I wasn't going to post about it. I have done a good job just letting Mormonism fall by the wayside and move on with more interesting things in my life. I consider myself to be recovered from its influence (except for the occasional clashes of opinion given forth by members of my family who are still involved in it).
Late Sunday night, the leader of the Mormon religion, Gordon B. Hinckley, passed away at the old age of 97, after battling colon cancer. During this period of time between the passing of one "prophet" and the installation of a new "prophet", the body of the church is in a slight state of upheaval. True, by tradition, the next in line is the President of the Quorum of 12, and that would be Thomas Monson. But, Boyd K. Packer, who has been acting President since Thomas Monson has been 1st counselor to the past three "prophets", could be named the next "prophet", because he is older than Monson and has served in the capacity of President of the Quorum for longer than Monson. A person like Packer is likely to even argue the case for himself, and could cause discord and even a schizm within the Quorum who is supposed to be receiving "divine inspiration" regarding the next to be called "Prophet, Seer and Revelator".
I can only hope for such a thing. It would demonstrate that the leaders are merely men, and Jesus doesn't have any say in the matter.
What is a prophet? One would assume that he has the ability to "speak with God, receive instructions from God, or be able to warn of troublesome events". Gordon Hinckley, like all of his predecessors, had neither the ability to see future events, but he also did not even know basic fundamental teachings of his predecessors, and denied many times in public discourse that such things as: "Man is what God once was." and "Blacks are never to receive the priesthood power because of their linage from Cain." These are truths that Brigham Young taught from the pulpit, and all his successors for over 100 years taught and believed, and sent their missionaries out to preach to all the world.
During the course of his "calling", he preferred to be called President of the Church. He shied away from the title of Prophet. He knew in his heart that he didn't have the power to lead by divine providence, only by precedent and tradition had he been handed the reigns of the leadership in the Mormon religion. And, the next "prophet" will be named in the same way, without having to demonstrate one iota of ability to make prophecies, or even have a bright light shine down on him from above, with a heavenly angel declaring that he shall be the chosen seer. It seems a shame that nobody else gets to have the scene with God and Jesus, just Joseph Smith (and we have his word on that).
I personally can't believe how many people are actually surprised that he died. He was 97 years old. He had cancer. It's a no-brainer.
While I'm here, I thought I would bring with me some quotes from Gordon through the years, and then maybe somebody out there can explain to me what exactly makes him so special, and why he gets the title of "prophet".
"Now we are at war. Great forces have been mobilized and will continue to be. Political alliances are being forged. We do not know how long this conflict will last. We do not know what it will cost in lives and treasure. We do not know the manner in which it will be carried out. It could impact the work of the Church in various ways."
"No one knows how long it will last. No one knows precisely where it will be fought. No one knows what it may entail before it is over. We have launched an undertaking the size and nature of which we cannot see at this time."
"I do not know what the future holds. I do not wish to sound negative, but I wish to remind you of the warnings of scripture and the teachings of the prophets which we have had constantly before us."
"Now, I do not wish to be an alarmist. I do not wish to be a prophet of doom. I am optimistic. I do not believe the time is here when an all-consuming calamity will overtake us. I earnestly pray that it may not. There is so much of the Lord’s work yet to be done. We, and our children after us, must do it. I can assure you that we who are responsible for the management of the affairs of the Church will be prudent and careful as we have tried to be in the past. The tithes of the Church are sacred."
- The Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Times in Which We Live,” October 2001 General Conference (Ensign, Nov. 2001, Page 72)
"I hope that prayer will take on a new luster in our lives. None of us knows what lies ahead. We may speculate, but we do not know."
- The Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, October 2001 General Conference “Till We Meet Again,” (Ensign, Nov. 2001, Page 89)
During an CNN interview after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Larry King asked Hinckley if God could have prevented the attacks:
KING: President Hinckley, though, couldn't He (God) have prevented this?
HINCKLEY: Oh, I suppose so. I believe He's all powerful, yes. I don't know His will. I don't know how He operates.
- Larry King Live CNN Interview, September 14, 2001,
link here
"Brigham Young said if you went to Heaven and saw God it would be Adam and Eve. I don't know what he meant by that." Pointing to a grim-faced portrait of the Lion of the Lord, as Young was called, Hinckley said, "There he is, right there. I'm not going to worry about what he said about those things." I asked whether Mormon theology was a form of polytheism. "I don't have the remotest idea what you mean," Hinckley said impatiently."
- Hinckley Interview in "Lives of the Saint", New Yorker, January 2002
link here
"Beyond the wonderful and descriptive words found in sections 76 and 137 [D&C 76; D&C 137] we know relatively little concerning the celestial kingdom and those who will be there. At least some of the rules of eligibility for acceptance into that kingdom are clearly set forth, but other than that, we are given little understanding."
"The next question you ask is why Eve was created from Adam. I can only respond that an all-wise Creator did it that way...."
"Now, Virginia, you call attention to the statement in the scriptures that Adam should rule over Eve. (See Gen. 3:16.) You ask why this is so. I do not know."
"You ask whether men are more important than women. I am going to turn that question back to you. Would any of us be here, either men or women, without the other?"
- The Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, November 1991 Young Womens Conference, “Daughters of God,” (Ensign, Nov. 1991, Page 97)
Question: "There are some significant differences in your beliefs [and other Christian churches]. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a man?"
Hinckley: "I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about."
- Interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997, p 3/Z1
From an interview Jan 29th, 2002 conducted by reporter Helmut Nemetschek, ZDF television, Germany, at Salt Lake City, Utah, in the Church Administration Building:
Question: "Until 1978 no person of color attained the priesthood in your church. Why it took so long time to overcome the racism?"
Hinckley: "I don’t know. I don’t know. (long pause) I can only say that. (long pause) But it’s here now. We’re carrying on a very substantial work on Africa for instance and in Brazil. We’re working among their people developing them."
Question: "Now, Mr. President, one question which is a little bit complicated for me to understand but I heard it an one colleague asked me to ask you. What will be your position when DNA analysis will show that in history there never had been an immigration from Israel to North America? It could be that scientists will find out?"
GBH: "It hasn’t happened. That hasn’t been determined yet. All I can say is that’s speculative. No one really knows that, the answer to that. Not at this point."
- Interview Jan 29th, 2002 conducted by reporter Helmut Nemetschek, ZDF television, Germany, at Salt Lake City, Utah, in the Church Administration Building.
link here
From an interview on the Australian Broadcasting Company's Sunday night television show COMPASS:
COMPASS:: So in retrospect was the Church wrong in that [denying blacks the priesthood]?
