Mormon Teachings

How has this thread effected your veiw of the LDS church?

  • Veiw the church more favorably

    Votes: 7 12.7%
  • Less favorably

    Votes: 19 34.5%
  • No change

    Votes: 20 36.4%
  • No more and no less than any other church out there

    Votes: 11 20.0%

  • Total voters
    55
The Goose said:
Jethro was a priest after the order of Melchizedek. That was the only order of priests there was at that time.
A completely baseless assertion. At most you could say there were no Israelite priesthood at the time. But Jethro wasn't an Israelite, he was a Midianite, a descendent of Midian. Midian was the step-brother of Isaac, a son of Abraham by Keturah. Hebrews tells us the Levi payed respects to Melchizedek through Abraham "because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor" (Heb. 7:10), so the same applies to Midian: he and his descendents (including whatever priests came out of them) would be inferior to Melchizedec, because Abraham was inferior to him. If the argument of inferiority doesn't apply to Midian, neither would it apply to Levi.

Furthermore, to whom did God make the promise - the one that Jesus fulfills - Melchizedec or Abraham? And which priesthood did God choose to consecrate this promise? Moses and the Levitical priesthood (Moses also belonged to the house of Levi) - "for on the basis of it the law was given to the people" (Heb. 7:11). And from the Levites, only Aaron and his descendants could minister at the altar and enter the Holy sanctuary as high priests (see below). This was ordained by God, and the Melchizedec priesthood (if it ever continued in office as you believe) was so irrelevant to this law and promise that it is never once mentioned. For his ordinances were not given with the purpose to provide people with a means to exercize authority or gain a place in heaven, but to expose sin and judge it: "The law was added so that the trespass might increase" (Romans 5:20) "...but where sin increased, grace increased all the more" until Christ came to fulfill the law and the deliver the promised grace, the coup de grâce.
Hebrews 7:28
For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.​

The lesser aaronic priesthood hadn't yet been set up, so he was a high priest. Priesthood isn't passed down by who had the most in comman with the guy it was named after. That would be rediculous. Just because Jethro wasn't a king, just because the Bible tells more about his histroy than that of Melchizedek, does not mean that he was not a priest of the most high God, or a priest after the order of Melchizedek. Melchizedek had a father and had a mother, and probably had a wife and kids, too. It just isn't talked about. Where it says that he had no father and mother in Heb 7:3, that's a confusing translation. It doesn't mean the Melchizedek had to family. It is the order that has no father, mother, geneology (meaning it's not passed down through geneologies like the aaronic priesthood) beggninning or end. And when it says "he remains a priest forever" the "he" is anybody who holds the priesthood, because those who are ordained into the priesthood get to be a part of something the Jesus was a part of, and get to have that priesthood forever.
Here's an analogy from the Bible. Some of the Levites, under Korah, rose up against Moses and Aaron, saying "You have gone too far! The whole community is holy, every one of them, and the LORD is with them. Why then do you set yourselves above the LORD's assembly?". They wanted to have the same priesthood authority as Aaron, so Moses replied:
Numbers 16:9-10 "Now listen, you Levites! Isn't it enough for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the rest of the Israelite community and brought you near himself to do the work at the LORD's tabernacle and to stand before the community and minister to them? He has brought you and all your fellow Levites near himself, but now you are trying to get the priesthood too.
Moses told these men to make an offering to God along with Aaron, to see if God would accept their offerings. But He didn't and a fire consumed all of them, so that only the censers were left.
Num 16:29-40 So Eleazar the priest collected the bronze censers brought by those who had been burned up, and he had them hammered out to overlay the altar, as the LORD directed him through Moses. This was to remind the Israelites that no one except a descendant of Aaron should come to burn incense before the LORD, or he would become like Korah and his followers.
Now, if I'm not mistaken, most Mormons consider themselves to be of the tribe of Ephraim and Manassah, not descendants of Levi (not to mention Aaron) at all. Since no member of Israel can claim any authority greater than Abraham (John 8:53), such priests cannot even keep the law required of Israel, and then what authority do they have to minister the grace of Christ which superceded it? "For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law" (Heb. 7:12). Was the law only changed for the Jews? No, because through Christ, God also grafts gentiles into Israel (not out of it into a world of gentile laws and priesthoods; Melchizedec had no Jewish genealogy: he was a gentile), and it is faith in Him - not laws - that marks us as His children (Rom. 10:6-13).

