Replies

Skipping all your "quotations", because they are actually irrelevant to your point. _DelphiUser

To the mind lost in the mormonism hive, the quotes from your founders which prove the heretical beliefs at the heart of Mormonism do look irrelevant and such an mind isn't likely to even read them. But readers need to see the true nature of the Mormonism cultic teaching, so here we go again. BTW, the god of Mormonism is not the God of the Bible, but I can see why mormonism apologists want to float that deceit:

"We were begotten by our Father in Heaven; the person of our Father in Heaven was begotten on a previous heavenly world by His Father; and again, He was begotten by a still more ancient Father; and so on, from generation to generation, ... we wonder in our minds, how far back the genealogy extends, and how the first world was formed, and the first father was begotten" (Orson Pratt, The Seer, p.132).
"Some people are troubled over the statements of the Prophet Joseph Smith.... The matter that seems such a mystery is the statement that our Father in heaven at one time passed through a life and death and is an exalted man. This is one of the mysteries.... The Prophet taught that our Father had a Father and so on. Is not this a reasonable thought, especially when we remember that the promises are made to us that we may become like him?" (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp.10, 12).

"Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee...We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into relation whereby he could see his seed [children] before he was crucified (Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 82).
"There was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and on a careful reading of that transaction, it will be discovered that non less a person that Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha an the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the best of it." (Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, p. 259).
"In the Church councils, it was spoken of: "Joseph F. Smith_ He spoke upon the marriage in Cana of Galilee. He thought Jesus was the bridegroom and Mary and Martha the brides."(Journal of Wilford Woodruff, July 22, 1883).
"The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing his crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were Mormons (Jedediah Grant, Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 346).
"One thing is certain, that there were several holy women that great loved Jesus, such as Mary and Martha her sister, and Mary Magdalene; and Jesus greatly loved them and associated with the much; and when he arose from the dead, instead of first showing himself to his chosen witnesses, the Apostles, He appeared first to these women, or at least to one of them--namely, Mary Magdalene. Now, it would be very natural for a husband in the resurrection to appear first to his own dear wives, and afterwards show himself to his other friends. If all the acts of Jesus were written, we no doubt should learn that these beloved women were his wives." (Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 159).

But wait! There’s more astonishing Mormonism heresy :

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. (Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 5, 1844)

Smith's worldview of time as it pertains to the gods: Smith believed in a "beginning" that was operative before the Mormon plan to the create this world. The question becomes, who is the head of the Gods as pertains to this ‘council of gods?

In the very beginning the Bible shows there is a plurality of Gods beyond the power of refutation. It is a great subject I am dwelling on. The word Eloheim ought to be in the plural all the way through--Gods. The heads of the Gods appointed ONE God for us... (Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 372)

According to Smith's worldview, "the heads of the Gods appointed one God for us."

Whatever "time frame" or eternity is chosen, only ONE GOD was chosen by a plurality of gods. It doesn't say a plurality of gods was chosen by a plurality of gods. Therefore, no Mormon godhead existed when the council chose the Mormon god! Apparently, the mormonism godhead of god the father, god the holy spirit, and god the jesus developed later .
The convolutions/confusions are rife in Mormonism. Despite the above teaching, LDS leader, Bruce McConkie, taught that lds worship 3 gods: "Three separate personages-Father, Son and holy Ghost- comprise the Godhead…these three are the only Gods we worship."(Mormon Doctrine 1966 ed. P.576-577).

“I will go back to the beginning, before the world was, to show what kind of a being God is. What sort of a being was God in the beginning? Open your ears and hear, all ye ends of the earth; for I am going to prove it to you by the Bible, and to tell you the designs of God in relation to the human race, and why he interferes with the affairs of man. God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret. (Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 3, 1844)

Whatever is taken by Smith as the ’beginning’, the Alpha point, Smith says god was a man. That he "was once as we are now." We already know from the above quote that the godhead came even after the Mormon god was appointed. The Mormon god was no godhead in the beginning Smith portrays, yet John’s Gospel starts with the Word, Jesus, was with God and was God in the beginning.

“I learned a testimony concerning Abraham, and he reasoned concerning the Gods of heaven. '...Intelligences exist one above another, so that there is no end to them.' If Abraham reasoned thus--If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and John discovered that God the Father of Jesus Christ had a Father, you may suppose that He had a Father also. Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son? Whenever did a tree or anything spring into existence without a progenitor? And everything comes in this way. Paul says that which is earthly is in the likeness of that which is heavenly. Hence if Jesus had a Father, can we not believe that He had a Father also? I despise the idea of being scared to death at such a doctrine, for the Bible is full of it. I want you to pay particular attention to what I am saying. Jesus said that the Father wrought precisely in the same way as His Father had done before Him. As the Father had done before? He laid down His life, and took it up the same as His Father had done before. (Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 373)

What's being said here? … The teaching of infinite regression of gods! Smith is claiming that Jesus had a grandpa and great-grandpa!

Finally, Smith claims that God the Father also laid down His life in some sort of redemptive way, to earn/gain exaltation! Which means whatever "time" you want to leave undefined, apparently God the Father had time enough to live as a man and die as a man for some whole other world.