HINCKLEY: No I don't think it was wrong. It, things, various things happened in different periods. There's a reason for them.
COMPASS: What was the reason for that?
HINCKLEY: I don't know what the reason was.
COMPASS: Is it a problem for the Church that it is still.. has a tag of being racist?
HINCKLEY: No, I don't think so. I don't see that anymore.
- Australian Broadcasting Company, COMPASS, April 8, 2005
Question: "Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?"
Hinckley: "I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it. I haven't heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don't know a lot about it and I don't know that others know a lot about it."
- Interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, Time Magazine, Aug 4, 1997
link here
When asked about the church's posture towards Homosexuals, Hinckley said he knows they "have a problem." So Larry King asked him if they were born with this "problem:"
KING: A problem they caused, or they were born with?
HINCKLEY: I don't know. I'm not an expert on these things. I don't pretend to be an expert on these things. The fact is, they have a problem.
- Larry King Live CNN Interview, December 26, 2004,
link here
Regarding the Mountian Meadows Massacre, the Prophet said: "No one can explain what happened in these meadows 142 years ago. We may speculate, but we do not know. We do not understand it. We cannot comprehend it. We can only say that the past is long since gone."
- The Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, Mountain Meadows Massacre Monument Ceremony, September 11th, 1999,
link here
When is a "prophet" speaking as a man? Apparently every time he opens his mouth...
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Review of John Dehlin's "Why They Leave" presentation
[This is a power-point presentation that can only be viewed by Internet Explorer Browsers using a PC. If you have a Mac, or using another browser, click here to go to John Dehlin's Mormon Stories site.]
I sent a TBM member I know a link to this site. She just sent back an email thanking me, telling me she watched it and can see now why I chose to leave. BUT not one word about the particulars (like JS having many wives, Mark Hoffman scandal, the rock-in-a-hat translation) so I really doubt that she really did watch it, since she has previously denied any of these things happened.
It's frustrating having to plant all these tiny seeds, water them constantly, pull weeds and make sure they get plenty of sunlight, but I guess that's the best way to make a garden...
I just can't understand John's position that the church has a dilemma when it comes to admitting the basis of their religion has been proven unfounded, yet they feel it's in the best interest to perpetuate the myth for the sake of those who still believe in it vs. yanking the rug out from under them and letting the church authority fall apart.
Seems to me that the church is the one that created this false impression and delusion in the first place, and it only serves the interests of those in authority to keep the myth in place. It's not right for them to continue to hammer in the ideas of "one true church" to the faithful masses while a few lucky people that happen upon John's website get to learn all about the problems and then find ways to maintain their involvement by becoming a 'cafeteria Mormon'. Most people don't know they have the choice to do so, and that's the way the church wants it to stay.
That's why I left. I can't abide the constant drumming and drilling of the mantras of "one true church" and then work my way around all those expectations to maintain the perception of upholding Mormonism teachings when I know that there are thousands who take it literally and expect others to do the same. My sister is a classic example of this. I would never be able to get away with cafeteria Mormonism when compared to her interpretations of the teachings.
I think it's dishonest to remain in the church and keep a straight face when you don't believe a word of it. It's a waste of time trying to position yourself as a role model of moderation when you're expected to tow the line like everyone else. Besides, more often then not, if you aren't acting 100% like the most devout, they start to question among themselves why you get to maintain your recommend and do half the work. Then they complain to the bishop that you aren't being held to the same standards they are. Then when they slack off too, and attend only every other weekend, and reduce their calling responsibilities, and limit their participation in classes, etc., they point out that you have been doing it for years and still maintain your membership status on equal footing.
Then it's only a matter of time before the bishop gets on your case about attendance, tithing, calling responsibilities and other such "obligations", because even the smallest perception that someone is getting a pass when others must struggle through the least bit of sin (like making up missed tithing payments in order to obtain a recommend, or being disfellowshipped because of heavy petting) receives scorn and private condemnation of your fellow members. It's somewhat like running a kindergarten, in my opinion. There's always Sister Bertha-better-than-you who runs and tattles to the Bishop every small infraction she sees (like wearing flip-flops to sacrament meeting), and suddenly you're hauled in to explain yourself, or chastised to be a better example.
The church is wrong to keep perpetuating the myth of Joseph's divinity and the restoration of Jesus' original church organization, and just because they have worked themselves into a hole doesn't mean that they should now keep it going for the sake of preserving the status quo and maintaining the belief system so that people don't get upset and question what they have been taught. That's exactly what should happen, in my opinion. They are covering their own asses, by purposefully NOT looking any further than they have to, so they don't have to deal with the possibility of it not being true. Then they can keep up the act and maintain authority.
A lie is a lie is a lie, and it don't matter if it comes in black, white, or all the shades of the rainbow. Everyone deserves an equal chance to decide what to base their lives on, and those missionaries are sent out worldwide with one thing on the agenda: "feed them milk and sugar, never show them gristle or blood".
And John, if you are reading this, consider for a moment that you have an advantage that most members of your ward do not, that you have been presented or made aware of all the pertinent facts and have made a choice based upon that information, but not everyone does. Is that really fair and honest to knowingly allow such a divide within the church? Aren't you actually helping perpetuate that system by remaining active in the church and upholding the leaders, even though you don't take it literally like they expect you to? Don't you see that as cutting corners and re-interpreting to fit your own needs?
Why not ACTIVELY promote it, John Dehlin?
Don't you think having a website sometimes isn't enough?
My family used to come by all the time and read my blog, accusing me of all kinds of sin for "tearing down the church". Like you, I arrived at a place where I couldn't believe the literal interpretations of the church, its leaders and most of the devout followers. I left because I feel it's dishonest to help perpetuate the myth, even by allowing them to count me as a faithful devout member. I knew that I wasn't ever going to be devout again, after learning that the literal interpretations were wrong.
I am not on board with remaining in the church and acting as a covert spy, skimming under the radar to avoid detection, and gaining the popular vote for my acts of kindness. You are still subjected to the judgment of humans who believe they have the authority to intercede between you and God. Remaining in the church means having to pass their judgment from time to time, and that keeps the myth of priesthood authority alive and well in the Mormon belief system. But, I was a convert. I don't have multi-generations of Mormonism. I can see how 'cafeteria Mormonism' helps those who don't want to cause family strife or burn away the memories of those early pioneer families who believed 'literally' that Brigham Young was their God on the earth.
