I have heard this doctrine taught before and thought about it a lot and I don't find it shocking anymore. But is it shocking to others because it does not fit our modernistic rational protestant Christian view? In other words does our own parochialism play a part in our non acceptance of Mormon teaching?
@verminpants I don't find it shocking either anymore hence I am able to discuss that I bet he gave her a right good shagging (one night stand type of thing) and him being around a zillion years old and Mary maybe still a teen. At least they didn't need to have fertility treatment. BANG on first go unless Brigham Young or other LDS Profits know different of course.
@verminpants My Bishop? He is a really nice bloke and his family superb. What can I say.
However he realy thinks he is going to be given more wives in the life to come and tries to discuss this with his wife. She tears her hair out at the thought and refuses to discuss it with him.
This is the harm that Mormonism does to good people. Her life in my opinion is blighted by the thought of the real reality of what Mormon Doctrine really is. Depression amongst LDS is common.
@cisdac " I wonder what is worse? Depression among LDS or child raping priests among Catholics?"
Is that all you have to wonder about? Bit of a strange comparison?
In case you didn't realise it but there are lots of Child Rapists in the LDS church holding Temple Recommends and raping right under the noses of LDS Priesthood Discernment. I'll send you a link to some Child rapists convicted from the LDS church.
@ElderJoseph Actually, it is a major concern to worry about. Child predators should be caught, charged and jailed. The fact you said that; makes you seem more like a child molester then I originally thought. Your original intention was to show how badly LDS is; and yet you ignore the bigger picture (child abuse). I never claimed there wasn't child abuse among LDS members; I merely showed you the error of your ways. Learn to find the proper mistakes among religions; not just a little one.
@ElderJoseph You also made the other video "private" which also is very suspicious. It should be made available to everyone, not just to prove a point. I find that you might be a child predator yourself, I should know, I work with law enforcement agencies. I also worked closely with FBI. If you've molested any children, repent and seek help from people; turn yourself in!
@BrotherMurray The 'diagrams' are really for the benefit of LDS cult members who do not know what their own church stands for and has taught and believes. The LDS church leadership have a habit of pretending to be a Christian Church and trying to sound like they have the same beliefs as the majority of churches, yet they don't.
They do not tell their real theology to prospective recruits.
Its effective to say the least. Yeah, they tried to recruit me and once I brought up scripture, they said I was "argumentative". Surprise. Heres the best question for them- it flusters them pretty well:
Me: You don't believe in the Trinity, right? Them: Right! Me: Then why do you baptize into it? Them: Uhhh.... Me: Can you show me one example in the scriptures of your baptism? Them: You're argumentative and mean
"The older members were taught all their lives that blacks are the less valiants and hence banned from priesthood." All their lives? I doubt that. The statement about blacks being less valiant is pure speculation, and was not in ANY lesson manual the church produced.
Between Sep 05 and Nov 07? Strange, but you offered, over 10 years ago, to show me donation slips to prove that you were attending church. The numbers don't add up, m'man.
Its clear to me you are just muddled up and confused. How can I have offered to show my donation slips ten years ago when my you tube channel only commenced in 2006?
Can you be a bit more productive and only speak of things which are relevant. Its clear what the church has taught for its entire existence and this why Gordon Hinckley had to make a statement about it in the Apr 06 Conf
You used to frequent the religious chat rooms on AOL. as did I. THATS where you offered to show me the tithing slips, m'man. And THATS where, when I asked what ward you belonged to, informed me that it was "ward one". Prior to blacks not receiving the priesthood, the church taught that their time for that was not yet, but would occur at some point in the future. There was NEVER any official doctrine as to why blacks could not hold the priesthood at that time.
Jedi You must be mistaken. I haven't chatted in any AOL chatrooms, though I do remember someone here doubting whether I ever attended church and I offered to email them my contribution statements for the two years I attended.
April 1st, 2006 General Conference, Gordon Hinckley " I remind you that no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. Nor can he consider himself to be in harmony with the teachings of the Church of Christ. How can any man holding the Melchizedek Priesthood arrogantly assume that he is eligible for the priesthood whereas another who lives a righteous life but whose skin is of a different color is ineligible?"
Well there will be an even better revelation coming soon when the church throws the Book Of Mormon out as any kind of reliable factual history and instead declares it all a fictional parable.
That will never happen. The truth of the Book of Mormon is not something that is dictated by the church, but is discovered through study, prayer, and a witness from the Holy Ghost.
@JediMormon Sorry, JM, but there is plethora of pronunciations from the pulpit and paper on the black issue. Your prophets even had to have a revelation, spurred by the Fed, to accept blacks or else. So, like with the Polygamy issue a "revelation" pops up. There were some black slaves in Utah back then. Not many, 50 or so. There is a picture of our 911 murdering maniac "Gen. Dame" with 2 black slaves (female of course) in the background.
Okay...now the question becomes, WHEN did this two year attendance occur? At least 10 years ago, you offered to show me tithing slips to prove that you were attending. I've no doubt that you can prove attendance, but if it was that long ago, you can't honestly make the statement that older members are STILL shocked. I submit that they would either gotten over it by now, or left the church.
@JediMormon between September 05 and November 07 approximately. I'll quite happily email you my 'contribution' slips. I didn't pay Tithe, I paid Humanitarian Aid and fasts regularly as I gained some measure of confidence in the church.
The older members were taught all their lives that blacks are the less valiants and hence banned from priesthood.
Brigahm Young taught that Blacks get the priesthood after all the Valiant WHITES have been brought in and not before then.
Look like members are still shocked to me ,Gordon Hinckley April 06
"Now I am told that racial slurs and denigrating remarks are sometimes heard among us. I remind you that no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. How can any man holding the Melchizedek Priesthood arrogantly assume that he is eligible for the priesthood whereas another who lives a righteous life but whose skin is of a different color is ineligible?"
"YES Jedi The WHITE members ( older aged 60-80) are stil shocked and suprised because they KNOW what they were taught as youngsters."
I'm wondering how you would know that if you don't attend the LDS church? As you said, "I don't consider it anything to do with me anymore." Do please un-confuse us readers on here.
Ah...the scripture from 2 Nephi 5:21 has NOTHING to do with Cain or the supposed "Curse of Cain", ElderJoe. Please get your facts straight. As I have told you before, the Lamanites were cursed by God with a dark skin because of their wickedness and disobedience to Him. The two topics are not connected in anyway, shape, or form.
'As I have told you before, the Lamanites were cursed by God with a dark skin because of their wickedness and disobedience to Him.'
Brigham Young the PROPHET of your LDS UTAH SECT taught they were connected,( Negroes equally cursed with dark skin for disobediance in the pre existence) to his followers and so did the prophets and Apostles after him and including Mark E Peterson in 1954.
LDS members Lived and Died beleiving that.
Was Brighamand all the others leading them astray?
YES Jedi The WHITE members ( older aged 60-80) are stil shocked and suprised because they KNOW what they were taught as youngsters.
It was after a sunday school lesson when it was brought up, there seem to be confusion in the class afterwards so I asked the older members.The younger members and missionaries are UNEDUCATED as to LDS history. All those older members still believe Negroes are the LESS VALIANTS.
My ward as in local ward. I don't consider it anything to do with me anymore.
Curse of Cain "doctrine"??? There you go AGAIN, trying set as doctrine what was originally spoken/written as speculation. The truth is, we don't know who was less valiant and who wasn't. There is nothing in official LDS doctrine (the four standard works) that tells us.
(Sitting back to see what horse is trotted out next...)
2 Nephi, 5:21 And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For
behold, they had hardened their hearts
against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were WHITE, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a SKIN OF BLACKNESS to come upon them.
"Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." (Proverbs 3:5 - 6) Problem with most anti-Mormons is that they don't trust in the Lord, but depend on their own faulty understanding where LDS are concerned. They don't pray for wisdom like the Bible says. If they did, sincerely, they would know that JS, BY, et. al. were prophets of God, and that the Book of Mormon was true. I rest my case.
The LDS prophet can't lead you astray according to the LDS prophets.
So why do so few accept Adam-God or the Curse of Cain doctrime wgich taught that negroes are the Less valiants and deserving o their disadvantages in life compared to white mormons?
See Apostle Mark E Peterson talk at BYU for further confirmation of this teaching as recent as 1954 and over100 years of LDS prophets and apostles continually teaching this.
and why quote the bible when LDS prophets teach its MISTRANSLATED?
Looks like some things bear repeating: The Adam/God statement was NEVER doctrine, and never will be. Adam walked and talked with God in the garden of eden. Every LDS knows this, including BY. But...there are STILL some anti-Mormons who cling defiantly to their false assumption that just because the statement appears in the Journal of Discourses, that automatically makes it LDS doctrine. (Feel like I'm running a kindergarten, here.) Don't know how I can explain it any more simply.
Tha Adam God teaching was Doctrine according to Brigham Young.
How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me namely that Adam is our father and God ... "(Brigham Young, Deseret News, v. 22, no.308, June 8, 1873)
gotta love the end... DO YOU BELIEVE ME?? lots of people did. your saying that in the video like your telling things out of the side of your mouth... ie twisting things so they suit your purpose. dont know why you post this. obviously from here you believe in god. and as such doing this would be against his word for in the bible (not talking about the b.o.m.) it tells us basically to be nice to our fellow man and do good for each other. attacking another persons faith isnt in there.
Are you inferring that the early Saints had the wisdom to ignore Brigham Young? I don't think so.
When he taught his Adam is God doctrine, many believed it and wrote of it in their diaries.
It was reported in the church newspapers at the time also.
Why else have a so called prophet amongst their midst if he was known to speak total nonsenses. We now know he was full of Crap but not back then, they were misled badly.
I'm not attacking anyones faith. believe what what you want,.
Why not? If not it's Likley you have the benefit of hindsight and education.
Do you believe in his Adam God doctrine? He taught that Adam was Father God and brought one of his wives with him from Celestial Kingdom to make bodies for his own spirit children.
Not thats what I call TWISTING things. He would say anything, no matter how flawd and falseto justify his own erroneus polygamy.
"I don't know anyone who cons LDS members into leaving and neither do you."
Actually, EJ...I DO know people who con members into leaving the church. You happen to be one of them. There are many others who do the same thing. As for your false assumption that we purposely deceive investigators, not so. Perhaps you consider asking them to read the Book of Mormon and pray to God about it's truthfulness to be deceptive? Alone. No one else around. Just them and God. How it that deceptive? Hummm...?
The "con" happens when you and others who have an ax to grind against the church. You quote from sources that you KNOW are not considered as official doctrine by the church (though you do your best to present them as such). I've had dealings with anti-Mormon on the internet for many years, and in all that time, none of them has ever denied lying occasionally about LDS beliefs and doctrine. Many of them told me that they felt it was justified if the lie caused someone to leave the church.
'and in all that time, none of them has ever denied lying occasionally about LDS beliefs'
You can be trusted as much as Joseph Smith can be trusted when he spent all his life lying, lying to his members over his secretly polygamy and denying it up to his death.
