Restoring the Ancient Church. Salvation History and Requirements (Mormon) Part 4

FAIRLDS ^ | Barry Robert Bickmore

[Elsie]

I have never found you to be one that seeks open, honest debate as described in the above post. Therefore, I will respectfully wish you a good day & not get into a silly tit for tat w/ you.

I guess that means you will NOT be answering or refuting the FACTS about the 'official' first vision.

[Rameumptom]

The text you have provided is not verbatim or a YouTube transcript. It was actually copied by three people in the congregation. Two copies confrom to each other and the third did not. The third scribe was confused on pronouns and didn't understand the biblical term and usage of the title Adam or Michael as a Title not just a personal namesake. For example Paul calls Christ the "Last Adam" in the NT.

1 Corinthians15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.

Elias is a personal namesake which refers to an OT prophet but is used in a titular sense in other contexts meaning forerunner. Brigham Young understood the titular sense of the word in his sermon. Unfortunately 1 of the 3 scribes did not. It one is why Mormons don't consider the Journal of Discourses revelation or canon. Mormons understand the difference between scripture and a historical document copied down by a scribe. Some of the Journal of Discourse sermons were written in shorthand and not published until 25 years later.

Either anti-Mormons don't understand the historocity of secondary and tertiary sources or (...gasp) they are miscontruing the complete historical record on purpose.

[Rameumptom]

There's no way you can read all the old Testament writings and believe that polygamy wasn't an integral part of the Christian religion - denials to the contrary.

There fixed it for you. Perhaps you should google what St. Augustine and Martin Luther said about the Biblical practice of Christian Polygamy. Or about the Polygamous marraige Martin Luther solemized. The only real difference between Mormons and "orthodox" Christians on the matter is it fell out of favor later with the Mormons.

[P-Marlowe]

The text you have provided is not verbatim or a YouTube transcript. It was actually copied by three people in the congregation. Two copies confrom to each other and the third did not. The third scribe was confused on pronouns and didn't understand the biblical term and usage of the title Adam or Michael as a Title not just a personal namesake. For example Paul calls Christ the "Last Adam" in the NT.

So as to avoid "confusion" lets see if there are any other sources we can find to figure out what Brigham Young said:

How much unbelief exists in the minds of 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 ..Then he said, 'I want my children who are in the spirit world to come and live here. I once dwelt upon an earth something like this, in a mortal state. I was faithful. I received my crown and exaltation...I want my children that were born to me in the spirit world to come here and take tabernacles of flesh that their spirits may have a house, a tabernacle...' (Brigham Young, Deseret Weekly News, June 18, 1873, page 308; Deseret Evening News, June 14, 1873)

Who was the Savior begotten by?....Who did beget him? His Father, and his father is our God, and the Father of our spirits, and he is the framer of the body, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Who is he? He is Father Adam; Michael; the Ancient of Days. (President Brigham Young, Feb. 19, 1854, Brigham Young Collection, LDS Archives; ; Brigham Young Addresses, 1850-1854, Vol. 2, by Elden J. Watson, sheet 179 (in chronological order), Historical Dept. Church, Ms d 1234, Box 48 Fd. 11; also in Adam Is God???, pp. 9-10; Adam-God Maze, p.101)

Some have grumbled because I believe our God to be so near to us as Father Adam. There are many who know that doctrine to be true. (Brigham Young, October 7, 1857, Journal of Discourses 5:331).

Some years ago I advanced a doctrine with regard to Adam being our Father and God...It is one of the most glorious revealments of the economy of heaven... (President Brigham Young, in the Tabernacle, General Conference, October 8, 1861, 10:30 a.m.; Brigham Young Addresses, 1860-1864, Vol. 4, by Elden J. Watson, sheet 134 (in chronological order), Historical Dept. Church, Ms d 1234, Box 49 fd 8)

I tell you more: Adam is the father of our spirits. He lived upon an earth, he did abide his creation and did honor to his calling and priesthood and obeyed his master or lord, and probably many of his wives did the same, and they lived and died upon an earth and then were resurrected again to immortality and eternal life. (Brigham Young, October 8, 1854, Brigham Young Addresses, 18509-1854, Vol. 2, by Elden J. Watson, sheet 221 (in chronological order), Historical Dept. Church, Box 49 fd 12)

The following is that part of the Lecture at the Veil which was delivered by President Young at his home in St. George, Utah, on the evening of February 7th, 1877:...