There are thousands converted every year, based on the same myth that holds those who have been born into the belief. This is wrong, in my opinion. Those who are multi-generational have reasons to hold on to those myths, because it ties the family together. I believe that those who are converted should be given the entire truth before choosing to join, or it's not an honest gain. I feel that the responsibility lies with SLC and the missionary program. They can (and have) done whatever it takes to gain converts, to keep the church alive, to keep the coffers filled with tithes, and to keep the loyal base strong. It involves the use of "fluffy bunny" information. They do it knowingly. That's why I call it a lie.
I read your essay on your website, (How to Stay in the LDS church after becoming disaffected) and I can't understand how you can advocate paying less than 10% tithe and the church will be satisfied with whatever you decide to offer. Either you are just fortunate to live where you live, or you simply have never heard of cases where people are compelled to pay the entire 10% of their gross, or lose their temple recommend. Is the answer just "move to a different ward"? That doesn't work, because that file follows you everywhere, and so do your past sins, and actions of rebellion (like not paying tithing). If you have a bishop who is out to 'bring you in line', moving to another ward 200 miles away does not solve this problem. (personal experience talking).
What if every member was eventually like you, John? What if they all let go of the literal interpretation, but kept their membership covertly like you do? How would that help prevent thousands of newcomers every year from being indoctrinated into the "one true church" concept?
Let's say that in your ward of 200+ members, everyone was just like you, taught the lessons they felt were acceptable to them as Christians, skipped over the parts they don't agree with, and re-interpreted the messages of the GA's so that it fits their world view? How long would that last, before some SP or Area Authority noticed this rogue ward and made a special trip to give the sacrament talk on "Loyalty to the Church"?
In my view, it would be impossible for everyone in the church to adopt your position, because it would tear down the base of loyalty and devotion needed to sustain the church in the first place. They need the myth. It's the only magical claim they have. It's what sets the Mormon church apart and lures people to leave their own church behind to join up. People are becoming convinced that the Mormon church has something to offer them that no other church can do: authority and priesthood power. By choosing to remain, you are becoming complicit in upholding the myth.
I chose to leave because I refuse to uphold a church whose claims are designed to "replace" mainstream Christian beliefs. Missionaries don't limit themselves to non-Christian types, their target group is other Christians. Their bait is a lie, in my opinion. And I have the concern for others of various Christian beliefs, in that I don't wish for them to chose to become Mormon, live the Mormon lifestyle of "literal belief", make the sacrifices necessary to belong, and cut off their children and grandchildren who decide it isn't for them. In my opinion, they would do just as well without the Mormon belief system if they just maintained their membership in whatever Christian denomination they currently uphold.
I can see why you would want to stay, John. But making the case for others to stay is only helping the church continue to draw others in that are not as enlightened as you are. Do you ever hope to reach them all with your message? And if you reach enough to really make a difference, wouldn't that be undermining the authority of the church? Lots of people get ex'd for doing what you do, and I don't think it's right that some get to remain in good standing while others are cut off and bullied into submission. That's another reason to get out, in my opinion.
I sent a TBM member I know a link to this site. She just sent back an email thanking me, telling me she watched it and can see now why I chose to leave. BUT not one word about the particulars (like JS having many wives, Mark Hoffman scandal, the rock-in-a-hat translation) so I really doubt that she really did watch it, since she has previously denied any of these things happened.
It's frustrating having to plant all these tiny seeds, water them constantly, pull weeds and make sure they get plenty of sunlight, but I guess that's the best way to make a garden...
I just can't understand John's position that the church has a dilemma when it comes to admitting the basis of their religion has been proven unfounded, yet they feel it's in the best interest to perpetuate the myth for the sake of those who still believe in it vs. yanking the rug out from under them and letting the church authority fall apart.
Seems to me that the church is the one that created this false impression and delusion in the first place, and it only serves the interests of those in authority to keep the myth in place. It's not right for them to continue to hammer in the ideas of "one true church" to the faithful masses while a few lucky people that happen upon John's website get to learn all about the problems and then find ways to maintain their involvement by becoming a 'cafeteria Mormon'. Most people don't know they have the choice to do so, and that's the way the church wants it to stay.
That's why I left. I can't abide the constant drumming and drilling of the mantras of "one true church" and then work my way around all those expectations to maintain the perception of upholding Mormonism teachings when I know that there are thousands who take it literally and expect others to do the same. My sister is a classic example of this. I would never be able to get away with cafeteria Mormonism when compared to her interpretations of the teachings.
I think it's dishonest to remain in the church and keep a straight face when you don't believe a word of it. It's a waste of time trying to position yourself as a role model of moderation when you're expected to tow the line like everyone else. Besides, more often then not, if you aren't acting 100% like the most devout, they start to question among themselves why you get to maintain your recommend and do half the work. Then they complain to the bishop that you aren't being held to the same standards they are. Then when they slack off too, and attend only every other weekend, and reduce their calling responsibilities, and limit their participation in classes, etc., they point out that you have been doing it for years and still maintain your membership status on equal footing.
Then it's only a matter of time before the bishop gets on your case about attendance, tithing, calling responsibilities and other such "obligations", because even the smallest perception that someone is getting a pass when others must struggle through the least bit of sin (like making up missed tithing payments in order to obtain a recommend, or being disfellowshipped because of heavy petting) receives scorn and private condemnation of your fellow members. It's somewhat like running a kindergarten, in my opinion. There's always Sister Bertha-better-than-you who runs and tattles to the Bishop every small infraction she sees (like wearing flip-flops to sacrament meeting), and suddenly you're hauled in to explain yourself, or chastised to be a better example.
The church is wrong to keep perpetuating the myth of Joseph's divinity and the restoration of Jesus' original church organization, and just because they have worked themselves into a hole doesn't mean that they should now keep it going for the sake of preserving the status quo and maintaining the belief system so that people don't get upset and question what they have been taught. That's exactly what should happen, in my opinion. They are covering their own asses, by purposefully NOT looking any further than they have to, so they don't have to deal with the possibility of it not being true. Then they can keep up the act and maintain authority.
A lie is a lie is a lie, and it don't matter if it comes in black, white, or all the shades of the rainbow. Everyone deserves an equal chance to decide what to base their lives on, and those missionaries are sent out worldwide with one thing on the agenda: "feed them milk and sugar, never show them gristle or blood".
And John, if you are reading this, consider for a moment that you have an advantage that most members of your ward do not, that you have been presented or made aware of all the pertinent facts and have made a choice based upon that information, but not everyone does. Is that really fair and honest to knowingly allow such a divide within the church? Aren't you actually helping perpetuate that system by remaining active in the church and upholding the leaders, even though you don't take it literally like they expect you to? Don't you see that as cutting corners and re-interpreting to fit your own needs?