People will see my Mormon Leaders Lying Videos and work it out for themselves. Thats why the church is loosing its once faithfull tithe paying members/victims.
You talk about liars and lying. See my newest video about the Deception of Doctrine and Covenants 101:4 being used by early church leaders to deceive members, investigators and the public alike..
People leave the church because they find out its a lying scam created by Joseph Smith.
they find out he never went to work like his followers did,that he asked for money and material goods, had a house built for himself, asked for followers wives,married followers wives then wanted their daughters too.
They find out about the secret council of fifty and his plans to be crowned king of the world.
You are a mindless victim of a scam and to be avoided at all costs.
Actually, JS worked at whatever jobs he could find. At one time, he even owned a store. Now, if he was as dishonest as you claim, you'd think that he would have been selling shoddy merchandise, charging confiscatory prices, and otherwise bilking them for all he could get, wouldn't you?Well, guess what?He went broke giving too much credit to those who couldn't pay. If they were truly needy,he didn't have the heart to demand payment down the road. THAT says as much about his character as anything.
Then Joseph Smith decided he wanted the followers to provide him his material needs so he didn't have to do it for himself .
D&C 43:13 And again, I say unto you, that if ye desire the mysteries of the kingdom, provide for him food and raiment, and whatsoever thing he needeth to accomplish the work wherewith I have commanded him;
In this handy 'revelation' he excuses himself from having to go to work, No 'temporal labours' for Joseph
D&C 24: 9 And in temporal labors thou shalt not have strength, for this is not thy calling. Attend to thy calling and thou shalt have wherewith to magnify thine office, and to expound all scriptures, and continue in laying on of the hands and confirming the churches.
This one is the scariest one, he gave for himself:
An endless supply of women .
D&C132:62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
And collected some of his followers wives as he went along too and married them.
You have no idea what you are talking about. The talk of marriage between Elohim and Mary had nothing to do with sex. It had to do with whether or not Jesus Christ was technically a "bastard child"
bastard: a person born of unmarried parents; an illegitimate child.
So where was this marraige performed then? How did the Priesthood perform this mariage if there was no temple at the time except the one temple where they slashed the throats of animals?
When was the DIVORCE of Mary and Elohim granted so she was free to marry Joseph the carpenter?
Jesus said that couples cannot divorce except for the unfaithfullness of either of the couple?
I don't know the answers to any of those questions. I don't even know if they were technically married. None of those questions are really answered.
Maybe Jesus technically WAS a bastard child. The point is that Brigham Young suspected that Jesus wasn't a bastard child and in order for that to be the case there must have been a marriage of some kind. That was the supposition, but it didn't have anything to do with sex.
I don't think that they claimed to have received revelation on the topics you are discussing. I just think that they were reasoning.
To them it would seem illogical for God to have a bastard/illegitimate child. It was God after all, who ordained marriage and so forth, so it would only seem right that God live by the same rules that HE himself set forth.
Again, most of the quotes you use are quite out of context of the real point they were trying to get across, that God was the Father.
smpf38 These claims they made are no different from the claims Joseph Smith made in his book of mormon with reference to the American Indians being the direct decendants from the lamanites who were orginally the decendamts of an Israeli called Lehi.
We now know they are in fact of Asian/Siberian origins.
Mormonism is based on a simplistic attempt to explain many things and its left us all in total falsehoods.
Mormon logic cost women their dignity in an equally false polygamy.
For starters, Joseph Smith, in the Book of Mormon, never claimed that the American Indians were directly descended from the Lamanites. The actual statement is "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians" and is found in the introduction to the Book of Mormon, which Joseph Smith did not write.
This is Smith talking about the American Indians and the Lamanites being of Jewish origin:
D&C 54: 8 8 And thus you shall take your journey into the regions westward, unto the land of aMissouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.
D&C19:27..that soon it may go to the Jew, of whom the Lamanites are a remnant, that they may believe the gospel, and look not for a dMessiah to come who has already come.
But, the statement could still be correct in that "principal" does not have to mean genetics.
Let's say that my great, great, great, great, great, great, etc. grandfather was a black man from South Africa. However, let's say that all of my other relatives were Caucasian. I AM a direct descendant of the South African man, but those genetic markers would be difficult to find. I would still consider this man to be a "principal ancestor" if important prophecies pertained to that lineage.
'I would still consider this man to be a "principal ancestor"'
Well the LDS Mormon church WOULD NOT agree with you and thats why they changed the Introduction of The Book Of Mormon and REMOVED ' PRINCIPAL ANCESTORS' when describing The Lamanites in relation to AmerIndians.
AssPostle McConkies BULLSHIT statement has been altered.
Elder: Well the LDS Mormon church WOULD NOT agree with you...
Not necessarily. Perhaps they felt that the statement would be misunderstood. Or it could be as simple as McConkie making an assumption that turned out to be incorrect.
I don't think that anybody (except those with axes to grind) thinks that it is that big of a deal.
"I don't think that anybody (except those with axes to grind) thinks that it is that big of a deal."
Good point. The ONLY folks who seem to get their gum in a wad over supposed inconsistencies in LDS doctrine are those with axes to grind, and who don't understand (and don't WANT to understand) what constitutes LDS doctrine and what doesn't. Just because a leader of the LDS church offers an opinion on something, does not make that opinion binding doctrine.
The genetics of this is really quite simple. Let's say that a Caucasian group of 100 people goes to China. Then let's say that 50 of those people tend to marry amongst themselves and 50 of them goes off to mingle with the Chinese.
Now let's say that the group that primarily married amongst themselves is completely destroyed. All that is left is the very diluted genes of the group that intermarried with the Chinese. A thousand years later, you can't expect to readily find Caucasian genes.
See. Now we have gotten to the point where you just haphazardly jump from one accusation to another without resolving the original theme discussed in the video.
So, you know that none of the statements actually say there was physical intercourse. In fact, all LDS leaders clearly maintained that Mary was a Virgin.
Concerning the supposed "marriage", does God have to live by his own rules? Was Jesus Christ an illegitimate child? How do YOU resolve these questions?
'all LDS leaders clearly maintained that Mary was a Virgin'
What do you mean? Not all leaders if any taught that Mary was a Virgin when she maried Joseph. They believed she was a Virgin when Elohim gave her a personal Randy Romantic visit one evening in his body.
Those rules he gave for us suposedly. He is of a higher nature and so the question is irelevant anyway. Mormon Theology teaches that God breaks his own rules he gives us anyway if he wants.
Jesus was not like and us( was human and deity [GOD] at the same time) hence the ilegitimate question is not relevant.
Nothing to resolve. Learn some Historical theology on the nature of Jesus.
Elder: He is of a higher nature and so the question is irelevant anyway.
We were made in his likeness and image. He purposefully designed us to be like him.
Elder: "Jesus was not like and us"
You aren't listening. Spiritually, he was perfect... unlike us. However, he was subjected to the flesh and God's rules like us. He was fully human like us.
"Elder"Joseph...why so angry? You've never been LDS, and I fail to see how our beliefs threaten you. No one is forced to join or convert. Most people convert because they follow the advice in the Book of Mormon about reading it and praying about it. Lots of testimonies have been gotten because of it.
'Most people convert because they follow the advice in the Book of Mormon'
Thats FALSE. approx 90% of those I saw get baptised by the LDS Missionary KIds had not read the Book Of Mormon. I know because I showed them a few things in there and they were shocked.
They were pressured to get baptised to meet quotas for sales targets otherwise the Mission President would think the Mishies were living unworthy sinful lives on the mission.
"They were pressured to get baptized to meet quotas for sales targets otherwise the Mission President would think the Mishies were living unworthy sinful lives on the mission."
Of course,that's far from the truth.Lack of a certain number of baptisms is never equated by the mission president as the missionaries living sinful lives.I know.I served a two year mission in Scotland.And contrary to what you claim,MOST folks DO convert, partly because of believing the BofM to be true. Good try,though.
Its not far from the truth at all. In my Ward our worthiness was always being questioned as to why there were very few investigators or baptisms. The missionaries were always busy with figures and qoutas when I tracted with them.
I saw the whole 'conversion-baptism' process and it was mostly people who were easily manipulated by the missionaries and went inactive almost immediately, the others gave up when they realised the church was deceiving them.
Well...carry on a discussion long enough with anti-Mormons and they begin showing their true colors. They make false accusations, then demand answers to those false accusations. When LDS point out that the initial accusation was not true, then the anti-Mormons level the charge that LDS are "running away from their beliefs". Some anti-Mormons actually believe that it's okay to lie about LDS beliefs, if it cons someone into leaving the church. How twisted is that?
The bottom line is this: Mormons believe that man is made in God's image and likeness, and that God has a body (like Christ's resurrected body). Mormons believe that God the Father is the father of Jesus Christ. Some believe that (like many other visits to many prophets, etc) God the Father personally visited Mary.
However, none of those beliefs ever indicate that there was any sex involved. In fact, the repeated statements over and over by LDS leaders has been that Mary was a virgin.
'the repeated statements over and over by LDS leaders has been that Mary was a virgin. '
YesChristians know that and they believe that Joseph her husband married Mary a Virgin.
LDS theology is that she was a Virgin when Elohim conceived with her. This is why they had to rationalise that she must have been MARRIED to Elohim prior to marrying Joseph.
So did she divorce Elohim going on that same line of teaching by Brigham Young?
The real bottom line is Brigham was full of Cr**. Cultist.
Elder: LDS theology is that she was a Virgin when Elohim conceived with her.
Not true. Brigham Young and all other LDS prophets continued to call Mary a virgin after the conception. In fact, the Book of Mormon calls Mary a Virgin up to the actual birth of Jesus Christ. That is LDS doctrine, no matter how much YOU wish otherwise.
Starting with your first quote... Apparently, you don't know the difference between "birth" and "conception". You do agree that Christ was flesh and blood and was born of a woman... Do you not?
Furthermore, do you notice that throughout these quotes, Mary is repeatedly called "the Virgin" which implies that they didn't believe that physical intercourse was actually involved. Not to mention that "The Seer" you took one quote from was repudiated by the Joseph Smith for not being doctrinal.
Yes she was a Virgin (according to LDS Leaders) when Mormon Elohim came down in his body and had sex with her ( according to Brigham Young).
This is why Brigham Young was equally teaching that Mary must have been maried to Elohim prior to Joseph, otherwise they would be accusing Elohim of Fornication.
This is what they taught as so called LDS Prophets and Apostles.
I know its uncomfortable for you, but this is Mormon reality. Your Video response is very welcome.Cheers
So why did Elohim ned to come down in a BODY? For what purpose? Can he not do anything outside of his material being as you believe?
I can agree with you, but the problem here is what Brigham Young taught. He was NOT capable of understanding that. he was UNEDUCTED and spoke many utter nonsenses which LDS members took as wise council and teaching from the prophet.
Elder: why did Elohim need to come down in a BODY?
As you know, LDS believe that man is made in God's image and likeness. We believe that God has a body. He wouldn't have abandoned that body temporarily. Why did God visit Adam and Eve personally in the Garden of Eden? Why Jesus personally to Paul?
