Posted on 06/16/2021 4:47:03 PM PDT by Faith Presses On
After all, Satan's bait was that Adam and Eve would become as gods. And together with Satan, that would seem to them to be at least two or possibly three gods (if Satan was believed to be a god as well) against one.
This is easy.
You big dog on the porch wants to claim anything 'mormon' as your own; where the rest of us know that there are MANY groups huddled under the umbrella of the Book of Mormon.
You SLC folks want to claim it all? Go right ahead, but then you get all the investigative eyes turned in your direction; too.
Media Letter 26 June 2008 — Salt Lake City (http://newsroom.lds.org/additional-resource/media-letter) *The following is a letter from Elder Lance B. Wickman, General Counsel of the Church to publishers of major newspapers, TV stations and magazines. It was sent out on Tuesday, June 24, 2008. Recent events have focused the media spotlight on a polygamous sect near San Angelo, Texas, calling itself the “Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.” As you probably know, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has absolutely no affiliation with this polygamous sect. Decades ago, the founders of that sect rejected the doctrines of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, were excommunicated, and then started their own religion. To the best of our knowledge, no one at the Texas compound has ever been a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Unfortunately, however, some of the media coverage of the recent events in Texas has caused members of the public to confuse the doctrines and members of that group and our church. We have received numerous inquiries from confused members of the public who, by listening to less than careful media reports, have come to a grave misunderstanding about our respective doctrines and faith. Based on these media reports many have erroneously concluded that there is some affiliation between the two – or even worse, that they are one and the same. Over the years, in a careful effort to distinguish itself, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has gone to significant lengths to protect its rights in the name of the church and related matters. Specifically, we have obtained registrations for the name “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” “Mormon,” “Book of Mormon” and related trade and service marks from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and corresponding agencies in a significant number of foreign countries. We are confident that you are committed to avoiding misleading statements that cause unwarranted confusion and that may disparage or infringe the intellectual property rights discussed above. Accordingly, we respectfully request the following:
Stated simply, we would like to be known and recognized for whom we are and what we believe, and not be inaccurately associated with beliefs and practices that we condemn in the strongest terms. We would be grateful if you could circulate or copy this letter to your editorial staff and to your legal counsel. We thank you for your consideration of these important matters. Sincerely, Lance B. Wickman General Counsel |
No; elsie would point out that you guys are NEVER supposed to go against ANYTHING your leaders have said and/or proposed.
(That nasty Spirit of Apostacy be lurkin'; doncha know!)
"Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the 'prophets, seers, and revelators' of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostacy..." (Improvement Era, June 1945, p. 354) Reinforced here......
And here:
|
"If we get our salvation, we shall have to pass by him [Joseph Smith] - Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p.190 There is "no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith. - Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p.190 "I tell you, Joseph holds the keys, and none of us can get into the celestial kingdom without passing by him. - Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.154-155 "It is because the Lord called Joseph Smith that salvation is again available to mortal men.... If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation," - Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 396, 670 No man in this dispensation will enter the courts of heaven, without the approbation of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jun. - Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 224 If I ever pass into the heavenly courts, it will be by the consent of the Prophet Joseph. - Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 224 in context... "He (Joseph Smith) is the man through whom God has spoken... yet I would not like to call him a savior, though in a certain capacity he was a god to us, and is to the nations of the earth, and will continue to be." - Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 321 "If we get our salvation, we shall have to pass by him [Joseph Smith]; if we enter our glory, it will be through the authority he has received. We cannot get around him [Joseph Smith]" - (as quoted in 1988 Melchizedek Priesthood Study Guide, p. 142) There is "no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith. If Joseph Smith was verily a prophet, and if he told the truth...no man can reject that testimony without incurring the most dreadful consequences, for he cannot enter the kingdom of God" - Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p.190 "I tell you, Joseph holds the keys, and none of us can get into the celestial kingdom without passing by him. We have not got rid of him, but he stands there as the sentinel, holding the keys of the kingdom of God; and there are many of them beside him. I tell you, if we get past those who have mingled with us, and know us best, and have a right to know us best, probably we can pass all other sentinels as far as it is necessary, or as far as we may desire. But I tell you, the pinch will be with those that have mingled with us, stood next to us, weighed our spirits, tried us, and proven us: there will be a pinch, in my view, to get past them. The others, perhaps, will say, If brother Joseph is satisfied with you, you may pass. If it is all right with him, it is all right with me. Then if Joseph shall say to a man, or if brother Brigham say to a man, I forgive you your sins, "Whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them;" if you who have suffered and felt the weight of transgression—if you have generosity enough to forgive the sinner, I will forgive him: you cannot have more generosity than I have. I have given you power to forgive sins, and when the Lord gives a gift, he does not take it back again." - Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.154-155 "It is because the Lord called Joseph Smith that salvation is again available to mortal men.... If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation," - Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 396, 670
- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 224 |
Oh really?
Where do you come up with such nonsense?
I'd suspect that a year's worth of doors being closed in elders' faces on porches would have toughened them up to handle most any rebuke.
