Blaspheme against the Holy Ghost. Mark 3:29. 
Posted on 11/23/2007 9:14:46 AM PST by Gamecock
At this point Smith goes into a fascinating discussion of Genesis 1:1 and how this passage supports his theology,[1] but we move past this to remain focused upon ascertaining the what of his theology more than the how at this point.
Oh, ye lawyers, ye doctors, and ye priests, who have persecuted me, I want to let you know that the Holy Ghost knows something as well as you do. The head God called together the Gods and sat in grand council to bring forth the world. The grand councilors sat at the head in yonder heavens and contemplated the creation of the worlds which were created at the time.[2] . . . In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it. When we begin to learn this way, we begin to learn the only true God, and what kind of a being we have got to worship. Having a knowledge of God, we begin to know how to approach him, and how to ask so as to receive an answer. When we understand the character of God, and how to come to him, he begins to unfold the heavens to us, and to tell us all about it.
Every LDS person who embraces these words as true must realize how they sound to the ears of an orthodox Christian. God calling a council of the Gods? Concocting a plan to create the world and people it? Such words are so far removed from historic Christian belief that many struggle to react properly to them. We must remember that it is claimed by Mormons today that this is also what was believed by the Apostles of Jesus Christ, such as Paul, John, and Peter. Yet, their testimony to these things has been muted by time and by the corruption of the Scriptures.
Man’s Spirit Eternal and Uncreated
Smith then goes on to lay the foundation of the LDS denial of creatio ex nihilo, creation out of nothing, the historic Christian belief that God did not create the universe out of pre-existing matter, but solely by His creative power and will.
Now, I ask all who hear me, why the learned men who are preaching salvation, say that God created the heavens and the earth out of nothing? The reason is, that they are unlearned in the things of God, and have not the gift of the Holy Ghost; they account it blasphemy in any one to contradict their idea. If you tell them that God made the world out of something, they will call you a fool. But I am learned, and know more than all the world put together. The Holy Ghost does, anyhow, and He is within me, and comprehends more than all the world: and I will associate myself with Him.
How does Smith deal with the assertion that God created the heavens and the earth, as well as man himself?
You ask the learned doctors why they say the world was made out of nothing; and they will answer, Doesnt the Bible say He created the world? And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the baurau which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship. Hence, we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaoschaotic matter, which is element, and inwhich dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end.
Here Joseph Smith clearly teaches the eternality of matter, and the idea that God does not create but instead organizes. It should be noted, then, that while Smith has said that God has not eternally been God, matter has eternally existed. Hence, matter pre-exists God in that God has not always been God!
At this point, then, Smith moves to the spirit of man. Note well what he says:
We say that God himself is a self-existent being. Who told you so? It is correct enough; but how did it get into your heads? Who told you that man did not exist in like manner upon the same principles? Man does exist upon the same principles. God made a tabernacle and put a spirit into it, and it became a living soul. (Refers to the old Bible.) How does it read in the Hebrew? It does not say in the Hebrew that God created the spirit of man. It says God made man out of the earth and put into him Adams spirit, and so became a living body.
The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal[3] with God himself. . . . I am dwelling on the immortality of the spirit of man. Is it logical to say that the intelligence of spirits is immortal, and yet that it had a beginning? The intelligence of spirits had not beginning, neither will it have an end. That is good logic. That which has a beginning may have an end. There never was a time when there were not spirits; for they are co-equal [co-eternal] with our Father in heaven. . . . But if I amright, I might with boldness proclaim from the house-tops that God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself.
Mark well the assertion, God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all. This flows from the idea that the intelligence of spirits is immortal and without beginning, and that God Himself is to be numbered amongst the intelligences that areco-eternal with Him. This is what Smith means when he says God . . . could not create himself. The equation is complete, in that God and man are one species, one kind, along the divine continuum, separated by time and exaltation, but not by being.
The Principles of Eternal Life
The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits.
This is good doctrine. It tastes good. I can taste the principles of eternal life, and so can you. They are given to me by the revelations of Jesus Christ; and I know that when I tell you these words of eternal life as they are given to me, you taste them,and I know that you believe them. You say honey is sweet, and so do I. I can also taste the spirit of eternal life. I know it is good; and when I tell you of these things which were given my by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, you are bound to receive them as sweet, and rejoice more and more.
With these words we close our examination of Smiths King Follett Discourse. One might wish to re-read the citations, or even read the entirety of the discourse as found in numerous LDS sources, to fully grasp the breadth of the doctrines that are so plainly announced here. This sermon fleshes out the passages we examined in the LDS Scriptures, and will shed much light on the many other passages we have yet to examine. But to close out this section, we note a vital truth: for Mormonism, this concept of God –including exaltation, progression, and the plurality of gods – is intimately associated with the gospel itself. Smith speaks of the principles of eternal life, and when Mormon leaders so speak, they are referring to the concepts found in the King Follett Discourse. An understanding of this fact has tremendous ramifications with reference to our over-all inquiry regarding the nature of Mormon teaching and the relationship between Mormonism and Christianity.
————————————————
[1] See the review of Smith’s effort by Sean Hahn, Joseph Smith the Translator here.
[2] At this point Smith goes into a discussion of how the German translation is more accurate than the English because it has Jacob rather than James at places. Seemingly Smith did not know German well enough to realize that Jacobus in German is the equivalent of James in English.