Clearly, a personal visit from Deity does not require physical intercourse to be part of the equation as you attempt to assume for LDS members. That is YOUR sham that you try to pass off on us.
A belief is a personal opinion, not a statement of fact. Even prophets are entitled to personal beliefs. This is something that LDS recognize in our leaders, but anti-Mormons can't seem to get a clue about.Also, most anti-Mormons go to the JofD almost exclusively for material with which to bash the LDS,presenting it as doctrine even though the church does not accept it as such. "Here's what you REALLY believe" is a common theme that I've heard on many occasions.
JOD's include thesermons recorded in General Conferences.
Brigham Young:
'The Lord is in our midst. He teaches the people continually. I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve.' (Journal of Discourses v.13 p 95,)
Still trying to push the JofD as "official LDS doctrine" even when you know it isn't? Calling a cucumber a banana, then holding steadfastly to that false assumption STILL doesn't make the cucumber a banana. Likewise, pulling obscure quotes from the JofD and claiming that they are "official doctrine" does nothing for your credibility.
"Those obscure quotes included recorded talks from LDS General Conferences."
The "recorded" talks were taken down in shorthand, then transcribed, then formated for the printing press, then printed. Speaker, to shorthand, to written, to printing press. Step A to Step B to Step C. I'm surprised that you could think the talks would be 100% accurate after going through all those steps. The JofD even contains a court case. Do you consider that to be "official LDS doctrine" also?
These recorded talks are qouted and printed throughout my D&C Student Manual, my Gosepl principles book and every other current LDS publication.
So why are innacurate unreliable recorded talks being used in church manuals then?
Because the church picks and chooses. They don't like Brigham Youngs Adam God Doctrine or his threats of HELL to women over forcing polygamy with OLD mormon men, so they claim these things are not recorded correctly.
Elder: Because the church picks and chooses. They don't like Brigham Youngs Adam God Doctrine...
Good example. The Doctrine and Covenants clearly teaches that Adam is in fact the same being known as Michael the archangel. In fact, I can pull you quotes where Brigham Young himself teaches this doctrine.
Now if there are more obscure quotes with questionable reliability (especially when compared to D&C), of course the LDS church will choose the doctrine consistent with scripture/teachings.
'The Doctrine and Covenants clearly teaches that Adam is in fact the same being known as Michael the archangel '
Doesn't the LDS teach that Angels are those unmarried not worthy of a greater whatever in D&C132, So how come Michael the Chief Angel ends up as Adam married and according to Brigham Young Adam was a Polygamist God of sort prior to coming to earth.
"Doesn't the LDS teach that Angels are those unmarried not worthy of a greater whatever in D&C132"
If you go into detail about what Joseph Smith taught about angels, you will find that there are messengers who have not yet lived who are called angels, and those who have lived and died and are called angels.
Furthermore, Joseph Smith taught that perfection to godhood can occur long after this life and is not necessarily immediate.
'messengers who have not yet lived who are called angels, and those who have lived and died and are called angels'
Interesting point, Moroni had lived and died ( if he was even real) so according to LDS theology he never made it to godhood and is single and unmarried and yet adorns every LDS Temple Spiral.
Its in my book A marvelous work and a wonder by Apostle Legrand Richards, it says Angels are those who didn't marry.
Elder: ... it says Angels are those who didn't marry.
Open your eyes. Angel (messenger) is a term that is used for those who had not been born yet (Michael/Gabriel/ Lucifer and his angels). Scriptures refer to even mortal men as "angels" (JST Gen 19:15)
As for those who died unsealed, they still have an opportunity to be sealed by proxy, which LDS believe will continue through the millenium. As for Moroni, you are making baseless assumption... again.
Don't forget also this part of the quote which I missed out originally
"... I believe the Father came down in His tabernacle and begat Jesus Christ. Brigham Young JOD 1, p238
Many LDS members believe this today.
This was the LDS prophet speaking, the man who claimed Gods voice came through him. If we are going to choose to disbelieve what he taught, then what is the point of him. He was leading them astray then,
"... I believe the Father came down in His tabernacle and begat Jesus Christ." Brigham Young JOD 1, p238
... LDS members believe this today.
Including me. You might notice that sex is not mentioned. "the power of the Most High" overshadowed Mary. God came down to overshadow Mary, but it is only YOU who indicates that this means sex.
All of these prophets indicated that Mary was a virgin. So that seems to indicate that they did NOT believe that physical intercourse was involved.
The Journal of Discourses was a sixteen-page semimonthly subscription publication privately printed in Liverpool, England, in 1854-1886. It served as the printed word of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, particularly for members who had no access to the Salt Lake City Deseret News. While the Journal most often published sermons of Church leaders, these speeches were not always considered to be official statements of doctrine. Many different kinds of speeches were printed.
Also, "Elder", you obviously are unaware of what it takes for a book or work to be canonized in the LDS church. First, it MUST be presented to the membership of the church for their sustaining vote during a general conference. Only then would it be considered as scripture, or official doctrine. The JofD has never gone through that process, and never will. See my next post for the reason why. :o)
This video is NOT presented by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as the title would have you believe. Furthermore, the views expressed in this video are not official doctrine of the church. "Elder"Joseph has followed typical anti-Mormon tactics by pulling quotes from works he KNOWS are not official doctrine, and represents them as being official doctrine anyway. What a shame that folks like this can't be honest and admit that they are presenting their own personal opinion.
These works are very official. They came from the MOUTHS of men claiming to be living Prophets and Apostles. They don't need your permission or anyone elses to determine if they are real or not.
This is what they believed and taught. And why would you doubt your own living Prophets and Apostles at that time?
I'm glad you disagree with them. It shows that you do not believe your own Apostles and Prophets.
Looks like it's time for a little education about the Journal of Discourses, where you seem to have gotten most of your quotes from.There is a good reason why the JofD is NOT, as a body of work, official doctrine. Does it contain doctrine? Of course. Does it contain errors and personal opinion?Of course to that also. The ONLY books that the LDS church has deemed "official doctrine" is what we refer to as the "the four standard works" (Bible, BofM, D&C, and PofGP. But then, you already knew that.
Its clear from Wilford Woodruffs Diaries and other faithfull followers writings/diaries at the time that they believed in Adam God and various other teachings you prefer to distance yourself from.
Did not Brigham Young have the standard works at the time? Was he ignorant of their contents?
How come he his sermons were so far out of what the standard works supposedly contained?
What is the point of LDS Prophets and Apostles if later you decide to disagree with their teachings?
I'm going to complete the "Mary had another husband" quote. Just a few sentences later, BY explains how the conception of Jesus took place: "That very babe that was cradled in the manger, was begotten....by God our heavenly Father." In the Bible, an angel told Joseph to "fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." (Matthew 1:20) God, being who He is, would not have to have physical sex with Mary in order for her to conceive Jesus.
... I believe the Father came down from heaven, as the Apostles said he did, and begat the Saviour of the world; for he is the ONLY-begotten of the Father, which could not be if the Father did not actually BEHGET HIM IN PERSON.... I believe the Father CAME DOWN in His TABERNACLE and begat Jesus Christ. (Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 1, p. 238)
So what we have, folks, is "Elder" Joseph quoting from a work (The Seer) that he KNOWS was repudiated and disowned by the twelve apostles, Orson Pratt included, as being untrue. The August 23, 1865 article that appeared in the Desert News even stated that where portions of "The Seer" may appear in other works, those parts should be CUT OUT AND DESTROYED. Sad that "Elder" Joseph will ignore this truth and continue using quotes from The Seer.
The Seer, by formal action of the First Presidency and 12 Apostles of the Church, was repudiated, and Elder Orson Pratt himself sanctioned the repudiation. An article published in the Deseret News on the 23rd of August, 1865, signed by the First Presidency and Twelve, stated that: "The Seercontain[s] doctrine which we cannot sanction and which we have felt to disown. Where these objectionable works are bound in volumes, or otherwise, they should be cut out and destroyed." (BH Roberts)
The dilemma is that Mormon Leaders somehow tried to rationalise that Mary was married to The Father Elohim prior to Joseph or else she is a fornicator! lol
If Elohim had lietral sex in the body with one of his daughters Mary and was supposedly married to her then they have to explain why she then divorced a perfect Elohim to marry Joseph ?
Mormonism is so ridiculous. This is what you get when straying from historical Trinitarian Theology.
"The dilemma is that Mormon Leaders somehow tried to rationalise that Mary was married to The Father Elohim prior to Joseph or else she is a fornicator! lol"
What dilemma? The only "dilemma" existing is what "Elder" Joseph has fabricated from his over-active imagination. (Might interest ya'll to know that ElderJoseph used to claim that he was LDS, when, of course, he wasn't. He even offered to email me a photo of a tithing slip with his name on it to prove it. This was several years ago.)
Jose...you also never claimed NOT to be a member. In fact, it took quite awhile of questioning and pointing out slips on your part (i.e. the "I belong to ward one" line), before you FINALLY admitted that you were NOT LDS. I would suggest that your extreme hesitancy to be forthcoming indicates that you WANTED folks to believe that you were LDS.
And I don't "twist things". I correct the errors that others post about the LDS faith, along with educating them about LDS beliefs.
Many Mormons do not seem to know the deep doctrine of the church and teachings of its prophets and apostles.
They taught that Mary was married to 'Elohim' prior to Joseph ! lol Otherwise it would look like Elohim had casual Fornication with what they were teaching.
Not sure how they explain Mary getting re-married to Joseph her supposed second husband. Maybe she divorced Elohim or something. lol
There has never been ANY doctrine that Mary was married to Elohim. I notice that you rarely provide any quotes or references, either. Almost never, in fact. Making up stuff like that is easy. Proving it is another matter.
As "Elder" Joseph knows, the J of D, as a body of work, IS NOT OFFICIAL LDS DOCTRINE. He and I went through this debate several years ago. I even explained to him why the J of D is not, and never will be, official LDS doctrine. It does contain statements that are doctrinal, but it also contains statements that are not doctrinal. Ergo, LDS take the JofD for what it is: good to study and learn from, but to be taken with caution.
J of D recorded Brigham Youngs General Conference talks.
What was the point of them if he ws talking Bullshit and trying to lead to church astray.
What is the point of claiming io be a prophet and then spend the rest of your life Bullshiting the flock with teachings which later get brushed under the carpet.
"Elder" Joseph wrote: "J of D recorded Brigham Youngs General Conference talks."
Ahhh....now we're getting somewhere--at a snail's pace, however. The J of D consists of 26 volumes, each comprising 300+ pages. Now all I have to do is read the entire set of books, HOPING that I will stumble on some quote that "Elder" Joseph claims is contained therein (sarcasm intended).
The entire 26 volumes of JOD is full of rubbish. There is no need to try to stumble on a quote or two. The entire flock were being constantly led astray.
It's clear that these men did not know what they were talking about and were simply a case of the blind leading the blind and still is today.
"They taught that Mary was married to 'Elohim' prior to Joseph !"
Really? Ante up and provide some references for that statement, if you would, please. Otherwise, I'll have to assume that your statement was fabricated.