16. Adam was an immortal being when he came on this earth;

17. He had lived on an earth similiar [sic] to ours; he had received the Priesthood and the keys thereof,

18. And had been faithful in all things and gained his resurrection and his exaltation, and was crowned with glory, immortality and eternal lives, and was numbered with the Gods for such he became through his faithfulness,

19.And had begotten all the spirits that was to come to this earth. (Unpublished Revelations of the Prophets and Presidents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, complied by Fred C. Collier, Vol 1, pp. 116-117, Collier's Publishing Co. P.O. Box 1866, Salt Lake City, UT 84110, 2nd edition 1981)

It is reported that this part of the Lecture was removed some time between 1902 and 1905. This next quotation, by Brigham Young, is the one many LDS say is not clear and/or not recorded correctly. But notice, it is just one of many that say the same thing. Are they all recorded incorrectly?

Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body [see footnote 2 for more on celestial body.], and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken­­HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non­professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later... Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation. (Journal of Discourses, 1:50­51, Brigham Young, April 9, 1852).

Does that clear up the confusion in your mind?

[Reno232]

You are an interesting study Elsie. I'm not understanding why this is so difficult for you, but I will try ONE more time to explain. The one personage (The Father) said “this is My beloved Son, hear Him” (Him, being the Son). Joseph had a question. The Son, whom he had been told to hear, responded.

Now, how do you then conclude that the Son said nothing? Perhaps you can indisputably prove to me that the Son said nothing. Maybe that would help me understand your query better, b/c right now, I have no idea how you can come to the conclusion. If you should decide to come up w/ one of your "witty" answers that doesn't address the question, then I'm done. If you have a serious & logical response, I may be engaged. You know, I don't play in the sandbox. Ball's in your court.

[Elsie]

The Son, whom he had been told to hear, responded.

Simple - SHOW IT TO US!

---

Start here:

 

 

 

 

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/19#19   17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!    18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.   19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”   20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.”

 

 

[Reno232]

Are you just trying to yank my chain Elsie, or are you really still not understanding? I know I said only one more time, but curiosity is killing the cat here.

Joseph was to hear the Son. The Son answered & said that “he must join none of them”. The personage who addressed him (the One that Joseph was told to hear, the Son), by telling him “he must join none of them”, then said that “all their creeds were an abomination in His sight”, etc..

Now perhaps when you say “Simple - SHOW IT TO US!” you mean that you would like me to show you the vision, well, of course I can’t. Just as I can’t show anyone the vision of Moses receiving the tablets.

According to Joseph’s account, who do you think was talking to Joseph? Either I’m missing some hidden meaning you’re trying to get across, or you may need a nap Elsie.

Now, really, I am done w/ this exercise in futility. Have a great day Elsie.

[SkyPilot]

Whoa!!! SOMEBODY when ballistic in 83-84-85!

Not me. Wonder who that was.

[SkyPilot]

Your response in post #93 was excellent, and contributes greatly to the spirit of open debate here.

I commend you for that - and I thank you as well. Yours was perhaps one of the most open and honest responses I have seen here by an LDS member in a long, long time.

I wish some of your fellow LDS members shared in it. There is an immediate battle going on right now by LDS members to shut down debate on the Mormon church. The Mods know it - we know it.

________________________________________________________________________

And to the best of our ability & knowledge.

I would love to see you on the witness stand, when a 6'5" bailiff and a stern judge were looking at you. You were facing consequences if you didn't answer truthfully to the question: "Do you PROMISE to Say the Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing But the Truth?"

And your response was.....

"Ummmmm.....to the best of my ability and knowledge?"

Please don't complain again that those 50 Questions of Mormonism have been answered time and time again.

They have not - so that is why people have the right to keep posting them.

Fair enough?