Why not ACTIVELY promote it, John Dehlin?
Don't you think having a website sometimes isn't enough?
My family used to come by all the time and read my blog, accusing me of all kinds of sin for "tearing down the church". Like you, I arrived at a place where I couldn't believe the literal interpretations of the church, its leaders and most of the devout followers. I left because I feel it's dishonest to help perpetuate the myth, even by allowing them to count me as a faithful devout member. I knew that I wasn't ever going to be devout again, after learning that the literal interpretations were wrong.
I am not on board with remaining in the church and acting as a covert spy, skimming under the radar to avoid detection, and gaining the popular vote for my acts of kindness. You are still subjected to the judgment of humans who believe they have the authority to intercede between you and God. Remaining in the church means having to pass their judgment from time to time, and that keeps the myth of priesthood authority alive and well in the Mormon belief system. But, I was a convert. I don't have multi-generations of Mormonism. I can see how 'cafeteria Mormonism' helps those who don't want to cause family strife or burn away the memories of those early pioneer families who believed 'literally' that Brigham Young was their God on the earth.
There are thousands converted every year, based on the same myth that holds those who have been born into the belief. This is wrong, in my opinion. Those who are multi-generational have reasons to hold on to those myths, because it ties the family together. I believe that those who are converted should be given the entire truth before choosing to join, or it's not an honest gain. I feel that the responsibility lies with SLC and the missionary program. They can (and have) done whatever it takes to gain converts, to keep the church alive, to keep the coffers filled with tithes, and to keep the loyal base strong. It involves the use of "fluffy bunny" information. They do it knowingly. That's why I call it a lie.
I read your essay on your website, (How to Stay in the LDS church after becoming disaffected) and I can't understand how you can advocate paying less than 10% tithe and the church will be satisfied with whatever you decide to offer. Either you are just fortunate to live where you live, or you simply have never heard of cases where people are compelled to pay the entire 10% of their gross, or lose their temple recommend. Is the answer just "move to a different ward"? That doesn't work, because that file follows you everywhere, and so do your past sins, and actions of rebellion (like not paying tithing). If you have a bishop who is out to 'bring you in line', moving to another ward 200 miles away does not solve this problem. (personal experience talking).
What if every member was eventually like you, John? What if they all let go of the literal interpretation, but kept their membership covertly like you do? How would that help prevent thousands of newcomers every year from being indoctrinated into the "one true church" concept?
Let's say that in your ward of 200+ members, everyone was just like you, taught the lessons they felt were acceptable to them as Christians, skipped over the parts they don't agree with, and re-interpreted the messages of the GA's so that it fits their world view? How long would that last, before some SP or Area Authority noticed this rogue ward and made a special trip to give the sacrament talk on "Loyalty to the Church"?
In my view, it would be impossible for everyone in the church to adopt your position, because it would tear down the base of loyalty and devotion needed to sustain the church in the first place. They need the myth. It's the only magical claim they have. It's what sets the Mormon church apart and lures people to leave their own church behind to join up. People are becoming convinced that the Mormon church has something to offer them that no other church can do: authority and priesthood power. By choosing to remain, you are becoming complicit in upholding the myth.
I chose to leave because I refuse to uphold a church whose claims are designed to "replace" mainstream Christian beliefs. Missionaries don't limit themselves to non-Christian types, their target group is other Christians. Their bait is a lie, in my opinion. And I have the concern for others of various Christian beliefs, in that I don't wish for them to chose to become Mormon, live the Mormon lifestyle of "literal belief", make the sacrifices necessary to belong, and cut off their children and grandchildren who decide it isn't for them. In my opinion, they would do just as well without the Mormon belief system if they just maintained their membership in whatever Christian denomination they currently uphold.
I can see why you would want to stay, John. But making the case for others to stay is only helping the church continue to draw others in that are not as enlightened as you are. Do you ever hope to reach them all with your message? And if you reach enough to really make a difference, wouldn't that be undermining the authority of the church? Lots of people get ex'd for doing what you do, and I don't think it's right that some get to remain in good standing while others are cut off and bullied into submission. That's another reason to get out, in my opinion.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Just Answer the Question: Do Mormons believe and teach that Jesus and Satan are Brothers?
Once again, multi-mouth Mitt is attempting to dishonestly skirt and misrepresent as alleged anti-Mormon religious bigotry the clearly-stated Mormon doctrine of a Jesus-Satan brotherhood. For the one of the latest examples of his blatant deceptive tactics, see:
here and here
_____
But blatant deception is nothing new on the part of the Mormon Church, for and about which Romney utters his lies.
Mormon apologist W. John Walsh has continued predictable the Mormon duck-and-dodge hodgepodge by asserting that LDS doctrine does not teach that Jesus and Satan are brothers:
"Is Jesus the brother of Satan? . . .
" . . . [I]t can be said that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers, in the sense of both being spiritually begotten by the Father, but it is a misrepresentation to say so without giving the contextual background. Whatever similarities in background exist between Jesus and Satan pale compared to the differences. Jesus is the Beloved and Chosen, who is the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh. . . .
"['Is Jesus the brother of Satan?'] is a common question asked by those exposed to Anti-Mormon literature. Anti-Mormons often twist our doctrines out of context to make people falsely believe that Latter-Day Saints denigrate Jesus and consider Satan and the Lord to be equals. Of course, anyone familiar with our beliefs about Jesus Christ knows that we have the utmost respect and reverence for Our Savior and Redeemer.
"First, Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God the Father (and is therefore divine) and the mortal virgin Mary. Satan, a malignant spirit, does not share this parental heritage of Jesus, and cannot be considered divine in any respect.
"Therefore, in the usual way that we speak of brothers and sisters, Jesus and Satan are not brothers."
See here
_____
Nice attempt at dodging, there, Brother Walsh.
To had fuel to the fib, the official Mormon website declares that, in fact, Jesus and Satan are brothers, and does so by linking to an officially-published Primary lesson for children, wherein the Mormon Church teaches the following about the Jesus-Satan brotherhood:
"1. In the premortal life we were spirit children and lived with our heavenly parents . . .