I'm an old coot who has been a member of the church for over 50 years, and I have NEVER, EVER been taught that (EXCEPT by anti-Mormons, lol).
LOL..0 Stars "Elder" Joseph. "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Presents"???
Just can't resist being dishonest, can you. MOST of the stuff you claim that Mormons were/are taught, I've NEVER heard in church--and I've been LDS for over 60 years now. Go figure. I challenge you to a "discussion" about the "Mormon" Jesus. We'll do it all on this site. (Be good for those who come here to finally hear the truth for a change.) You up to it? Your move, "Elder". :oP
I don't care if you have been a mormon for over 80 years there is one thing certain to me, Joseph Smith is a false prophet. We do have different Jesus, we do have a different God, and you have a counterfeit cult religion. Joseph Smith failed the biblical test for a prophet, he failed as a translator of Egyptian, and he was a teller of tall tales. So bring it on baby, welcome to johsonjoerocks!
"Elder" Joseph wrote: "They presented the teachings that Elohim came down from heaven and screwed Mary in a physical body and hence was even married to her."
STILL no proof or references. PROOF! PROOF! PROOF! Either that, or admit that you've been fabricating stuff.
... I believe the Father came down from heaven, as the Apostles said he did, and begat the Saviour of the world; for he is the ONLY-begotten of the Father, which could not be if the Father did not actually beget him in person.... I believe the Father came down in His tabernacle and begat Jesus Christ. (Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 1, p. 238)
The birth of Christ was natural meaning He grew in Mary's womb as any other baby. He was delivered in the normal way. Except His Father was God and He was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost in a way that no one understands.
So Elder Joseph not only do you misinterpret would the church leaders have said but you add you own foolish imagination by way of drawings to make it more effective. Pretty deceitful if you ask me. The bible teaches that Jesus is the only begotten of the Father and that He had a body of flesh and bones. What is natural in your mind may not have been what is natural in Brigham Youngs mind and going by your drawings I would say your mind is of a much baser content. Mary never had sex with God
Journalof Discourses 7:286, Brigham Young, October 9, 1859
"The Being whom we call Father was the Father of the spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, and he WAS ALSO HIS FATHER PERTAINING TO THE FLESH. Infidels and Christians, make all you can of this statement."
Yes and Christ also said that the Father of the Pharisees is the devil?
Does that mean Satan produced their spirits etc?
The LDS Theology is mistaken and thats why the church leaders got into a pickle teaching that Jesus was naturally concieved. Brigham Young taught that Jesus was not conceived of the Holy Ghost but the bible says otherwise.
This is why they had to teach that Elohim was Marys Husband prior to Joseph otherwise it meant Elohim had fornicated etc.
Now I'm confused. I thought all Christians believed that God was the Father of Jesus Christ. He taught them to begin their prayers by saying "Our Father who art in Heaven"
He said "He that hath seen me hath seen my Father" Was God not His Father?
2morrowman ""He that hath seen me hath seen my Father" OK I understand that to mean that those who saw Jesus saw God.
"No one has ever seen God; the only Son who is in the bosom of the Father has made him known" (Jn 1:18). Jesus had two natures, one of God ( being the son of God) and one of man ( being the son of Mary).
Thats why he needed to pray to the Father( God) and yet declared his authority as the Sonof God as well.
Jornal of Discourses 11:268, Brigham Young, August 19, 1866
"The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, BUT MARY THE WIFE OF JOSEPH HAD ANOTHER HUSBAND. On the manger, was begotten, not by Joseph, the husband of Mary, but by another Being. Do you inquire by whom? He was begotten by God our heavenly Father. This answer may suffice you − you need never inquire more upon that point."
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
2morrowman Maybe try to believe what the bible says rather than claim its translated wrongly when it contradicts LDS beliefs.
Even though there are many churches based on the bible which I can understand why some feel Mormonism is the answer, but there are already 200 sects approx of Mormonism in only 180 years of its existence. In 2000 years there will be many more :((
If theres allready 200 versions of our church in 180 years imagine what could have happened to the bible in 2000 years with all the different churches.
1What kind of grammar is 'allready'? all and ready should be seperate words.
2 'theres' should be 'there are' or 'there is' Why do you find that you should pull me up on my grammar when you are not even capable yourself of correct grammar.
There are more Mormon divisions in its first 180 years than biblical ones in that time frame and no doubt many more to come.
I expect the main LDS church to fragment and shrink. The facts show its a fraud.
"Well Im just a kid so I dont know anything" I dont use correct grammer because I dont care but you were talking about me just being a kid but your the one who writes like he hasnt left highschool. :P
According to the United Nations statistics there were over 23,000 competing and often contradictory denominations worldwide.
33,000+ denominations of Protestantism and counting. How long have they been around again?
If you look within your own church it is no different, Some of you believe all the women will enter polygamy, some believe not. Some believe God was once a man, some believe not, some believe the church prophets are right, some believe they are idiots, some believe the BOM is literal, some believe it's fiction.
Amongst mormon members,some believe blacks are the less valiants, some believe they are not, some believe its the only true church, many don't, some believe the priesthood ban on blacks was wrong, some think it was right, some think God is a white skinned man, some think he is not,
Amongst the LDS church some think they will be exactly like God, some think they will not be not quite as equal, some believe blacks will be servants in CK some think not
Some believe the general Conference is scripture, some think its just opinions, some think Monson talks with Jesus in the salt Lake temple, some think he just goes on a feeling himself.
Some think Elohim had sex with Mary in a physical Body, others think it was artificial insemination, some think it was miraculous.
Those Divisons are no more fundamental than the division amongst latter day saints and what individual members believe.
McConkie had his own beliefs seperate from the church, so did Orson Pratt. So strong that they even published their beliefs. So did Brigham Young who taught Adam is Father God in conference and condemned anyone who objected.
I have heard this doctrine taught before and thought about it a lot and I don't find it shocking anymore. But is it shocking to others because it does not fit our modernistic rational protestant Christian view? In other words does our own parochialism play a part in our non acceptance of Mormon teaching?
verminpants 1 year ago
@verminpants I don't find it shocking either anymore hence I am able to discuss that I bet he gave her a right good shagging (one night stand type of thing) and him being around a zillion years old and Mary maybe still a teen. At least they didn't need to have fertility treatment. BANG on first go unless Brigham Young or other LDS Profits know different of course.
ElderJoseph 1 year ago
@ElderJoseph Lol! I'm gonna tell your bishop you rudest of men!!!
verminpants 1 year ago
@verminpants My Bishop? He is a really nice bloke and his family superb. What can I say.
However he realy thinks he is going to be given more wives in the life to come and tries to discuss this with his wife. She tears her hair out at the thought and refuses to discuss it with him.
This is the harm that Mormonism does to good people. Her life in my opinion is blighted by the thought of the real reality of what Mormon Doctrine really is. Depression amongst LDS is common.
ElderJoseph 1 year ago
@ElderJoseph I wonder what is worse? Depression among LDS or child raping priests among Catholics?
cisdac 6 months ago
@cisdac " I wonder what is worse? Depression among LDS or child raping priests among Catholics?"
Is that all you have to wonder about? Bit of a strange comparison?
In case you didn't realise it but there are lots of Child Rapists in the LDS church holding Temple Recommends and raping right under the noses of LDS Priesthood Discernment. I'll send you a link to some Child rapists convicted from the LDS church.
ElderJoseph 6 months ago
@ElderJoseph Actually, it is a major concern to worry about. Child predators should be caught, charged and jailed. The fact you said that; makes you seem more like a child molester then I originally thought. Your original intention was to show how badly LDS is; and yet you ignore the bigger picture (child abuse). I never claimed there wasn't child abuse among LDS members; I merely showed you the error of your ways. Learn to find the proper mistakes among religions; not just a little one.
cisdac 6 months ago
@ElderJoseph You also made the other video "private" which also is very suspicious. It should be made available to everyone, not just to prove a point. I find that you might be a child predator yourself, I should know, I work with law enforcement agencies. I also worked closely with FBI. If you've molested any children, repent and seek help from people; turn yourself in!
cisdac 6 months ago
This was very informative, but I could have gone without the diagrams. Thanks for the information though. Its really appreciated.
BrotherMurray 1 year ago
@BrotherMurray The 'diagrams' are really for the benefit of LDS cult members who do not know what their own church stands for and has taught and believes. The LDS church leadership have a habit of pretending to be a Christian Church and trying to sound like they have the same beliefs as the majority of churches, yet they don't.
They do not tell their real theology to prospective recruits.
ElderJoseph 1 year ago
Its effective to say the least. Yeah, they tried to recruit me and once I brought up scripture, they said I was "argumentative". Surprise. Heres the best question for them- it flusters them pretty well:
Me: You don't believe in the Trinity, right? Them: Right! Me: Then why do you baptize into it? Them: Uhhh.... Me: Can you show me one example in the scriptures of your baptism? Them: You're argumentative and mean
BrotherMurray 1 year ago
"The older members were taught all their lives that blacks are the less valiants and hence banned from priesthood." All their lives? I doubt that. The statement about blacks being less valiant is pure speculation, and was not in ANY lesson manual the church produced.
Between Sep 05 and Nov 07? Strange, but you offered, over 10 years ago, to show me donation slips to prove that you were attending church. The numbers don't add up, m'man.
JediMormon 2 years ago
Its clear to me you are just muddled up and confused. How can I have offered to show my donation slips ten years ago when my you tube channel only commenced in 2006?
Can you be a bit more productive and only speak of things which are relevant. Its clear what the church has taught for its entire existence and this why Gordon Hinckley had to make a statement about it in the Apr 06 Conf
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
You used to frequent the religious chat rooms on AOL. as did I. THATS where you offered to show me the tithing slips, m'man. And THATS where, when I asked what ward you belonged to, informed me that it was "ward one". Prior to blacks not receiving the priesthood, the church taught that their time for that was not yet, but would occur at some point in the future. There was NEVER any official doctrine as to why blacks could not hold the priesthood at that time.
JediMormon 2 years ago
Jedi You must be mistaken. I haven't chatted in any AOL chatrooms, though I do remember someone here doubting whether I ever attended church and I offered to email them my contribution statements for the two years I attended.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
April 1st, 2006 General Conference, Gordon Hinckley " I remind you that no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. Nor can he consider himself to be in harmony with the teachings of the Church of Christ. How can any man holding the Melchizedek Priesthood arrogantly assume that he is eligible for the priesthood whereas another who lives a righteous life but whose skin is of a different color is ineligible?"
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
And I agree with that 100%. Most members of the church, including me, were ELATED when the revelation came.
JediMormon 2 years ago
Well there will be an even better revelation coming soon when the church throws the Book Of Mormon out as any kind of reliable factual history and instead declares it all a fictional parable.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
That will never happen. The truth of the Book of Mormon is not something that is dictated by the church, but is discovered through study, prayer, and a witness from the Holy Ghost.
JediMormon 2 years ago
It will happen, thats the difference between me and you. I can see the scam, but you are ther willing victim of it.
The book is totally bogus and its creator Smith used his power to screw his followers wives and take their money from them. Wake Up.