[greyfoxx39]

When our antagonists frequently go to the Tanner sites as well as other anti sites that have been totally discredited by most standards, & then spew the venom contained therin w/o basis in fact, that's bashing.

So, we are to go to lds.org and fair to find information to debate the propaganda articles posted here? To dispute the information being posted that we know to be false?

Thanks for explaining the mormon definition of "bashing".

When YOU start posting the whole truth instead of denying the history of the LDS church and cherry-picking and posting "partial" facts about doctrine and practices, there will be no need for us to source the so-called "anti" sites, who, BTW are in most cases owned and operated by former mormons who know what they are talking about.

[Osage Orange]

Debate is not bashing. Misrepresenting what the church believes, distorting, purposely telling falsehoods, calling those who don't share your opinion liars & agents of Satan, etc....., that's bashing.

Okay....here's some simple quotes from one of the founders of mormonism, the much honored B.Young. Are these bashing? Are they falsehoods? Is B. Young lying?

"For unbelievers we will quote from the Scriptures - "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God." Again - "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God." I will now give my scripture - "Whosoever confesseth that Joseph Smith was sent of God to reveal the holy Gospel to the children of men, and lay the foundation for gathering Israel, and building up the kingdom of God on the earth, that spirit is of God; and every spirit that does not confess that God has sent Joseph Smith, and revealed the everlasting Gospel to and through him, is of Antichrist....... - B.Young

Here's one for you too...: )

"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned; and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given, and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned. - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)

It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael, these three forming a quorum, as in all heavenly bodies, and in organizing element, perfectly represented in the Deity, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Again, they will try to tell how the divinity of Jesus is joined to his humanity, and exhaust all their mental faculties, and wind up with this profound language, as describing the soul of man, "it is an immaterial substance!" What a learned idea! Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation.

I have given you a few leading items upon this subject, but a great deal more remains to be told. Now, remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. - JoD 1:50-51 (April 9, 1852)

The rank, rabid abolitionists, whom I call black-hearted Republicans, have set the whole national fabric on fire. Do you know this, Democrats? They have kindled the fire that is raging now from the north to the south, and from the south to the north. I am no abolitionist, neither am I a proslavery man; I hate some of their principles and especially some of their conduct, as I do the gates of hell. The Southerners make the negroes, and the Northerners worship them; this is all the difference between slaveholders. and abolitionists. I would like the President of the United States and all the world to hear this.

Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.

- JoD: vol.10 p. 110: (March 8, 1863)

I dunno...but looks like ol' B. Young was pretty good at bashings.

And you wonder why Christians question your religion? That's rich!

[Reno232]

I appreciate your demeanor & response. As I've stated on many occasion here, can you imagine what this board could produce in the form of constructive dialog if “debates” where handled in a more civil & reasoned way? It's a shame, but for the better part, all I can do is, imagine.

As for my LDS pals here, I think for the better part, we handle ourselves w/ decorum. There are occasional exceptions but let me ask you this, if you came daily to a board you loved throughout the years as a bastion of great political thought & discourse, only to have that board turned upside down because a few religious types decided to lambaste your religion on a regular basis & then did so by using misquotes, misconceptions, falsehoods, disinformation, etc., wouldn't that get your gander up a little? Doesn't that happen regularly to us Christians by the liberals & MSM? Do Christians some times get a little heated when that happens? That's what kills me, the hypocrisy sometimes.

As far as your assertion that the 50 questions haven't come up often, I respectfully beg to differ. They may not come up often in a 50 question format often, but those questions come right from the Tanner's et al & have been used here ad nauseum. They have been answered ad nauseum. Check out the posting histories of Delphiuser, Sevenbak, Rameumptom, Grig, Restornu, & literally countless others, & you will find that those questions have all been answered for the better part & on many occasions.

And lastly, I say to the best of my ability & knowledge b/c I firmly believe I don't know everything. My knowledge base is better than average & I have done research for years. This forum has just pushed me further in that research I already enjoy. But the fact is, I still can make mistakes like everyone here. I usually do a great deal of research to buttress my arguments (that's why I don't post that often. I often just don't have the time to look up the links etc.). It's very seldom, but sometimes I err. It would be disingenuous to claim otherwise. Nobody on this forum is perfect in that regard.