2. Jesus was the firstborn spirit child of Heavenly Father and is the older brother of our spirits . . .
3. Lucifer, who became Satan, was also a spirit child of the Heavenly Father . . ." ("Jesus Christ Volunteered to Be Our Savior, " Lesson 2: Primary 7: New Testament, 5)
See it here
Unfortunately for LDS spinmeisters, the Mormon Church's official magazine, the "Ensign," in its "I Have a Question" forum, had made it clear that the LDS Church emphatically accepts as doctrine--based both in quoted scripture and the statements of Mormon General Authorities--the notion that Jesus and Satan are literal brothers and that, in fact, Satan (also like Jesus) is a son of God:
"How can Jesus and Lucifer be spirit brothers when their characters and purposes are so utterly opposed?
"Jess L. Christensen, Institute of Religion director at Utah State University, Logan, Utah [responds]:
"'On first hearing, the doctrine that Lucifer and our Lord, Jesus Christ, are brothers may seem surprising to some—especially to those unacquainted with latter-day revelations.
"But both the scriptures and the prophets affirm that Jesus Christ and Lucifer are indeed offspring of our Heavenly Father and, therefore, spirit brothers.
"Jesus Christ was with the Father from the beginning. Lucifer, too, was an angel “who was in authority in the presence of God,” a 'son of the morning.' (See Isa. 14:12; D&C 76:25–27.)
"Both Jesus and Lucifer were strong leaders with great knowledge and influence. But as the Firstborn of the Father, Jesus was Lucifer’s older brother. (See Col. 1:15; D&C 93:21.)
"How could two such great spirits become so totally opposite? The answer lies in the principle of agency, which has existed from all eternity. (See D&C 93:30–31.) Of Lucifer, the scripture says that because of rebellion “he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies.” (Moses 4:4.) Note that he was not created evil, but became Satan by his own choice.
"When our Father in Heaven presented his plan of salvation, Jesus sustained the plan and his part in it, giving the glory to God, to whom it properly belonged. Lucifer, on the other hand, sought power, honor, and glory only for himself. (See Isa. 14:13–14; Moses 4:1–2.)
"When his modification of the Father’s plan was rejected, he rebelled against God and was subsequently cast out of heaven with those who had sided with him. (See Rev. 12:7–9; D&C 29:36–37.)
"That brothers would make dramatically different choices is not unusual. It has happened time and again, as the scriptures attest: Cain chose to serve Satan; Abel chose to serve God. (See Moses 5:16–18.)
"Esau “despised his birthright”; Jacob wanted to honor it. (Gen. 25:29–34.)
"Joseph’s brothers sought to kill him; he sought to preserve them. (Gen. 37:12–24; Gen. 45:3–11.)
"It is ironic that the agency with which Lucifer rebelled is the very gift he tried to take from man. His proposal was that all be forced back into God’s presence. (See Moses 4:1, 3.)
"But the principle of agency is fundamental to the existence and progression of intelligent beings: as we make wise choices, we grow in light and truth. On the other hand, wrong choices—such as the one Satan made—stop progress and can even deny us blessings that we already have. (See D&C 93:30–36.)
"In order for us to progress, therefore, we must have the opportunity to choose good or evil. Interestingly, Satan and his angels—those who opposed agency—have become that opposition. As the prophet Lehi taught, 'Men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.' (2 Ne. 2:27.)
"Although the Father has allowed Satan and his angels to tempt mankind, he has given each of us the ability to rise above temptation. (See 1 Cor. 10:13.) He has also given us the great gift of the Atonement.
"When the Lord placed enmity between Eve’s children and the devil, Satan was told that he would bruise the heel of Eve’s seed, but her seed would bruise his head. (See Moses 4:21.)
"President Joseph Fielding Smith explained that 'the "God of peace," who according to the scriptures is to bruise Satan, is Jesus Christ.” (Answers to Gospel Questions, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1957, 1:3.)
"Satan would bruise the Savior’s heel by leading men to crucify Him. But through his death and resurrection, Christ overcame death for all of us; and through his atonement, he offers each of us a way to escape the eternal ramifications of sin. Thus, Satan’s machinations have been frustrated and eventually he will be judged, bound, and cast into hell forever. (See Rev. 20:1–10; D&C 29:26–29.)
"In Hebrew, the word bruise means 'to crush or grind.' Therefore, the very heel that was bruised will crush Satan and will help us overcome the world and return to our Father. As we use our agency to choose good over evil, the atonement of Christ prepares the way for us to return to our Father in Heaven.
"We can only imagine the sorrow of our Heavenly Father as he watched a loved son incite and lead a rebellion and lose his opportunity for exaltation. But we can also imagine the Father’s love and rejoicing as he welcomed back the beloved son who had valiantly and perfectly fought the battles of life and brought about the great Atonement through his suffering and death. (Jess L. Christensen, 'I Have a Question,' Ensign, June 1986, 25–26)
See it here
_____
Moreover, in keeping with historic LDS doctrine on the matter, Apostle Spencer W. Kimball declared that Jesus and Satan are brothers:
"There is another power in this world forceful and vicious. In the wilderness of Judea, on the temple's pinnacles and on the high mountain, a momentous contest took place between two brothers, Jehovah and Lucifer, sons of Elohim." (Kimball, "Conference Report," April 1964, p .95)
"There is another power in this world, forceful and vicious. In the wilderness of Judea, on the temple's pinnacle and on the high mountain, a momentous contest took place between two brothers, Jehovah and Lucifer, sons of Elohim. When physically weak from fasting, Christ was tempted by Lucifer: 'If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread.' (Luke 4:3.)
"Similarly Satan had contended for the subservience of Moses. Satan, also a son of God, had rebelled and had been cast out of heaven and not permitted an earthly body as had his brother Jehovah. Much depended upon the outcome of this spectacular duel. Could Lucifer control and dominate this prophet Moses, who had learned so much directly from his Lord?" (Kimball, "Faith Precedes the Miracle," p. 87)
See it here
_____
Now, to reasonably thinking people who hear the Mormon claim that Jesus and Satan are brothers, the reaction goes like this, with accompanying head-scratching as they try to digest the Mormon Church tortured explanations:
"Wow. Jesus and Satan sure sound like blood brothers.
"But, Mormons have a nuanced sense of brotherhood.
"Mormons believe that ' . . . all beings were created by God and are His spirit children,' says Kim Farah, spokeswoman for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
"Mormons believe in a pre-life existence populated by spirit children waiting to be born. All those spirit children are brothers and sisters in a general sense. This is why Mormons refer to each other as Brother and Sister (and joke about being the brethren and the 'cistern').
"'What this means is that as spirit children, Jesus and Satan were brothers. But they were not brothers in any sort of human sense,' says Jan Shipps, an historian at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis, who is considered the foremost non-Mormon authority on Mormon history and culture.