See my newest Video about the massive Book Of Mormon Introduction U turn.
Its never too late to cut your losses and reclaim some dignity.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
@JediMormon Sorry, JM, but there is plethora of pronunciations from the pulpit and paper on the black issue. Your prophets even had to have a revelation, spurred by the Fed, to accept blacks or else. So, like with the Polygamy issue a "revelation" pops up. There were some black slaves in Utah back then. Not many, 50 or so. There is a picture of our 911 murdering maniac "Gen. Dame" with 2 black slaves (female of course) in the background.
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
"I ATTENDED FOR TWO YEARS."
Okay...now the question becomes, WHEN did this two year attendance occur? At least 10 years ago, you offered to show me tithing slips to prove that you were attending. I've no doubt that you can prove attendance, but if it was that long ago, you can't honestly make the statement that older members are STILL shocked. I submit that they would either gotten over it by now, or left the church.
JediMormon 2 years ago
@JediMormon between September 05 and November 07 approximately. I'll quite happily email you my 'contribution' slips. I didn't pay Tithe, I paid Humanitarian Aid and fasts regularly as I gained some measure of confidence in the church.
The older members were taught all their lives that blacks are the less valiants and hence banned from priesthood.
Brigahm Young taught that Blacks get the priesthood after all the Valiant WHITES have been brought in and not before then.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Look like members are still shocked to me ,Gordon Hinckley April 06
"Now I am told that racial slurs and denigrating remarks are sometimes heard among us. I remind you that no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. How can any man holding the Melchizedek Priesthood arrogantly assume that he is eligible for the priesthood whereas another who lives a righteous life but whose skin is of a different color is ineligible?"
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"YES Jedi The WHITE members ( older aged 60-80) are stil shocked and suprised because they KNOW what they were taught as youngsters."
I'm wondering how you would know that if you don't attend the LDS church? As you said, "I don't consider it anything to do with me anymore." Do please un-confuse us readers on here.
JediMormon 2 years ago
'I'm wondering how you would know that if you don't attend the LDS church'
I attended for two years.
Only you can get confused over something so simple.
REPEAT:
I ATTENDED FOR TWO YEARS.
I ASKED THINGS, I SPOKE WITH MEMBERS.
OK ?
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Ah...the scripture from 2 Nephi 5:21 has NOTHING to do with Cain or the supposed "Curse of Cain", ElderJoe. Please get your facts straight. As I have told you before, the Lamanites were cursed by God with a dark skin because of their wickedness and disobedience to Him. The two topics are not connected in anyway, shape, or form.
(Next horse, please.)
JediMormon 2 years ago
'As I have told you before, the Lamanites were cursed by God with a dark skin because of their wickedness and disobedience to Him.'
Brigham Young the PROPHET of your LDS UTAH SECT taught they were connected,( Negroes equally cursed with dark skin for disobediance in the pre existence) to his followers and so did the prophets and Apostles after him and including Mark E Peterson in 1954.
LDS members Lived and Died beleiving that.
Was Brighamand all the others leading them astray?
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"The older members in my ward still believe it and are still shocked that the negroes were given the Priesthood."
Really? After over 30 years, some are "still shocked"? Why do I find that hard to believe, "Elder"?
And what's with the "my ward" claim? I thought you disliked the church.
JediMormon 2 years ago
YES Jedi The WHITE members ( older aged 60-80) are stil shocked and suprised because they KNOW what they were taught as youngsters.
It was after a sunday school lesson when it was brought up, there seem to be confusion in the class afterwards so I asked the older members.The younger members and missionaries are UNEDUCATED as to LDS history. All those older members still believe Negroes are the LESS VALIANTS.
My ward as in local ward. I don't consider it anything to do with me anymore.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Curse of Cain "doctrine"??? There you go AGAIN, trying set as doctrine what was originally spoken/written as speculation. The truth is, we don't know who was less valiant and who wasn't. There is nothing in official LDS doctrine (the four standard works) that tells us.
(Sitting back to see what horse is trotted out next...)
JediMormon 2 years ago
Your church Prophets taught this consistently non stop for over 100 years.
The older members in my ward still believe it and are still shocked that the negroes were given the Priesthood.
This was LDS doctrine at its finest. Thats why you have living Prophets to reveal Truths to the folowers.
Whats the point of Prophets claiming to be in communication with God and then teach falsehoods.
The Prophet can't lead you astray according to the prophet. What a joke.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
'There is nothing in official LDS doctrine'
2 Nephi, 5:21 And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For
behold, they had hardened their hearts
against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were WHITE, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a SKIN OF BLACKNESS to come upon them.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
'trying set as doctrine what was originally spoken/written as speculation'
It was not speculation,It was taught throughout the church membership and written about for over 100 years by church Prophets and apostles,
It was only when society was reforming outside of the church that the church slowly started to backtrack and hush away its prior revealed truths.
Many older members who were taught the curse of cain doctrine still believe in it. It was official LDS teachings to members.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." (Proverbs 3:5 - 6) Problem with most anti-Mormons is that they don't trust in the Lord, but depend on their own faulty understanding where LDS are concerned. They don't pray for wisdom like the Bible says. If they did, sincerely, they would know that JS, BY, et. al. were prophets of God, and that the Book of Mormon was true. I rest my case.
JediMormon 2 years ago
The LDS prophet can't lead you astray according to the LDS prophets.
So why do so few accept Adam-God or the Curse of Cain doctrime wgich taught that negroes are the Less valiants and deserving o their disadvantages in life compared to white mormons?
See Apostle Mark E Peterson talk at BYU for further confirmation of this teaching as recent as 1954 and over100 years of LDS prophets and apostles continually teaching this.
and why quote the bible when LDS prophets teach its MISTRANSLATED?
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Looks like some things bear repeating: The Adam/God statement was NEVER doctrine, and never will be. Adam walked and talked with God in the garden of eden. Every LDS knows this, including BY. But...there are STILL some anti-Mormons who cling defiantly to their false assumption that just because the statement appears in the Journal of Discourses, that automatically makes it LDS doctrine. (Feel like I'm running a kindergarten, here.) Don't know how I can explain it any more simply.
JediMormon 2 years ago
Tha Adam God teaching was Doctrine according to Brigham Young.
How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me namely that Adam is our father and God ... "(Brigham Young, Deseret News, v. 22, no.308, June 8, 1873)
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
gotta love the end... DO YOU BELIEVE ME?? lots of people did. your saying that in the video like your telling things out of the side of your mouth... ie twisting things so they suit your purpose. dont know why you post this. obviously from here you believe in god. and as such doing this would be against his word for in the bible (not talking about the b.o.m.) it tells us basically to be nice to our fellow man and do good for each other. attacking another persons faith isnt in there.
Remorce78 2 years ago
Are you inferring that the early Saints had the wisdom to ignore Brigham Young? I don't think so.
When he taught his Adam is God doctrine, many believed it and wrote of it in their diaries.
It was reported in the church newspapers at the time also.
Why else have a so called prophet amongst their midst if he was known to speak total nonsenses. We now know he was full of Crap but not back then, they were misled badly.
I'm not attacking anyones faith. believe what what you want,.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
'DO YOU BELIEVE ME?? lots of people did'
Don't you believe what Brigham Taught?
Why not? If not it's Likley you have the benefit of hindsight and education.
Do you believe in his Adam God doctrine? He taught that Adam was Father God and brought one of his wives with him from Celestial Kingdom to make bodies for his own spirit children.
Not thats what I call TWISTING things. He would say anything, no matter how flawd and falseto justify his own erroneus polygamy.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"I don't know anyone who cons LDS members into leaving and neither do you."
Actually, EJ...I DO know people who con members into leaving the church. You happen to be one of them. There are many others who do the same thing. As for your false assumption that we purposely deceive investigators, not so. Perhaps you consider asking them to read the Book of Mormon and pray to God about it's truthfulness to be deceptive? Alone. No one else around. Just them and God. How it that deceptive? Hummm...?
JediMormon 2 years ago
The "con" happens when you and others who have an ax to grind against the church. You quote from sources that you KNOW are not considered as official doctrine by the church (though you do your best to present them as such). I've had dealings with anti-Mormon on the internet for many years, and in all that time, none of them has ever denied lying occasionally about LDS beliefs and doctrine. Many of them told me that they felt it was justified if the lie caused someone to leave the church.
JediMormon 2 years ago
'and in all that time, none of them has ever denied lying occasionally about LDS beliefs'
You can be trusted as much as Joseph Smith can be trusted when he spent all his life lying, lying to his members over his secretly polygamy and denying it up to his death.
People will see my Mormon Leaders Lying Videos and work it out for themselves. Thats why the church is loosing its once faithfull tithe paying members/victims.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
You talk about liars and lying. See my newest video about the Deception of Doctrine and Covenants 101:4 being used by early church leaders to deceive members, investigators and the public alike..
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
People leave the church because they find out its a lying scam created by Joseph Smith.
they find out he never went to work like his followers did,that he asked for money and material goods, had a house built for himself, asked for followers wives,married followers wives then wanted their daughters too.
They find out about the secret council of fifty and his plans to be crowned king of the world.
You are a mindless victim of a scam and to be avoided at all costs.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Actually, JS worked at whatever jobs he could find. At one time, he even owned a store. Now, if he was as dishonest as you claim, you'd think that he would have been selling shoddy merchandise, charging confiscatory prices, and otherwise bilking them for all he could get, wouldn't you?Well, guess what?He went broke giving too much credit to those who couldn't pay. If they were truly needy,he didn't have the heart to demand payment down the road. THAT says as much about his character as anything.
JediMormon 2 years ago
Jedi Just read D&C and see how Joseph Smith made up revelations for his own gain
First one he wanted a house for himself so he claimed God told the members to build one for him.
D&C 41 : 7 And again, it is meet that my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., should have a house built, in which to live and translate.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Then Joseph Smith decided he wanted the followers to provide him his material needs so he didn't have to do it for himself .
D&C 43:13 And again, I say unto you, that if ye desire the mysteries of the kingdom, provide for him food and raiment, and whatsoever thing he needeth to accomplish the work wherewith I have commanded him;
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
In this handy 'revelation' he excuses himself from having to go to work, No 'temporal labours' for Joseph
D&C 24: 9 And in temporal labors thou shalt not have strength, for this is not thy calling. Attend to thy calling and thou shalt have wherewith to magnify thine office, and to expound all scriptures, and continue in laying on of the hands and confirming the churches.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
This one is the scariest one, he gave for himself:
An endless supply of women .
D&C132:62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
And collected some of his followers wives as he went along too and married them.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
You have no idea what you are talking about. The talk of marriage between Elohim and Mary had nothing to do with sex. It had to do with whether or not Jesus Christ was technically a "bastard child"
bastard: a person born of unmarried parents; an illegitimate child.
smpf38 2 years ago
So where was this marraige performed then? How did the Priesthood perform this mariage if there was no temple at the time except the one temple where they slashed the throats of animals?
When was the DIVORCE of Mary and Elohim granted so she was free to marry Joseph the carpenter?