[3] A quick glance at almost any recognized lexical source for the Hebrew language will show that Smith is in error. The term can be used in many ways, but in the Qal form it is used only of Gods activity, and hence carries great theological import. McComiskey, in the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980), 1:127 notes that bara “differs from yasar ‘to fashion’ in that the latter primarily emphasizes the shaping of an object while bara emphasizes the initiation of the object.” Later in his article he writes,
The limitation of this word to divine activity indicates that the area of meaning deliniated by the root falls outside the sphere of human ability. Since the word never occurs with the object of the material, and since the primary emphasis of the word is on the newness of the created object, the word lends itself well to the concept of creation ex nihilo, although that concept is not necessarily inherent within the meaning of the word.
Hence, Smith’s assertion that bara means to organize is highly misleading at best, and downright erroneous at worst.
Well then, teach me why YOU are right.
What would you like to know?
what are the bare bones tenets of your religion?
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: (1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV)
don that, what’s next?
I don think so. I really don't think that you believe that.
As a Mormon I was taught that Christ atoned for our sins by sweating great drops of blood in the Garden of Gethsemane. But Paul states categorically that he DIED for our sins. Christ took the punishment for our sins on the Cross and suffered and died for our sins.
Do you really believe that?
"Sealed the Atonement". Is this Mormon doctrine or are you making this up as you go along?
Did Christ die on the cross for your sins?
Which ones?
Did he leave any out?
Is there some sin that you could commit or have committed which would or could undo what Christ did for YOU on the cross?
Is there some good work or some ritual that you must do in order to contribute to the work of Christ in atoning for your own sins?
In other words do you REALLY believe the words of Paul that Christ died for your sins?
Blaspheme against the Holy Ghost. Mark 3:29.
In light of the fact that Christ said that he would lose NONE of his sheep, is it even possible for one of Christ's sheep to commit that sin?
If so, then would that not make Christ a liar?
If so, then would that not make Christ a liar?
++++++++++++++++++=
Please list the denominations you believe to be wrong because they do not understand the words of God in the Bible like you do. I told my cats that they get half my steak dinner, if you had the fortitude to offend others, like you offend us. Will you see that they get their stake?
Yes or no?
How does your question answer my straight forward question to yo, or are you telling me I have to share my steak with my cats?
You changed the subject.
You asked me "what are the bare bones tenets of your religion?"
I then responded with the simple statement of the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4.
You then responded that you had "don that, what’s next?"
I then challenged you as to whether or not you truly believed that Christ died for your sins.
And now I'm just trying to get a straight answser from you on whether or not you truly believe what Paul wrote in 1 Cor 15:1-4.
So can you answer this simple question?
Did Christ DIE for your sins?
Did Christ DIE for your sins?
+++++++++++++++++
YES
now answer this;
Please list the denominations you believe to be wrong because they do not understand the words of God in the Bible like you do. I told my cats that they get half my steak dinner, if you had the fortitude to offend others, like you offend us. Will you see that they get their stake?
Who is "us" and wherein have I offended "us"?
I told you that your arguments against Calvinism were lame. The fact is that you build straw men against Calvinism and then knock them down. Nobody is impressed.
Don't feel bad, I've been guilty of using those same silly arguments against Calvinism. They are not good arguments. You can have honest disagreements with Calvinism without misrepresenting what they believe. Try it sometime.
Tell me, do you think God is the ultimate determiner of who is or is not going to be saved?
If so, when did he make that determination?
Really? Then what was all this stuff about "sealing the atonement" on the cross?
When I was a Mormon I was taught that Christ atoned for my sins in the Garden of Gesthemane. I never found that doctrine in the Bible. Maybe I don't have the right translation, eh?
So do Mormons believe that it was Christ's death on the cross which atones for our sins or was it the bleeding in the Garden?
“Us”, who does the article misrepsented.
000000
I told you that your arguments against Calvinism were lame. The fact is that you build straw men against Calvinism and then knock them down. Nobody is impressed.
All I have done is bring out the teachings of Calvin and ask questions like why there is a difference in the way one group oa Calvinists say one thing and why does another group of Calvinists say it means something else and does that make the other group wrong. No straw man, just want to know witch one of you has the true right to say he is right.
0000000000
Don’t feel bad, I’ve been guilty of using those same silly arguments against Calvinism. They are not good arguments. You can have honest disagreements with Calvinism without misrepresenting what they believe. Try it sometime
I have not brought up any arguments against Calvinism, I just put forth your words and ask questions about them.
00000000000
Tell me, do you think God is the ultimate determiner of who is or is not going to be saved?
If so, when did he make that determination?
If you mean did he determine who will be saved from the sins of Adam, yes. He did it before people came to this earth.
ooooooooooooooo
If you have any thing to add to the above, please do.
And, answer my repeated question to you, in a separate posting, as if it is another thread.
As stated before;
Please list the denominations you believe to be wrong because they do not understand the words of God in the Bible like you do. I told my cats that they get half my steak dinner, if you had the fortitude to offend others, like you offend us. Will you see that they get their stake?
Did Christ die for YOUR sins, or did he die for the sins of Adam?
I'm confused. Is there a difference between being saved from the sins of Adam and your own sins?
The bible states that it is by grace we have been saved through faith and not of works. Have you been saved?
What have you been saved from?
I told my cats that they get half my steak dinner, if you had the fortitude to offend others, like you offend us. Will you see that they get their stake?
Who are the "us" that I have offended? And who are the "others" that you would like for me to offend?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.