Smith says heavenly father laid down his life as a redeemer on another world. Brigham Young added that “every earth has its redeemer, and every earth has its tempter”. (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 14, p. 71, 1870)

If there is no ultimate beginning, then there is no ‘Alpha‘, which of course contradicts what God said of Himself as The Alpha and Omega. That is one big heresy at the heart of Mormonism, but the mormonism apologists want you to ignore these heresies and focus elsewhere, anywhere, so long as the truth about this heretical cult is not exposed!

We were begotten by our Father in Heaven; the person of our Father in Heaven was begotten on a previous heavenly world by His Father; and again, He was begotten by a still more ancient Father, and so on, from generation to generation, from one heavenly world to another still more ancient, until our minds are wearied and lost in the multiplicity of generations and successive worlds, … and as a last resort, we wonder in our minds, how far back the genealogy extends, and how the first world was formed, and the first father was begotten. But why does man seek for a first, when revelation informs him that God's works are without beginning? (Lds apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 132, 1853)

I said "Skipping all your "quotations", because they are actually irrelevant to your point."

MHG said "To the mind lost in the mormonism hive, the quotes from your founders which prove the heretical beliefs at the heart of Mormonism do look irrelevant and such an mind isn't likely to even read them. But readers need to see the true nature of the Mormonism cultic teaching, so here we go again. BTW, the god of Mormonism is not the God of the Bible, but I can see why mormonism apologists want to float that deceit:"

OK, I'll explain it again, and I'll try to use smaller words this time.

You don't have the basic understanding of our doctrine required to go into the discussion you are trying to have.

You do not have the scientific knowledge required to understand the answers to the questions you are asking.

How do I know what? Easy, you keep asking questions that tell me how much you know.

I know, I just offended you, sorry. I just can't think of a tactful way of telling you this, maybe it's my autism. Logic is easy for me. Tact is not.

Let's just look at your first question after this as an example of wrong thinking.

You start with Who is God's God's God..."So on ad infinitum" as if that has any bearing on God's authority over you. God is your God, he is your creator, he has ultimate authority over you by virtue of the fact that he created you. You cannot appeal to his Creator, or to his creator's creator. Such questions are so far out of scope that I can see that you lack the basics to even discuss it.

An Example: In programming, if you have an object that has a value stored in a variable,you can access it, no problem. If you want to access a variable in another object, you can't by normal means. What do I mean normal means? Three requirements need to be met in order for you to access that value stores in another object. 1) the object has to have made the value accessible to functions outside of that object. 2) You have to have a pointer to that object. and 3) You have to be in the same "scope", or memory space.

You cannot "access" any God but yours. They are not structured that way. They are not in the same scope.

The very fact that you are asking the questions you are, shows you are not ready to have the conversation.

Let's try another example. I am faced with an algebra 1 student who is insisting that he can do calculus, and wants to challenge established formula with questions that make no sense.

Here is an article that I read here on FR, that I see as Science beginning to understand the reality I have known spiritually for a long time :Have we found the universe that existed before the Big Bang?

Remember this from my post?
I understand that your mind can only comprehend time, my religion however does not limit itself to the abnormal space in the eternities known as "time".

<
>

Eternity time
You are here. Eternity

Again, I'm skipping a bunch of nonsense questions, because you are saying it's blasphemy to speak of more than one God. When Jesus told some of the Jews, I and my Father are one., they wanted to stone him for Blasphemy. Jesus then spoke of all men who received the word of God as being gods. Here, read it yourself.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

So, Jesus says we are gods if we receive God's word. It's in the Bible. You may not interpret the Bible that same way I do, and that's OK. Your wrong, but I'll try not to rub your face in it too much.

Thus all your posturing, all your grandstanding about Mormon "Gods" is just further proof that you don't even understand the Bible, let alone our teachings and doctrine.

Now, let's cut to your conclusion: If there is no ultimate beginning, then there is no ‘Alpha‘, which of course contradicts what God said of Himself as The Alpha and Omega. That is one big heresy at the heart of Mormonism, but the mormonism apologists want you to ignore these heresies and focus elsewhere, anywhere, so long as the truth about this heretical cult is not exposed!

Sigh, it's hard enough to explain calculus, but when someone does not want to understand and instead of learning, they want to prove it wrong with algebra, well it's sad and funny at the same time.

So, what is the Beginning speaking of in the Bible? God's beginning? Certainly not. The beginning of time? Possibly, The beginning of Mortality? Also possibly. It's definitely a beginning for us as mortals. So that is our scope, we exist inside of "time" The article I linked to above talks about how time has no meaning before the "Big Bang" and will have no meaning after the "Big Crunch". Thus my model above, here, let me repeat it for you.

<		>
Eternity Big Bang The Beginning Alpha	time You are here.	Eternity Big Crunch The End Omega

The alpha cannot apply to a being with no beginning, so your definition of Alpha cannot apply to God, but to our relationship with him. God the Father is unchanging from Eternity to all Eternity, he is the Alpha and Omega. Again, your misunderstanding of the realities of Christianity stems from the Trinity, a small change to the understanding of the nature of God has profound impact on the understanding of Men. It is too bad that change was made in 325 AD. Now, as when Jesus tried to restore truth, the bearers of God's truth are called heretics and sinners.

God bless and open your eyes MHG, God bless you this day, may you give thanks for the truths you know and open your heart to receive further light and knowledge from God that he may teach you. Either way, I hope you have a wonderful Thanksgiving.

Delph