Jesus said that couples cannot divorce except for the unfaithfullness of either of the couple?
Was Elohim unfaithful or Mary?
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
I don't know the answers to any of those questions. I don't even know if they were technically married. None of those questions are really answered.
Maybe Jesus technically WAS a bastard child. The point is that Brigham Young suspected that Jesus wasn't a bastard child and in order for that to be the case there must have been a marriage of some kind. That was the supposition, but it didn't have anything to do with sex.
smpf38 2 years ago
'I don't know the answers
I don't even know if'
Brigham Young, Orson Pratt and all the other complete idiots should have kept their BIG stupid mouths shut.
They didn't know either.
They had no guidance or revelation but were imposters of the most despicable kind and may suffered at their hands.
Thank goodness in this day and age we are more enlightened and know these men were false and their claims false also.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
I don't think that they claimed to have received revelation on the topics you are discussing. I just think that they were reasoning.
To them it would seem illogical for God to have a bastard/illegitimate child. It was God after all, who ordained marriage and so forth, so it would only seem right that God live by the same rules that HE himself set forth.
Again, most of the quotes you use are quite out of context of the real point they were trying to get across, that God was the Father.
smpf38 2 years ago
smpf38 These claims they made are no different from the claims Joseph Smith made in his book of mormon with reference to the American Indians being the direct decendants from the lamanites who were orginally the decendamts of an Israeli called Lehi.
We now know they are in fact of Asian/Siberian origins.
Mormonism is based on a simplistic attempt to explain many things and its left us all in total falsehoods.
Mormon logic cost women their dignity in an equally false polygamy.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
For starters, Joseph Smith, in the Book of Mormon, never claimed that the American Indians were directly descended from the Lamanites. The actual statement is "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians" and is found in the introduction to the Book of Mormon, which Joseph Smith did not write.
JediMormon 2 years ago
This is Smith talking about the American Indians and the Lamanites being of Jewish origin:
D&C 54: 8 8 And thus you shall take your journey into the regions westward, unto the land of aMissouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.
D&C19:27..that soon it may go to the Jew, of whom the Lamanites are a remnant, that they may believe the gospel, and look not for a dMessiah to come who has already come.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
But, the statement could still be correct in that "principal" does not have to mean genetics.
Let's say that my great, great, great, great, great, great, etc. grandfather was a black man from South Africa. However, let's say that all of my other relatives were Caucasian. I AM a direct descendant of the South African man, but those genetic markers would be difficult to find. I would still consider this man to be a "principal ancestor" if important prophecies pertained to that lineage.
smpf38 2 years ago
'I would still consider this man to be a "principal ancestor"'
Well the LDS Mormon church WOULD NOT agree with you and thats why they changed the Introduction of The Book Of Mormon and REMOVED ' PRINCIPAL ANCESTORS' when describing The Lamanites in relation to AmerIndians.
AssPostle McConkies BULLSHIT statement has been altered.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: Well the LDS Mormon church WOULD NOT agree with you...
Not necessarily. Perhaps they felt that the statement would be misunderstood. Or it could be as simple as McConkie making an assumption that turned out to be incorrect.
I don't think that anybody (except those with axes to grind) thinks that it is that big of a deal.
smpf38 2 years ago
Its a BIG DEAL and has been ALTERED accordingly because of Science and fact bsaed Evidence.
McConkie was BLATANTLY WRONG AS USUAL.
What an embarrasment he is and a fool.
I feel sorry for all those sincere people he MISLED with his writings and claim to be an Apostle.
He never fooled me anyway and no LDS leaders ever will.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"I don't think that anybody (except those with axes to grind) thinks that it is that big of a deal."
Good point. The ONLY folks who seem to get their gum in a wad over supposed inconsistencies in LDS doctrine are those with axes to grind, and who don't understand (and don't WANT to understand) what constitutes LDS doctrine and what doesn't. Just because a leader of the LDS church offers an opinion on something, does not make that opinion binding doctrine.
JediMormon 2 years ago
The genetics of this is really quite simple. Let's say that a Caucasian group of 100 people goes to China. Then let's say that 50 of those people tend to marry amongst themselves and 50 of them goes off to mingle with the Chinese.
Now let's say that the group that primarily married amongst themselves is completely destroyed. All that is left is the very diluted genes of the group that intermarried with the Chinese. A thousand years later, you can't expect to readily find Caucasian genes.
smpf38 2 years ago
smpf38 Why not start again in life, preferable primary school. You sound no different to Brigham Young who taught that men lived on the sun and moon.
To him it was quite simple really as well.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
See. Now we have gotten to the point where you just haphazardly jump from one accusation to another without resolving the original theme discussed in the video.
So, you know that none of the statements actually say there was physical intercourse. In fact, all LDS leaders clearly maintained that Mary was a Virgin.
Concerning the supposed "marriage", does God have to live by his own rules? Was Jesus Christ an illegitimate child? How do YOU resolve these questions?
smpf38 2 years ago
'all LDS leaders clearly maintained that Mary was a Virgin'
What do you mean? Not all leaders if any taught that Mary was a Virgin when she maried Joseph. They believed she was a Virgin when Elohim gave her a personal Randy Romantic visit one evening in his body.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: What do you mean? Not all leaders if any taught that Mary was a Virgin when she married Joseph.
Yes. They taught she was a virgin when she married Joseph, (possibly even until Jesus Christ was born, as the Book of Mormon indicates).
smpf38 2 years ago
'does God have to live by his own rules'
Those rules he gave for us suposedly. He is of a higher nature and so the question is irelevant anyway. Mormon Theology teaches that God breaks his own rules he gives us anyway if he wants.
Jesus was not like and us( was human and deity [GOD] at the same time) hence the ilegitimate question is not relevant.
Nothing to resolve. Learn some Historical theology on the nature of Jesus.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: He is of a higher nature and so the question is irelevant anyway.
We were made in his likeness and image. He purposefully designed us to be like him.
Elder: "Jesus was not like and us"
You aren't listening. Spiritually, he was perfect... unlike us. However, he was subjected to the flesh and God's rules like us. He was fully human like us.
smpf38 2 years ago
"Elder"Joseph...why so angry? You've never been LDS, and I fail to see how our beliefs threaten you. No one is forced to join or convert. Most people convert because they follow the advice in the Book of Mormon about reading it and praying about it. Lots of testimonies have been gotten because of it.
JediMormon 2 years ago
'Most people convert because they follow the advice in the Book of Mormon'
Thats FALSE. approx 90% of those I saw get baptised by the LDS Missionary KIds had not read the Book Of Mormon. I know because I showed them a few things in there and they were shocked.
They were pressured to get baptised to meet quotas for sales targets otherwise the Mission President would think the Mishies were living unworthy sinful lives on the mission.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"They were pressured to get baptized to meet quotas for sales targets otherwise the Mission President would think the Mishies were living unworthy sinful lives on the mission."
Of course,that's far from the truth.Lack of a certain number of baptisms is never equated by the mission president as the missionaries living sinful lives.I know.I served a two year mission in Scotland.And contrary to what you claim,MOST folks DO convert, partly because of believing the BofM to be true. Good try,though.
JediMormon 2 years ago
'Of course,that's far from the truth'
Its not far from the truth at all. In my Ward our worthiness was always being questioned as to why there were very few investigators or baptisms. The missionaries were always busy with figures and qoutas when I tracted with them.
I saw the whole 'conversion-baptism' process and it was mostly people who were easily manipulated by the missionaries and went inactive almost immediately, the others gave up when they realised the church was deceiving them.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Well...carry on a discussion long enough with anti-Mormons and they begin showing their true colors. They make false accusations, then demand answers to those false accusations. When LDS point out that the initial accusation was not true, then the anti-Mormons level the charge that LDS are "running away from their beliefs". Some anti-Mormons actually believe that it's okay to lie about LDS beliefs, if it cons someone into leaving the church. How twisted is that?
JediMormon 2 years ago
You claim antimormons con people into the leaving the church and how twisted is that?
Its as twisted as you present it.
People actually leave the church when they find out its a con.
I don't know anyone who cons LDS members into leaving and neither do you.
However the LDS church does con many people into joining it in the first place.
It purposely deceives investigators and even members about its true history and even doctrine.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
The bottom line is this: Mormons believe that man is made in God's image and likeness, and that God has a body (like Christ's resurrected body). Mormons believe that God the Father is the father of Jesus Christ. Some believe that (like many other visits to many prophets, etc) God the Father personally visited Mary.
However, none of those beliefs ever indicate that there was any sex involved. In fact, the repeated statements over and over by LDS leaders has been that Mary was a virgin.
smpf38 2 years ago
'the repeated statements over and over by LDS leaders has been that Mary was a virgin. '
YesChristians know that and they believe that Joseph her husband married Mary a Virgin.
LDS theology is that she was a Virgin when Elohim conceived with her. This is why they had to rationalise that she must have been MARRIED to Elohim prior to marrying Joseph.
So did she divorce Elohim going on that same line of teaching by Brigham Young?
The real bottom line is Brigham was full of Cr**. Cultist.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: LDS theology is that she was a Virgin when Elohim conceived with her.
Not true. Brigham Young and all other LDS prophets continued to call Mary a virgin after the conception. In fact, the Book of Mormon calls Mary a Virgin up to the actual birth of Jesus Christ. That is LDS doctrine, no matter how much YOU wish otherwise.
smpf38 2 years ago
Starting with your first quote... Apparently, you don't know the difference between "birth" and "conception". You do agree that Christ was flesh and blood and was born of a woman... Do you not?
Furthermore, do you notice that throughout these quotes, Mary is repeatedly called "the Virgin" which implies that they didn't believe that physical intercourse was actually involved. Not to mention that "The Seer" you took one quote from was repudiated by the Joseph Smith for not being doctrinal.
smpf38 2 years ago
Yes she was a Virgin (according to LDS Leaders) when Mormon Elohim came down in his body and had sex with her ( according to Brigham Young).
This is why Brigham Young was equally teaching that Mary must have been maried to Elohim prior to Joseph, otherwise they would be accusing Elohim of Fornication.
This is what they taught as so called LDS Prophets and Apostles.
I know its uncomfortable for you, but this is Mormon reality. Your Video response is very welcome.Cheers
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: "when Mormon Elohim came down in his body and had sex with her ( according to Brigham Young)"
Being "begotten" by God doesn't necessitate sex. I don't see why you are incapable of understanding that.
smpf38 2 years ago
So why did Elohim ned to come down in a BODY? For what purpose? Can he not do anything outside of his material being as you believe?
I can agree with you, but the problem here is what Brigham Young taught. He was NOT capable of understanding that. he was UNEDUCTED and spoke many utter nonsenses which LDS members took as wise council and teaching from the prophet.
What a sham.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: why did Elohim need to come down in a BODY?
As you know, LDS believe that man is made in God's image and likeness. We believe that God has a body. He wouldn't have abandoned that body temporarily. Why did God visit Adam and Eve personally in the Garden of Eden? Why Jesus personally to Paul?