"In other words, Jesus and Lucifer were never siblings like me and my brother, who I thought was Satan when he vomited in my shoes."
See it here
Yeah, right, uh-huh and whatever.
In the meantime, for additional quotes and sources to Mormon claims that Jesus and Satan are, literally speaking, brothers of God the Father, see:
here
*****My Thoughts*****
When I was about 13-14 years old, I remember attending various worship services with my grandparents, who were very upset that we had "become Mormon". Somehow, the minister we were listening to would know about this fact and make his sermon built around the false doctrines of the Mormon religion, bringing up such things as polygamy, becoming Gods, and Jesus and Satan being brothers. My sister and I sat dumbfounded at some of these sermons, not having a clue what the minister was talking about, and assuming that he was just mistaken, or had read Anti-Mormon literature. We also assumed that our grandparents had informed the minister of our "situation" and that they were trying to "deprogram" us by using the intervention of the pastors in the various church services they took us to. We attended the Church of the Nazorene, the Bible Holiness Church, the Christian Union Church, the Full Faith Christian Center, etc... and it seemed highly unlikely that each sermon we heard would be directed at the only two Mormons in the entire congregation.
I remember making fun of my grandmother's assertion that Mormons worship Joseph Smith. I even pretended to mock worship while chanting "Joseph Smith", just because I found the thought of it so absurd. Now I understand what she was talking about. I didn't see it before, because I had just joined the church, but after 20+ years in it, I believe her. I'm sorry I made fun of her concern for me, and wish I could take it back.
I remember writing a letter to my grandparents defending my religion, and pointing out all the reasons why it was true, and better, and more complete than their regular plain vanilla Christianity, and now, years later, I can see where I was wrong to be so proud, so arrogant and full of myself for knowing the "truth" while others wallow in "ignorance" and "stiff-neckedness". Shame on me for using these words against people who were worried about my welfare.
Here I am on the flip side of the coin.
The LDS church teaches that all humans, all angels, all creatures were created by one God of a whole eternal family of Gods, and that we all existed before the Earth was created for our physical test. We would need to obtain knowledge and experience in order to progress past this child-like state we were in, and we petitioned our God-creator for the chance to become like him. (similar to how our children want to grow up to become like us). In this pre-existence, we discussed together what types of experiences and tests we would need in order to grow and gain wisdom and knowledge. Our eldest brother, Jesus, the first born, proposed a plan of free agency, knowing some would be lost and not be able to return. Another of God's creations, an angel of light, called Lucifer, proposed a plan in which not one soul would be lost, all would gain the necessary knowledge and wisdom, and all would return. He expected to be glorified in exchange for this guarantee. And God decided that Jesus' plan was better, even though it meant that some of his children would not return. Then, according to Mormon theology, Lucifer basically incited a riot, stirring up 1/3 of the souls against Jesus' plan, because they wanted a guarantee that they would complete the trials and tests. There was 1/3 who sided with Jesus, and they would ultimately become those souls who would obtain human form, and receive the opportunity to progress to Godhood. And the remaining 1/3 were fence-sitters, neither for or against one plan or the other. And because of this they were considered "less-valiant" in the pre-existance. Therefore, these souls would still get the opportunity for a human experience, but they would be faced with harder trials, such as being born with disabilities, being born outside Mormon families, being born to parents of African or Asian lineage, or not having the same opportunity to hear the message of salvation while in this earthly state. Therefore they would be rewarded according to their accomplishments, and because they were lukewarm in the "family feud" between Jesus and Lucifer, their fates would be sealed and they would never obtain Godhood. But, those who chose Jesus and his plan, would be born to Mormon families, sealed in the covenant, serve righteous missions, obtain their endowments in the temple, memorize the sacred handgrips, words, and signs, wear the special garment with the compass and the square stitched in the right places, fulfill their duties in the church, complete the ordinance work for all of their dead relatives, pay an honest tithe, have as many babies as they are physically able to do without regard for financial concerns or personal preference, and always listen to the words and advice of their prophets and the "Lord's Anointed", and if they were good enough, and worked hard enough, and fulfilled all of the requirements, then they would be able to obtain Celestial Glory, and be sealed to their families forever in an unending chain of generations. But only the very elect of these select individuals would ever obtain Godhood, because it is also necessary to have been given the Second Anointing to make their calling and election sure, and to be made Priests and Kings (or Priestesses and Queens unto their husbands) in the Kingdom of Heaven, whereas in the endowment session, they are only anointed to potentially become such.
See, how wonderful this plan is?
Even after all that work, if you haven't had your calling and election made sure by receiving the Second Anointing, you'll make it to the CK, but you won't become rulers of your own spirit children, you won't be able to give them the same chance at progression to become a God themselves, and you won't be able to obtain it either, because you didn't know that you had to be anointed a second time in the Holy of Holies withing the Salt Lake Temple. There are thousands of faithful Mormons who don't know that they have been passed over for this ordinance because it is "so sacred" that it isn't even revealed to you until (or unless) you are called to receive it. And then, you are forbidden from discussing it with anyone, not any family or other members, because you are "so special" that you were chosen to receive this calling and election as a Priest and King (or etc.) that if you were to let it be known, you would lose this guarantee of Godhood.
Your own mother could have had this ordinance, and she couldn't tell you. And she can't ever know if you have received it either. Your bishop might not even know about it. Or your Stake President. But if they did, they couldn't tell you, or they would lose their guarantee. See how masterful the plan is?
Go ahead. Google it. Type in "Second Anointing LDS" You might be surprised.
And that's all I have to say about that.......
here and here
_____
But blatant deception is nothing new on the part of the Mormon Church, for and about which Romney utters his lies.
Mormon apologist W. John Walsh has continued predictable the Mormon duck-and-dodge hodgepodge by asserting that LDS doctrine does not teach that Jesus and Satan are brothers:
"Is Jesus the brother of Satan? . . .
" . . . [I]t can be said that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers, in the sense of both being spiritually begotten by the Father, but it is a misrepresentation to say so without giving the contextual background. Whatever similarities in background exist between Jesus and Satan pale compared to the differences. Jesus is the Beloved and Chosen, who is the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh. . . .
"['Is Jesus the brother of Satan?'] is a common question asked by those exposed to Anti-Mormon literature. Anti-Mormons often twist our doctrines out of context to make people falsely believe that Latter-Day Saints denigrate Jesus and consider Satan and the Lord to be equals. Of course, anyone familiar with our beliefs about Jesus Christ knows that we have the utmost respect and reverence for Our Savior and Redeemer.
