of God being married, of us all being spiritual siblings, that he's an exalted being and that we, too, can become gods, anything about the pre-mortal existance, that God has a physical body, that there are three levels of Heaven, that polygamy would be permitted even while it was publicly denounced, that he, God, and the Holy Spirit are separate and distinct, or that he atoned for our sins in the Garden and not on the cross.

[omiolo]

"Jesus teaching of God being married"

Jesus is God!

[moparmonster1965]

No, he's not. He's a seprate and distinct individual according to the church. You're using double-speak to confuse people who don't know anything about Mormon history or doctrine.

[moparmonster1965]

This negates the need for D&C and POGP because of its "fulness." By adding anything else, you're calling God, who undoubtedly had a hand in that introduction, a liar. Thus, those things unique to Mormonism that aren't in the BOM or Bible aren't of Jesus because either they have said "fulness" or they don't.

[moparmonster1965]

Ah, but I did.

"The BOM is a volume of holy scripture comparable to the Bible. It is a record of God's dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains, as does the Bible, the fulness of the everlasting gospel." (BOM introduction, p. 5)

[MormonsLoveFamilies]

@omiolo It is hard for them to continually fight against God, but they don't seem to want to give up.