Clearly, a personal visit from Deity does not require physical intercourse to be part of the equation as you attempt to assume for LDS members. That is YOUR sham that you try to pass off on us.
smpf38 2 years ago
The bible does not teach Mary had a personal visit from The Father.
Now you are being deceitful. FULL STOP.
You are twisting things to try to excuse away Brigham Youngs FALSE teachings.
Brighan Yound said he believed the Father came down from Heaven as The Apostles said he did and begat the saviour.
But no apsostle said that in the bible.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
A belief is a personal opinion, not a statement of fact. Even prophets are entitled to personal beliefs. This is something that LDS recognize in our leaders, but anti-Mormons can't seem to get a clue about.Also, most anti-Mormons go to the JofD almost exclusively for material with which to bash the LDS,presenting it as doctrine even though the church does not accept it as such. "Here's what you REALLY believe" is a common theme that I've heard on many occasions.
JediMormon 2 years ago
JOD's include thesermons recorded in General Conferences.
Brigham Young:
'The Lord is in our midst. He teaches the people continually. I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve.' (Journal of Discourses v.13 p 95,)
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Still trying to push the JofD as "official LDS doctrine" even when you know it isn't? Calling a cucumber a banana, then holding steadfastly to that false assumption STILL doesn't make the cucumber a banana. Likewise, pulling obscure quotes from the JofD and claiming that they are "official doctrine" does nothing for your credibility.
JediMormon 2 years ago
"Still trying to push the JofD as "official LDS doctrine"
No I'm jsut showing the world the utter CRAP that LDS apostles and prophets taught and many Saints died beleieving that utter rubbish.
Those obscure quotes included recorded talks from LDS General Conferences.
What was the point of teaching nonsenses at conferences for the saints?
Isn this what they still do today? i think so.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"Those obscure quotes included recorded talks from LDS General Conferences."
The "recorded" talks were taken down in shorthand, then transcribed, then formated for the printing press, then printed. Speaker, to shorthand, to written, to printing press. Step A to Step B to Step C. I'm surprised that you could think the talks would be 100% accurate after going through all those steps. The JofD even contains a court case. Do you consider that to be "official LDS doctrine" also?
JediMormon 2 years ago
These recorded talks are qouted and printed throughout my D&C Student Manual, my Gosepl principles book and every other current LDS publication.
So why are innacurate unreliable recorded talks being used in church manuals then?
Because the church picks and chooses. They don't like Brigham Youngs Adam God Doctrine or his threats of HELL to women over forcing polygamy with OLD mormon men, so they claim these things are not recorded correctly.
The church is a fraud, a cult like the JW's.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: Because the church picks and chooses. They don't like Brigham Youngs Adam God Doctrine...
Good example. The Doctrine and Covenants clearly teaches that Adam is in fact the same being known as Michael the archangel. In fact, I can pull you quotes where Brigham Young himself teaches this doctrine.
Now if there are more obscure quotes with questionable reliability (especially when compared to D&C), of course the LDS church will choose the doctrine consistent with scripture/teachings.
smpf38 2 years ago
"Adam-God" was never a doctrine.
JediMormon 2 years ago
'The Doctrine and Covenants clearly teaches that Adam is in fact the same being known as Michael the archangel '
Doesn't the LDS teach that Angels are those unmarried not worthy of a greater whatever in D&C132, So how come Michael the Chief Angel ends up as Adam married and according to Brigham Young Adam was a Polygamist God of sort prior to coming to earth.
Nothing is consistent in LDS theology.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"Doesn't the LDS teach that Angels are those unmarried not worthy of a greater whatever in D&C132"
If you go into detail about what Joseph Smith taught about angels, you will find that there are messengers who have not yet lived who are called angels, and those who have lived and died and are called angels.
Furthermore, Joseph Smith taught that perfection to godhood can occur long after this life and is not necessarily immediate.
smpf38 2 years ago
'messengers who have not yet lived who are called angels, and those who have lived and died and are called angels'
Interesting point, Moroni had lived and died ( if he was even real) so according to LDS theology he never made it to godhood and is single and unmarried and yet adorns every LDS Temple Spiral.
Its in my book A marvelous work and a wonder by Apostle Legrand Richards, it says Angels are those who didn't marry.
Numerous LDS sources teach this.
Moroni was single.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: ... it says Angels are those who didn't marry.
Open your eyes. Angel (messenger) is a term that is used for those who had not been born yet (Michael/Gabriel/ Lucifer and his angels). Scriptures refer to even mortal men as "angels" (JST Gen 19:15)
As for those who died unsealed, they still have an opportunity to be sealed by proxy, which LDS believe will continue through the millenium. As for Moroni, you are making baseless assumption... again.
smpf38 2 years ago
smpf38
Don't forget also this part of the quote which I missed out originally
"... I believe the Father came down in His tabernacle and begat Jesus Christ. Brigham Young JOD 1, p238
Many LDS members believe this today.
This was the LDS prophet speaking, the man who claimed Gods voice came through him. If we are going to choose to disbelieve what he taught, then what is the point of him. He was leading them astray then,
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"... I believe the Father came down in His tabernacle and begat Jesus Christ." Brigham Young JOD 1, p238
... LDS members believe this today.
Including me. You might notice that sex is not mentioned. "the power of the Most High" overshadowed Mary. God came down to overshadow Mary, but it is only YOU who indicates that this means sex.
All of these prophets indicated that Mary was a virgin. So that seems to indicate that they did NOT believe that physical intercourse was involved.
smpf38 2 years ago
The quote continues ' which could not be if The Father did not ACTAULLY BEGET HIM IN PERSON"
"When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." Matthew 1:18 (KJV)
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
The Holy Ghost was present in order to make the miracle possible. But the Holy Ghost was not the Father.
smpf38 2 years ago
I agree with you that the Holy Ghost was present, however their is no mention of the Father being present also.
You are adding something into the New Testament that is not there. Brigham Young did not know what he was talking about.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Elder: I agree with you that the Holy Ghost was present, however their is no mention of the Father being present also
"The Most High" refers to God the Father. And it doesn't matter if you agree or not, because sex is not involved on either side of the aisle.
smpf38 2 years ago
The Journal of Discourses was a sixteen-page semimonthly subscription publication privately printed in Liverpool, England, in 1854-1886. It served as the printed word of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, particularly for members who had no access to the Salt Lake City Deseret News. While the Journal most often published sermons of Church leaders, these speeches were not always considered to be official statements of doctrine. Many different kinds of speeches were printed.
JediMormon 2 years ago
Also, "Elder", you obviously are unaware of what it takes for a book or work to be canonized in the LDS church. First, it MUST be presented to the membership of the church for their sustaining vote during a general conference. Only then would it be considered as scripture, or official doctrine. The JofD has never gone through that process, and never will. See my next post for the reason why. :o)
JediMormon 2 years ago
This video is NOT presented by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as the title would have you believe. Furthermore, the views expressed in this video are not official doctrine of the church. "Elder"Joseph has followed typical anti-Mormon tactics by pulling quotes from works he KNOWS are not official doctrine, and represents them as being official doctrine anyway. What a shame that folks like this can't be honest and admit that they are presenting their own personal opinion.
JediMormon 2 years ago
These works are very official. They came from the MOUTHS of men claiming to be living Prophets and Apostles. They don't need your permission or anyone elses to determine if they are real or not.
This is what they believed and taught. And why would you doubt your own living Prophets and Apostles at that time?
I'm glad you disagree with them. It shows that you do not believe your own Apostles and Prophets.
Well done, you know they speaking bullshit.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Looks like it's time for a little education about the Journal of Discourses, where you seem to have gotten most of your quotes from.There is a good reason why the JofD is NOT, as a body of work, official doctrine. Does it contain doctrine? Of course. Does it contain errors and personal opinion?Of course to that also. The ONLY books that the LDS church has deemed "official doctrine" is what we refer to as the "the four standard works" (Bible, BofM, D&C, and PofGP. But then, you already knew that.
JediMormon 2 years ago
Its clear from Wilford Woodruffs Diaries and other faithfull followers writings/diaries at the time that they believed in Adam God and various other teachings you prefer to distance yourself from.
Did not Brigham Young have the standard works at the time? Was he ignorant of their contents?
How come he his sermons were so far out of what the standard works supposedly contained?
What is the point of LDS Prophets and Apostles if later you decide to disagree with their teachings?
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
What is doctrine then?
Is their any mention that God was once a man in the standard works?
So why do you believe in it then? Why has the church taught this to its members. It is not in the Standard Works.
I was taught that God was once a man after two years of milk.
is that just Joseph Smiths false sermon also?
King Follet Discourse blunder.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
I'm going to complete the "Mary had another husband" quote. Just a few sentences later, BY explains how the conception of Jesus took place: "That very babe that was cradled in the manger, was begotten....by God our heavenly Father." In the Bible, an angel told Joseph to "fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." (Matthew 1:20) God, being who He is, would not have to have physical sex with Mary in order for her to conceive Jesus.
JediMormon 2 years ago
JediMormon
... I believe the Father came down from heaven, as the Apostles said he did, and begat the Saviour of the world; for he is the ONLY-begotten of the Father, which could not be if the Father did not actually BEHGET HIM IN PERSON.... I believe the Father CAME DOWN in His TABERNACLE and begat Jesus Christ. (Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 1, p. 238)
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
So what we have, folks, is "Elder" Joseph quoting from a work (The Seer) that he KNOWS was repudiated and disowned by the twelve apostles, Orson Pratt included, as being untrue. The August 23, 1865 article that appeared in the Desert News even stated that where portions of "The Seer" may appear in other works, those parts should be CUT OUT AND DESTROYED. Sad that "Elder" Joseph will ignore this truth and continue using quotes from The Seer.
JediMormon 2 years ago
orson Pratt was an Apostle or should we say ASSpostle.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
The Seer, by formal action of the First Presidency and 12 Apostles of the Church, was repudiated, and Elder Orson Pratt himself sanctioned the repudiation. An article published in the Deseret News on the 23rd of August, 1865, signed by the First Presidency and Twelve, stated that: "The Seercontain[s] doctrine which we cannot sanction and which we have felt to disown. Where these objectionable works are bound in volumes, or otherwise, they should be cut out and destroyed." (BH Roberts)
JediMormon 2 years ago
oh lord, the cartoons ...
carlasue88 2 years ago
This is exactly what Mormon Theology is.
The dilemma is that Mormon Leaders somehow tried to rationalise that Mary was married to The Father Elohim prior to Joseph or else she is a fornicator! lol
If Elohim had lietral sex in the body with one of his daughters Mary and was supposedly married to her then they have to explain why she then divorced a perfect Elohim to marry Joseph ?
Mormonism is so ridiculous. This is what you get when straying from historical Trinitarian Theology.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"The dilemma is that Mormon Leaders somehow tried to rationalise that Mary was married to The Father Elohim prior to Joseph or else she is a fornicator! lol"
What dilemma? The only "dilemma" existing is what "Elder" Joseph has fabricated from his over-active imagination. (Might interest ya'll to know that ElderJoseph used to claim that he was LDS, when, of course, he wasn't. He even offered to email me a photo of a tithing slip with his name on it to prove it. This was several years ago.)