Hope all his makes sense to you & you take it in the spirit intended. Thanks again for the civil discourse & have a great evening.

[Reno232]

Could there be a better example of what I talked about in my first paragraph than the 2 proceeding posts, 110 & 111?

[MHGinTN]

Your condescending smoke and mirrors isn’t working. Try again.

[SkyPilot]

You can be civil here.

I appreciate it. We ALL appreciate it.

BUT - Joseph Smith raped (and he did rape them - they were under the age of any culture) children. Mormonism is still a Cult.

Those are historical facts. If you wish to have me "back them up" you will have them.

I thank you for your civil attitude earlier. I too wish to be civil here. I am a sinful man. I help out my neighbors cutting their grass, baby sitting kids that are difficult, and doing things that are hard - believe it or not.

But works do not save us. "All you can do" is blasphemy.

Your LDS faith has much to answer for - ESPECIALLY if you wish to compare what you believe to Biblical Christianity. Be prepared for that.

Fair enough?

Fair Enough Admin Moderator?

Another?

Uh huh.

Is it OK to doubt this? Or is "Free" Republic not so "FREE" anymore?

Do you want to shut down debate on Mormonism?

I served in the military for over 21 years for your right to speak. Tell me to my face that you want to shut down this debate.

And don't give me any words about "bashing." Good gracious. Have you all lost your mind since Jim has been in hospital?

[SkyPilot]

Here is my prayer.

First of all - THANK you John. You have done wonderful things for this website. Your talents are incredible. I wish I had them.

AM - What I have seen in private Free-mails frightens me. Who is saying these things, and when?

We know who Jim and John are - but you AMs cannot stand here and bask in their glory. I know you have a very difficult job. It is tough, and has always been tough on the religion side. In this case, the LDS side has been assaulting you, and it appears you are yielding to the pressure. Tell me I am wrong.

[SkyPilot]

My prayers to you.

Jim - I still (I will always) remember you waiving that "ugly" finger at Bill Clinton on the Washington Mall!

I smile still - but I grieve for you now.

May God heal you Jim.

He sent his word, and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions. Psalm 107:20

[ansel12]

“only to have that board turned upside down because a few religious types decided to lambaste your religion on a regular basis & then did so by using misquotes, misconceptions, falsehoods, disinformation, etc., wouldn’t that get your gander up a little? Doesn’t that happen regularly to us Christians by the liberals & MSM? Do Christians some times get a little heated when that happens? “

---

That is the problem, you are not Christians.

No matter which church a freeper belongs to, if they know their churches position on Mormonism then they know that their church will tell them Mormonism is not Christian.

It is a duty for a Christian to stand up to a cult when that cult tries to worm it’s way into convincing the ignorant that it is “Christian”, I can only imagine how difficult it must be for these now Christian, ex-Mormons to have to know that they must stay silent.

When a Mormon tries to spread his cults message by claiming to be Christian, then the Catholic, the Baptist, the Lutheran, the Eastern Orthodox, the Presbyterian, the Assemblies of God, must all deny their own Christian church to accommodate Mormons proselytizing to those that don’t know that their own church has examined the Mormon religion and has pronounced it non-Christian and untrue, that is an awful lot to ask of social and religious conservatives.

[Elsie]

According to Joseph’s account, who do you think was talking to Joseph?

I highlighted in bold and color.

The alledged Father was the speaker - only.

---

Now, really, I am done w/ this exercise in futility.

Goodbye; and thank you for pointing out that you did NOT answer the question of just "WHAT" was untrue about Presbyterianism.

[Elsie]

There are occasional exceptions but let me ask you this, if you came daily to a board you loved throughout the years as a bastion of great political thought & discourse, only to have that board turned upside down because a few religious types decided to lambaste your religion on a regular basis & then did so by using misquotes, misconceptions, falsehoods, disinformation, etc., wouldn't that get your gander up a little?

I agree: it would.

But WHY should using actual quotes, truth, history, information, and LDS sources GOOSE your Dander into the stratosphere?