"First, Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God the Father (and is therefore divine) and the mortal virgin Mary. Satan, a malignant spirit, does not share this parental heritage of Jesus, and cannot be considered divine in any respect.
"Therefore, in the usual way that we speak of brothers and sisters, Jesus and Satan are not brothers."
See here
_____
Nice attempt at dodging, there, Brother Walsh.
To had fuel to the fib, the official Mormon website declares that, in fact, Jesus and Satan are brothers, and does so by linking to an officially-published Primary lesson for children, wherein the Mormon Church teaches the following about the Jesus-Satan brotherhood:
"1. In the premortal life we were spirit children and lived with our heavenly parents . . .
2. Jesus was the firstborn spirit child of Heavenly Father and is the older brother of our spirits . . .
3. Lucifer, who became Satan, was also a spirit child of the Heavenly Father . . ." ("Jesus Christ Volunteered to Be Our Savior, " Lesson 2: Primary 7: New Testament, 5)
See it here
Unfortunately for LDS spinmeisters, the Mormon Church's official magazine, the "Ensign," in its "I Have a Question" forum, had made it clear that the LDS Church emphatically accepts as doctrine--based both in quoted scripture and the statements of Mormon General Authorities--the notion that Jesus and Satan are literal brothers and that, in fact, Satan (also like Jesus) is a son of God:
"How can Jesus and Lucifer be spirit brothers when their characters and purposes are so utterly opposed?
"Jess L. Christensen, Institute of Religion director at Utah State University, Logan, Utah [responds]:
"'On first hearing, the doctrine that Lucifer and our Lord, Jesus Christ, are brothers may seem surprising to some—especially to those unacquainted with latter-day revelations.
"But both the scriptures and the prophets affirm that Jesus Christ and Lucifer are indeed offspring of our Heavenly Father and, therefore, spirit brothers.
"Jesus Christ was with the Father from the beginning. Lucifer, too, was an angel “who was in authority in the presence of God,” a 'son of the morning.' (See Isa. 14:12; D&C 76:25–27.)
"Both Jesus and Lucifer were strong leaders with great knowledge and influence. But as the Firstborn of the Father, Jesus was Lucifer’s older brother. (See Col. 1:15; D&C 93:21.)
"How could two such great spirits become so totally opposite? The answer lies in the principle of agency, which has existed from all eternity. (See D&C 93:30–31.) Of Lucifer, the scripture says that because of rebellion “he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies.” (Moses 4:4.) Note that he was not created evil, but became Satan by his own choice.
"When our Father in Heaven presented his plan of salvation, Jesus sustained the plan and his part in it, giving the glory to God, to whom it properly belonged. Lucifer, on the other hand, sought power, honor, and glory only for himself. (See Isa. 14:13–14; Moses 4:1–2.)
"When his modification of the Father’s plan was rejected, he rebelled against God and was subsequently cast out of heaven with those who had sided with him. (See Rev. 12:7–9; D&C 29:36–37.)
"That brothers would make dramatically different choices is not unusual. It has happened time and again, as the scriptures attest: Cain chose to serve Satan; Abel chose to serve God. (See Moses 5:16–18.)
"Esau “despised his birthright”; Jacob wanted to honor it. (Gen. 25:29–34.)
"Joseph’s brothers sought to kill him; he sought to preserve them. (Gen. 37:12–24; Gen. 45:3–11.)
"It is ironic that the agency with which Lucifer rebelled is the very gift he tried to take from man. His proposal was that all be forced back into God’s presence. (See Moses 4:1, 3.)
"But the principle of agency is fundamental to the existence and progression of intelligent beings: as we make wise choices, we grow in light and truth. On the other hand, wrong choices—such as the one Satan made—stop progress and can even deny us blessings that we already have. (See D&C 93:30–36.)
"In order for us to progress, therefore, we must have the opportunity to choose good or evil. Interestingly, Satan and his angels—those who opposed agency—have become that opposition. As the prophet Lehi taught, 'Men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.' (2 Ne. 2:27.)
"Although the Father has allowed Satan and his angels to tempt mankind, he has given each of us the ability to rise above temptation. (See 1 Cor. 10:13.) He has also given us the great gift of the Atonement.
"When the Lord placed enmity between Eve’s children and the devil, Satan was told that he would bruise the heel of Eve’s seed, but her seed would bruise his head. (See Moses 4:21.)
"President Joseph Fielding Smith explained that 'the "God of peace," who according to the scriptures is to bruise Satan, is Jesus Christ.” (Answers to Gospel Questions, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1957, 1:3.)
"Satan would bruise the Savior’s heel by leading men to crucify Him. But through his death and resurrection, Christ overcame death for all of us; and through his atonement, he offers each of us a way to escape the eternal ramifications of sin. Thus, Satan’s machinations have been frustrated and eventually he will be judged, bound, and cast into hell forever. (See Rev. 20:1–10; D&C 29:26–29.)
"In Hebrew, the word bruise means 'to crush or grind.' Therefore, the very heel that was bruised will crush Satan and will help us overcome the world and return to our Father. As we use our agency to choose good over evil, the atonement of Christ prepares the way for us to return to our Father in Heaven.
"We can only imagine the sorrow of our Heavenly Father as he watched a loved son incite and lead a rebellion and lose his opportunity for exaltation. But we can also imagine the Father’s love and rejoicing as he welcomed back the beloved son who had valiantly and perfectly fought the battles of life and brought about the great Atonement through his suffering and death. (Jess L. Christensen, 'I Have a Question,' Ensign, June 1986, 25–26)
See it here
_____
Moreover, in keeping with historic LDS doctrine on the matter, Apostle Spencer W. Kimball declared that Jesus and Satan are brothers:
"There is another power in this world forceful and vicious. In the wilderness of Judea, on the temple's pinnacles and on the high mountain, a momentous contest took place between two brothers, Jehovah and Lucifer, sons of Elohim." (Kimball, "Conference Report," April 1964, p .95)
"There is another power in this world, forceful and vicious. In the wilderness of Judea, on the temple's pinnacle and on the high mountain, a momentous contest took place between two brothers, Jehovah and Lucifer, sons of Elohim. When physically weak from fasting, Christ was tempted by Lucifer: 'If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread.' (Luke 4:3.)