JediMormon 2 years ago
I never claimed to b a member but I did claim to pay Humanitarian Aid and fasts and other donations and YES I have the slips to prove it.
Stop TWISTING things like Mormons always have to do in their religion.
the only over active imaginations are the CRAP the Mormon Leaders have taught for years.
Sucker.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
Jose...you also never claimed NOT to be a member. In fact, it took quite awhile of questioning and pointing out slips on your part (i.e. the "I belong to ward one" line), before you FINALLY admitted that you were NOT LDS. I would suggest that your extreme hesitancy to be forthcoming indicates that you WANTED folks to believe that you were LDS.
And I don't "twist things". I correct the errors that others post about the LDS faith, along with educating them about LDS beliefs.
JediMormon 2 years ago
5 Stars Elder Joseph great video!!!
johsonjoerocks 3 years ago
Many Mormons do not seem to know the deep doctrine of the church and teachings of its prophets and apostles.
They taught that Mary was married to 'Elohim' prior to Joseph ! lol Otherwise it would look like Elohim had casual Fornication with what they were teaching.
Not sure how they explain Mary getting re-married to Joseph her supposed second husband. Maybe she divorced Elohim or something. lol
What a crock the whole thing is.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
a lot of mormons don't even know or understand all the wild and crazy doctrines their church has had.
I am just glad that my eyes were opened and i was able to leave with my pride and a new direction in life.
Thanks for the great videos i always enjoy stopping by your channel.
johsonjoerocks 3 years ago
There has never been ANY doctrine that Mary was married to Elohim. I notice that you rarely provide any quotes or references, either. Almost never, in fact. Making up stuff like that is easy. Proving it is another matter.
Your move.
JediMormon 2 years ago
Brigham Young taught it,and its recorded in Journal Of Discourses.
He also taught that Elohim came down from heaven with a physical body and screwed Mary physically to concieve jesus.
The Video has the JOD quotes. Whats the point of a prophet if he was talking complete BULLSHIT.
Go and waste someone elses time you stupid CULTIST.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
As "Elder" Joseph knows, the J of D, as a body of work, IS NOT OFFICIAL LDS DOCTRINE. He and I went through this debate several years ago. I even explained to him why the J of D is not, and never will be, official LDS doctrine. It does contain statements that are doctrinal, but it also contains statements that are not doctrinal. Ergo, LDS take the JofD for what it is: good to study and learn from, but to be taken with caution.
JediMormon 2 years ago
J of D recorded Brigham Youngs General Conference talks.
What was the point of them if he ws talking Bullshit and trying to lead to church astray.
What is the point of claiming io be a prophet and then spend the rest of your life Bullshiting the flock with teachings which later get brushed under the carpet.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"Elder" Joseph wrote: "J of D recorded Brigham Youngs General Conference talks."
Ahhh....now we're getting somewhere--at a snail's pace, however. The J of D consists of 26 volumes, each comprising 300+ pages. Now all I have to do is read the entire set of books, HOPING that I will stumble on some quote that "Elder" Joseph claims is contained therein (sarcasm intended).
JediMormon 2 years ago
The entire 26 volumes of JOD is full of rubbish. There is no need to try to stumble on a quote or two. The entire flock were being constantly led astray.
It's clear that these men did not know what they were talking about and were simply a case of the blind leading the blind and still is today.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"They taught that Mary was married to 'Elohim' prior to Joseph !"
Really? Ante up and provide some references for that statement, if you would, please. Otherwise, I'll have to assume that your statement was fabricated.
I'm an old coot who has been a member of the church for over 50 years, and I have NEVER, EVER been taught that (EXCEPT by anti-Mormons, lol).
JediMormon 2 years ago
The references are on the video. Taught by LDS Leaders.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
LOL..0 Stars "Elder" Joseph. "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Presents"???
Just can't resist being dishonest, can you. MOST of the stuff you claim that Mormons were/are taught, I've NEVER heard in church--and I've been LDS for over 60 years now. Go figure. I challenge you to a "discussion" about the "Mormon" Jesus. We'll do it all on this site. (Be good for those who come here to finally hear the truth for a change.) You up to it? Your move, "Elder". :oP
JediMormon 2 years ago
I don't care if you have been a mormon for over 80 years there is one thing certain to me, Joseph Smith is a false prophet. We do have different Jesus, we do have a different God, and you have a counterfeit cult religion. Joseph Smith failed the biblical test for a prophet, he failed as a translator of Egyptian, and he was a teller of tall tales. So bring it on baby, welcome to johsonjoerocks!
johsonjoerocks 2 years ago
Those men claimed to be leaders of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints.
They presented the teachings that Elohim came down from heaven and screwed Mary in a physical body and hence was even married to her.
They taught it and published it.
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
"Elder" Joseph wrote: "They presented the teachings that Elohim came down from heaven and screwed Mary in a physical body and hence was even married to her."
STILL no proof or references. PROOF! PROOF! PROOF! Either that, or admit that you've been fabricating stuff.
JediMormon 2 years ago
... I believe the Father came down from heaven, as the Apostles said he did, and begat the Saviour of the world; for he is the ONLY-begotten of the Father, which could not be if the Father did not actually beget him in person.... I believe the Father came down in His tabernacle and begat Jesus Christ. (Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 1, p. 238)
ElderJoseph 2 years ago
The birth of Christ was natural meaning He grew in Mary's womb as any other baby. He was delivered in the normal way. Except His Father was God and He was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost in a way that no one understands.
2morrowman 3 years ago
2morrowman Its quite clear to anyone who reads early church leaders statements what they taught.
I'm not suprised you simply want to excuse away the absolute utter RUBBISH and NONSENSE taught by your very own so called Prophets and Apostles.
You don't believe the bible. You beleive its translated wrongly. Its in your Articles of Faith.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
Why do you try to tell me what I believe when I already told you what I believe?
2morrowman 3 years ago
I tell you what Brigham Young and the early LDS Mormon leaders taught as the church authority and not what you believe.
Its clear you don't believe them and you are wise not to.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
So Elder Joseph not only do you misinterpret would the church leaders have said but you add you own foolish imagination by way of drawings to make it more effective. Pretty deceitful if you ask me. The bible teaches that Jesus is the only begotten of the Father and that He had a body of flesh and bones. What is natural in your mind may not have been what is natural in Brigham Youngs mind and going by your drawings I would say your mind is of a much baser content. Mary never had sex with God
2morrowman 3 years ago
Journalof Discourses 7:286, Brigham Young, October 9, 1859
"The Being whom we call Father was the Father of the spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, and he WAS ALSO HIS FATHER PERTAINING TO THE FLESH. Infidels and Christians, make all you can of this statement."
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
Did not Christ say that God was His Father?
2morrowman 3 years ago
Yes and Christ also said that the Father of the Pharisees is the devil?
Does that mean Satan produced their spirits etc?
The LDS Theology is mistaken and thats why the church leaders got into a pickle teaching that Jesus was naturally concieved. Brigham Young taught that Jesus was not conceived of the Holy Ghost but the bible says otherwise.
This is why they had to teach that Elohim was Marys Husband prior to Joseph otherwise it meant Elohim had fornicated etc.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
Now I'm confused. I thought all Christians believed that God was the Father of Jesus Christ. He taught them to begin their prayers by saying "Our Father who art in Heaven"
He said "He that hath seen me hath seen my Father" Was God not His Father?
2morrowman 3 years ago
2morrowman ""He that hath seen me hath seen my Father" OK I understand that to mean that those who saw Jesus saw God.
"No one has ever seen God; the only Son who is in the bosom of the Father has made him known" (Jn 1:18). Jesus had two natures, one of God ( being the son of God) and one of man ( being the son of Mary).
Thats why he needed to pray to the Father( God) and yet declared his authority as the Sonof God as well.
I'm not a Theologian, google for Walter Martin.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
Jornal of Discourses 11:268, Brigham Young, August 19, 1866
"The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, BUT MARY THE WIFE OF JOSEPH HAD ANOTHER HUSBAND. On the manger, was begotten, not by Joseph, the husband of Mary, but by another Being. Do you inquire by whom? He was begotten by God our heavenly Father. This answer may suffice you − you need never inquire more upon that point."
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
Joseph wasn't the father of Christ. He did have another Father, He testified of that.
2morrowman 3 years ago
Joseph never divorced his wife to be because her pregnancy was a miracle and not a physical natural event.
The LDS church denies this scripture as faulty/mistranslated.
Matt 1:18
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
So what is a miracle but something that we don't understand because of our nature but with God all things are possible.
2morrowman 3 years ago
2morrowman Maybe try to believe what the bible says rather than claim its translated wrongly when it contradicts LDS beliefs.
Even though there are many churches based on the bible which I can understand why some feel Mormonism is the answer, but there are already 200 sects approx of Mormonism in only 180 years of its existence. In 2000 years there will be many more :((
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
If theres allready 200 versions of our church in 180 years imagine what could have happened to the bible in 2000 years with all the different churches.
LatterDaySaint1029 3 years ago
latterdaynonsaint
1What kind of grammar is 'allready'? all and ready should be seperate words.
2 'theres' should be 'there are' or 'there is' Why do you find that you should pull me up on my grammar when you are not even capable yourself of correct grammar.
There are more Mormon divisions in its first 180 years than biblical ones in that time frame and no doubt many more to come.
I expect the main LDS church to fragment and shrink. The facts show its a fraud.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
"Well Im just a kid so I dont know anything" I dont use correct grammer because I dont care but you were talking about me just being a kid but your the one who writes like he hasnt left highschool. :P
According to the United Nations statistics there were over 23,000 competing and often contradictory denominations worldwide.
33,000+ denominations of Protestantism and counting. How long have they been around again?
LatterDaySaint1029 3 years ago
If you look within your own church it is no different, Some of you believe all the women will enter polygamy, some believe not. Some believe God was once a man, some believe not, some believe the church prophets are right, some believe they are idiots, some believe the BOM is literal, some believe it's fiction.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
Amongst mormon members,some believe blacks are the less valiants, some believe they are not, some believe its the only true church, many don't, some believe the priesthood ban on blacks was wrong, some think it was right, some think God is a white skinned man, some think he is not,
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
1995:33,820 christian divisions Under U.S. Country Table 2, 6,222 in the U.S.
LatterDaySaint1029 3 years ago
Amongst the LDS church some think they will be exactly like God, some think they will not be not quite as equal, some believe blacks will be servants in CK some think not
Some believe the general Conference is scripture, some think its just opinions, some think Monson talks with Jesus in the salt Lake temple, some think he just goes on a feeling himself.
Some think Elohim had sex with Mary in a physical Body, others think it was artificial insemination, some think it was miraculous.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
Those Divisons are no more fundamental than the division amongst latter day saints and what individual members believe.
McConkie had his own beliefs seperate from the church, so did Orson Pratt. So strong that they even published their beliefs. So did Brigham Young who taught Adam is Father God in conference and condemned anyone who objected.
ElderJoseph 3 years ago
So your saying it doesnt matter what people think.
LatterDaySaint1029 3 years ago