Early Latter-day Saint periodicals show the word being used with the same meaning; for example, “It is also the privilege of the Melchisedec priesthood, to reprove, rebuke and admonish.”[11]
[11] Messenger and Advocate 3, no. 7 (April 1837): 487; “It certainly was pure charity that inspired Christ and his apostles to reprove the world for their sins, and corruptions; and why should it be considered an uncharitable act in the Latter-Day Saints to do the same[?]” Times and Seasons 3, no. 4 (December 15, 1841): 629.
“with her” can mean: in the general region of the garden, within sight of each other or within arms length. None of which takes away the responsibility of Eve for taking that bite.
There may have been no verbel communication between the two, only her handing it to him with her eyes saying ‘do it with me’.
Woo woo!!
I am not going to spend any more time with the Book of Mormon, or the Pearl of Great Price or the Doctrines and Covenants than I already wasted decades ago when my friend was fooled into joining the Mormon religion. And since your mormonism 'scriptures' are not inspired from God there is no 'scripture' to cite for you, mormon.
Adam was not deceived. This is a big deal. What Adam did fits the definition of suicide. It was not an impulsive act like when Peter denined Christ. Adam knew. It becomes obvious that God intended man to know good and evil. The set up was designed by God. Every symbol in it’s place has meaning for us to find. Their nakedness shows lack of righteous (Rev 19:8) The introduction of a substutionary sacrifice, possibly using animals that Adam named. Note that God does not and never will tell us to eat of the tree of life. That would be a law which could have given life.
During the Millenial reign of Christ the Tree of Life will be in the New Jerusalem and the alive folks during that time are free to take from it fruit and the leaves will heal wounds.
See Revelation 22 for more
Your response mischaracterizes what I’ve said and I don’t agree with it. This thread has been about studying what happened in the Garden to increase our understanding of it, in order to help us a bit to follow Him and do His work better at a particularly difficult time, a time of particularly major turning away from God. Nothing more and nothing less. Our focus should be on the major things because that is our duty to Christ. I don’t agree entirely with many of your interpretations here but I’m willing to simply explain why by discussing the text. Like on this:
—”Yet God says in verse 17 that Adam did have communication with Eve.”
—No it does not. “And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.” (Genesis 3:17) Nowhere is Adam described speaking with Eve before they are of the forbidden fruit, nor even afterwards, except perhaps that “Adam called his wife’s name Eve.” (Genesis 3:20)
—-—————————
Nowhere is there a recording, either, of either God or Adam telling Eve that they were forbidden to eat that fruit or they’d die, but it can be inferred that she heard of it from at least one of them since she tells it to the serpent. I can’t believe you think that the Bible records every word of every conversation and all that happened.
And verse 17 suggests Adam likely ate after listening to his wife:
“Then in Genesis 3:17, God rightly charges Adam of heeding the voice of his wife. This likely indicates there was a conversation between Adam and Eve after her discussion with the serpent.”
https://answersingenesis.org/adam-and-eve/was-adam-with-eve-when-she-spoke-to-the-serpent/
A clarification on one sentence I wrote:
“I can’t believe you think that the Bible records every word of every conversation and all that happened”
I don’t *think* that’s your opinion. It’s quite obvious that the Lord had the Bible authors not record everything to the last detail and every word spoken.
What’s left to say?
And since your mormonism ‘scriptures’ are not inspired from God there is no ‘scripture’ to cite for you, mormon.
Of course there is, and you know it. The Bible is the word of God for the LDS as well as other Christians. That should be undeniable and a point of agreement but...
That aside, I am curious if your decades old friend is still your friend?
No, not inferred that she heard of it from at least one of them but clearly evidenced by her reiteration of the command, which is in contrary to the description of Adam silently eating what Eve gave him and in contrast to the reasons shown as to why Eve consumed the Fruit. For the issue is not simply whether there was a conversation btwn A+E but the nature of it and your insistence on defending it, that there was a conspiracy btwn them and the devil to kick their creator out of the Garden - which even being as God in omniscience does not mean - so that they could do as they please.
Rather, Scripture tells us why Eve was attracted to the fruit and induced into eating it, which was not that of becoming rulers with the devil and expulsion of God, but was that of its physical beauty, and the sensual pleasure of eating it, and the acquisition of sacred wisdom. The 3 basic temptations that they correspond to (1 Jn. 2:16) and Christ was tested in have varying degrees of scope and depth, but as regards Eve it is only manifestly very simple.
Stop trying to read into Scripture conspiracy theories above that which is written. (1 Co. 4:6) Based upon what we do read of the devil, then his premise and plan, and strategy and tactics are evident, as described, which is what the focus should be as we seen them everyday at work thru his proxy servants. A+E did unknowingly acts as the latter, but not as conspiratorialist with the devil to rule with him in the Garden to the exclusion of God.
Obviously, as Scripture itself teaches, (John 20:30) it does not contain everything could be known, but that is simply no justification for reading into a ridiculous devil, Adan and Eve mutinous conspiracy theory and insist on defending when the text simply shows Eve being deceived i and Adam silently going along with her in eating the forbidden fruit. That you insistent on defending this while missing the larger picture rather is troubling. This is indeed often how cults begin.
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.