Only Christ merges the two priesthoods, and fulfils them completely. Which Mormon priest claims to save anyone completely because of their Melchizedec authority? Yet this is the claim that is made for Christ: "but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them". Tell me, Marlin, do Mormons save? Because if they cannot even save, how do they presume to exalt? If Joseph Smith ever was a ordained to be a high priest, he was an non-Aaronic anomaly, and his office ended with his death (like the first Melchizedek's office must have if he was mortal, since he could not transfer it). And that's an office not even Jesus held on earth ("If [Jesus] were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law" 8:4)

The Bible teaches only Christ is "exalted" (Philippians 2:9), and that "law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers" (1 Tim. 1:9). We already know clearly enough by the commandments that we are lawbreakers, and nobody are worse sinners because they fail to meet Mormon requirements. Even if we were - Christ died for those sins as well, and his grace and authority extends as far beyond Mormon priests as Melchizedec's office extended past mortal priesthoods. "Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant" (Heb. 7:22) not "Jesus has delegated the guarantee of a better covenant".

What's this new covenant? Does it consists of new rituals and legalistic requirement by which men may find fault with each other? No, "They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings — external regulations applying until the time of the new order" and "by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified" (Rom. 3:20). God made that covenant obsolete , and said: "I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts" (the justification by faith that Paul speaks about in Rom. 10), "And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." That is the sign of the Lamb (Ex. 3:16; Rev. 22:4), who writes our names into the Book of Life. Read Rev. 20:15 - if you're life is still going to be judged by what you have done according to a law or an ordinance, you're in great trouble.
 
Last edited:
Jenyar, a couple of things came to mind when I read your latest post.

1) You say that laws are not important, yet Jesus plainly taught that "if you love me, keep my commandments." And when you say I'm in trouble if I'm to be judged by "what [I've] done according to a law or ordinance," you're right--everyone who doesn't keep the laws of Christ is in some degree in trouble. Remember, Revelation says that the dead will be judged, small and great, according to their works. And James 2 tells us that "faith without works is dead," so we do have to keep the laws of God to keep our faith alive. Or are the Ten Commandments outdated by the New Covenant?

2) The Melchizedek Priesthood was taken away from the Israelites when they were given the Law of Moses, a lesser law. The Melchizedek Priesthood encompasses and is greater than the Aaronic Priesthood. It was restored to the Prophet Joseph Smith through Peter, James and John laying their hands on his head and conferring it upon him. If you accept Joseph's testimony, then you will believe that the Melchizedek Priesthood has indeed been restored and is held by many. If you don't, well, you don't.

3) I find it ironic that someone who believes in a "priesthood of all believers" also says that Mormons cannot hold the Priesthood (correct me if I'm wrong). In actuality, every worthy male member of the Church may hold the Priesthood, so in a way, the priesthood of all believers concept is correct, only the LDS are the only ones who legitimately hold and exercise said Priesthood, and females are excluded from holding it.

4) You need to understand that there is a difference between the laws of God and the Law of Moses. The latter is what the New Testament supercedes, and is "the law" mentioned in so many verses. The former are in force and always have been, and always will be. God doesn't change; His laws are eternal and immutable in nature. He gave the Israelites the lesser "Law of Moses" because they showed that they could not handle the greater law. The Law of Moses was meant to point them to Christ, and it is this Law of sacrificial rites that had an end in Jesus's new covenant, not the immutable, unchangeable laws of the Kingdom of God. Make the distinction. The Law of Moses and the laws of God are not the same, nor does the New Testament end all ordinances and laws in favor of grace.
 
I wrote,

Marlin said:
The Melchizedek Priesthood was taken away from the Israelites when they were given the Law of Moses, a lesser law.

Apparently I was wrong, as the article I cited says that the Old Testament prophets all had the Melchizedek Priesthood. My mistake.
 
