Replies

Colofornian: an Lds apostle (Bruce McConkie) came on that same BYU campus and advised Mormon students NOT to seek a personal relationship with Jesus Christ

Grig: He did not say we should not have a relationship with Christ…

Colofornian: First of all, you didn’t quite quote me right – I said specifically, “PERSONAL relationship” – vs. your reduction to just “relationship”

If you are going to be like that, then again you are at fault for McConkie spoke against having a “SPECIAL AND personal relationship”, and he made it abundantly clear that by special he meant relative to one’s relationship with the other members of the Godhead. A personal relationship with Christ is fine, but it should not be any more special than one’s relationship with the Father or with the Holy Spirit.

Colofornian: Never mind that I didn’t finish these McConkie sentences....

LOL, that ranks right up there with ‘Ignore that man behind the curtain’. You take parts of sentances out of their context to change the meaning of the message. Anybody who reads the larger quotes I provided can plainly see it.

Grig: …he said our relationship with Christ should not be elated above our relationship with God the Father or our relationship with the Holy Spirit. [Grig]

Colofornian: How can you say that in light of this sentence alone? Our relationship with the Father is supreme, paramount, and preeminent over all others. He is the God we worship.

There is no inconsistency there, if our relationship with the Father is supreme, paramount, and preeminent over all others, then clearly our relationship with Christ is not elated above our relationship with God the Father.

As for the 1966 & 1982 quotes, again context is key. The 1966 speaks of worshiping the Godhead, headed by God the Father, which is the same thing as worshiping God the Father. The 1982 quote was about worshiping Christ or the Holy Spirit as individuals, which is incorrect.

Colofornian: D&C 20:19 & Mormon 7:7 directly clash.

Nope. In the very talk in question he says:

“Thus there are, in the Eternal Godhead, three persons—God the first, the Creator; God the second, the Redeemer; and God the third, the Testator. These three are one—one God if you will—in purposes, in powers, and in perfections. But each has his own severable work to perform, and mankind has a defined and known and specific relationship to each one of them. It is of these relationships that we shall now speak.”

So, the term ‘God’ can indicate God the Father as an individual, or the Godhead as a whole. There is usually no practical difference in how the term is used because of the oneness of all three members of the Godhead. There is nothing new about that idea in Mormonism.

Colofornian: I’m sorry, Texan Tory…but to worship Jesus “with ALL your might, mind, strength, and your whole soul” goes beyond token awe, reverence, and gratefulness.

No need to apologize, that statement is correct. It is also correct to say (as McConkie says) that you better feel the same way toward all members of the Godhead.

Colofornian: Did you know, Grig, that McConkie said your prayers don’t go through Christ?

Yup, and he is right on that point to. They go to Hevenly Father, and they do so in the name of Christ. If you put a George Washington stamp on a letter it doesn’t go to the White House before it gets to address you put on the envelope. (not yet anyway :) )

Colofornian: Have you ever considered, Grig that the Jesus Nick Vujicic was calling Lds up to be committed to just might be a different Jesus than the one you mention here?

Doesn’t make any difference, what is important is what was in the heart of the person going up. Your assumption that their going up was some form of rejection of their baptism or conversion away from Mormonism is wishful thinking. I’m sure they all came away with the intention of being better Mormons than they were before.

Also, the term ‘different Jesus’ carries a couple of meanings. If you take it as meaning a different person, like Paul the Apostle and Paul McCartney are different Pauls, then we do not believe in a different Jesus, but the same historical person named Jesus who was born of a virgin, lived a perfect life, died on the cross and rose on the 3rd day. If you take it as meaning a different ideas about the same person, then it’s perfectly legitimate and that is the sense in which President Hinckley and others have used the term.

Colofornian: We are all on the same page...why are you so out of harmony???

Truth is not determined by popular vote or the age of a belief. We are on a different page because we are following true prophets of God rather than the ideas of men.