"Similarly Satan had contended for the subservience of Moses. Satan, also a son of God, had rebelled and had been cast out of heaven and not permitted an earthly body as had his brother Jehovah. Much depended upon the outcome of this spectacular duel. Could Lucifer control and dominate this prophet Moses, who had learned so much directly from his Lord?" (Kimball, "Faith Precedes the Miracle," p. 87)
See it here
_____
Now, to reasonably thinking people who hear the Mormon claim that Jesus and Satan are brothers, the reaction goes like this, with accompanying head-scratching as they try to digest the Mormon Church tortured explanations:
"Wow. Jesus and Satan sure sound like blood brothers.
"But, Mormons have a nuanced sense of brotherhood.
"Mormons believe that ' . . . all beings were created by God and are His spirit children,' says Kim Farah, spokeswoman for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
"Mormons believe in a pre-life existence populated by spirit children waiting to be born. All those spirit children are brothers and sisters in a general sense. This is why Mormons refer to each other as Brother and Sister (and joke about being the brethren and the 'cistern').
"'What this means is that as spirit children, Jesus and Satan were brothers. But they were not brothers in any sort of human sense,' says Jan Shipps, an historian at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis, who is considered the foremost non-Mormon authority on Mormon history and culture.
"In other words, Jesus and Lucifer were never siblings like me and my brother, who I thought was Satan when he vomited in my shoes."
See it here
Yeah, right, uh-huh and whatever.
In the meantime, for additional quotes and sources to Mormon claims that Jesus and Satan are, literally speaking, brothers of God the Father, see:
here
*****My Thoughts*****
When I was about 13-14 years old, I remember attending various worship services with my grandparents, who were very upset that we had "become Mormon". Somehow, the minister we were listening to would know about this fact and make his sermon built around the false doctrines of the Mormon religion, bringing up such things as polygamy, becoming Gods, and Jesus and Satan being brothers. My sister and I sat dumbfounded at some of these sermons, not having a clue what the minister was talking about, and assuming that he was just mistaken, or had read Anti-Mormon literature. We also assumed that our grandparents had informed the minister of our "situation" and that they were trying to "deprogram" us by using the intervention of the pastors in the various church services they took us to. We attended the Church of the Nazorene, the Bible Holiness Church, the Christian Union Church, the Full Faith Christian Center, etc... and it seemed highly unlikely that each sermon we heard would be directed at the only two Mormons in the entire congregation.
I remember making fun of my grandmother's assertion that Mormons worship Joseph Smith. I even pretended to mock worship while chanting "Joseph Smith", just because I found the thought of it so absurd. Now I understand what she was talking about. I didn't see it before, because I had just joined the church, but after 20+ years in it, I believe her. I'm sorry I made fun of her concern for me, and wish I could take it back.
I remember writing a letter to my grandparents defending my religion, and pointing out all the reasons why it was true, and better, and more complete than their regular plain vanilla Christianity, and now, years later, I can see where I was wrong to be so proud, so arrogant and full of myself for knowing the "truth" while others wallow in "ignorance" and "stiff-neckedness". Shame on me for using these words against people who were worried about my welfare.
Here I am on the flip side of the coin.
The LDS church teaches that all humans, all angels, all creatures were created by one God of a whole eternal family of Gods, and that we all existed before the Earth was created for our physical test. We would need to obtain knowledge and experience in order to progress past this child-like state we were in, and we petitioned our God-creator for the chance to become like him. (similar to how our children want to grow up to become like us). In this pre-existence, we discussed together what types of experiences and tests we would need in order to grow and gain wisdom and knowledge. Our eldest brother, Jesus, the first born, proposed a plan of free agency, knowing some would be lost and not be able to return. Another of God's creations, an angel of light, called Lucifer, proposed a plan in which not one soul would be lost, all would gain the necessary knowledge and wisdom, and all would return. He expected to be glorified in exchange for this guarantee. And God decided that Jesus' plan was better, even though it meant that some of his children would not return. Then, according to Mormon theology, Lucifer basically incited a riot, stirring up 1/3 of the souls against Jesus' plan, because they wanted a guarantee that they would complete the trials and tests. There was 1/3 who sided with Jesus, and they would ultimately become those souls who would obtain human form, and receive the opportunity to progress to Godhood. And the remaining 1/3 were fence-sitters, neither for or against one plan or the other. And because of this they were considered "less-valiant" in the pre-existance. Therefore, these souls would still get the opportunity for a human experience, but they would be faced with harder trials, such as being born with disabilities, being born outside Mormon families, being born to parents of African or Asian lineage, or not having the same opportunity to hear the message of salvation while in this earthly state. Therefore they would be rewarded according to their accomplishments, and because they were lukewarm in the "family feud" between Jesus and Lucifer, their fates would be sealed and they would never obtain Godhood. But, those who chose Jesus and his plan, would be born to Mormon families, sealed in the covenant, serve righteous missions, obtain their endowments in the temple, memorize the sacred handgrips, words, and signs, wear the special garment with the compass and the square stitched in the right places, fulfill their duties in the church, complete the ordinance work for all of their dead relatives, pay an honest tithe, have as many babies as they are physically able to do without regard for financial concerns or personal preference, and always listen to the words and advice of their prophets and the "Lord's Anointed", and if they were good enough, and worked hard enough, and fulfilled all of the requirements, then they would be able to obtain Celestial Glory, and be sealed to their families forever in an unending chain of generations. But only the very elect of these select individuals would ever obtain Godhood, because it is also necessary to have been given the Second Anointing to make their calling and election sure, and to be made Priests and Kings (or Priestesses and Queens unto their husbands) in the Kingdom of Heaven, whereas in the endowment session, they are only anointed to potentially become such.
See, how wonderful this plan is?
Even after all that work, if you haven't had your calling and election made sure by receiving the Second Anointing, you'll make it to the CK, but you won't become rulers of your own spirit children, you won't be able to give them the same chance at progression to become a God themselves, and you won't be able to obtain it either, because you didn't know that you had to be anointed a second time in the Holy of Holies withing the Salt Lake Temple. There are thousands of faithful Mormons who don't know that they have been passed over for this ordinance because it is "so sacred" that it isn't even revealed to you until (or unless) you are called to receive it. And then, you are forbidden from discussing it with anyone, not any family or other members, because you are "so special" that you were chosen to receive this calling and election as a Priest and King (or etc.) that if you were to let it be known, you would lose this guarantee of Godhood.
Your own mother could have had this ordinance, and she couldn't tell you. And she can't ever know if you have received it either. Your bishop might not even know about it. Or your Stake President. But if they did, they couldn't tell you, or they would lose their guarantee. See how masterful the plan is?
Go ahead. Google it. Type in "Second Anointing LDS" You might be surprised.
And that's all I have to say about that.......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