Marlin said:
Jesus is God's "only begotten," meaning He is the only Son out of all of us who is physically begotten of God.
so, you're saying your god had physical sex with Mary?
The rest of us are spirit children of God but our physical bodies are begotten of our parents. God is Jesus's physical parent. Adam had no physical parents in the sense of a sperm and egg cell uniting--he was formed from the dust, yet he bore God's image anyway. So Jesus is indeed unique in having a physical parentage of God that no one else has.
so your saying, that your god's sperm was transferred into Mary via a penis? is that what you're saying? is she still a virgin then? seems to me, the more you explain mormonism, the more a "cult" it shows itself to be
 
WildBlueYonder said:
so, you're saying your god had physical sex with Mary?
so your saying, that your god's sperm was transferred into Mary via a penis? is that what you're saying? is she still a virgin then? seems to me, the more you explain mormonism, the more a "cult" it shows itself to be

The specifics regarding Jesus's conception are not known to us, but we do know that Mary was a virgin both before and after she conceived Him. She was overshadowed by the Holy Ghost and Jesus was conceived. Please see the following article for a more complete answer:


http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/response/qa/virgin_mary.htm

And yes, God is male and is in possession of the male sexual organs. Grow up a little.
 
Last edited:
Marlin said:
The specifics regarding Jesus's conception are not known to us, but we do know that Mary was a virgin both before and after she conceived Him. She was overshadowed by the Holy Ghost and Jesus was conceived. Please see the following article for a more complete answer:

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/response/qa/virgin_mary.htm

And yes, God is male and is in possession of the male sexual organs. Grow up a little.
*************
M*W: Oh, come on people! "Virgin" or in Hebrew "alma" simply meant "young woman." It had nothing to do with chastity.
 
Marlin said:
And yes, God is male and is in possession of the male sexual organs. Grow up a little.

Your "religion" is my worst nightmare come true. This patriarchal masturbations of the Mormons are just disgusting.
 
water said:
Your "religion" is my worst nightmare come true.

Why do you say that?

This patriarchal masturbations of the Mormons are just disgusting.

Hey, I'm just answering the questions as best I can about my religion. Just because the anti-Mormons bring up a subject, doesn't mean that subject is necessarily the heart and soul of Mormonism. The important parts of Mormonism are simply, "Love the Lord with all thy heart, might, mind and strength" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Those are the two commandments in Mormonism upon which all other commandments hinge. The anti's don't want to dwell on the non-sensational, non-controversial aspects of the LDS faith--that might make us look good!
 
Marlin said:
Why do you say that?

Because patriarchy as you have it IS my worst nightmare.


Hey, I'm just answering the questions as best I can about my religion. Just because the anti-Mormons bring up a subject, doesn't mean that subject is necessarily the heart and soul of Mormonism. The important parts of Mormonism are simply, "Love the Lord with all thy heart, might, mind and strength" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Those are the two commandments in Mormonism upon which all other commandments hinge. The anti's don't want to dwell on the non-sensational, non-controversial aspects of the LDS faith--that might make us look good!

The point is that a WOMAN, if she is to be Mormon, has to WORSHIP A MAN. A man as in "a creature with a penis", not as in "a fellow human".
Mormonism isn't only patriarchal in a brutal way, it is also a phalic-worship cult.
 
Oh please, water. Do you think of your own father as just a "creature with a penis"? That is the most ludicrous thing I've heard all year. God is our Father in Heaven, the father of our spirits. He couldn't be more "fellow human" than He is, as our exalted Parent.
 
Last edited:
Marlin said:
The specifics regarding Jesus's conception are not known to us, but we do know that Mary was a virgin both before and after she conceived Him.
that's not what Joe Smith or B. Young use to say, are modern mormons changing their words? look up the early D & C's, its quite specific, that's why JS started 'celestial marriage', why some mormons believe that the Holy Ghost is a female goddess
She was overshadowed by the Holy Ghost and Jesus was conceived. Please see the following article for a more complete answer :
so, is the Holy Ghost male or female? did the Father have 'spiritual sex' with the Holy Ghost? what are you saying? what does 'overshadowed' mean? how were those 'spirit children' created, that you've talked about before?
And yes, God is male and is in possession of the male sexual organs.
Just solved the origin of your religion, you're really talking about Zeus, you're god is Greek, he liked deflowering young maidens, see Greek mythology
http://www.pantheon.org/areas/mythology/europe/greek/articles.html

whereas Dios is spirit, any mention of body parts is allegorical, as in 'wings', 'arms', or 'fortress'. Jesus said, "God is spirit", called Him "Father" & told us to do the same. that apparently confuses mormons, if you read more of the Bible, you would see what Jesus meant

oh, yeah, you consider the Bible poorly translated, whilst the BoM is perfect, hehehehe :D

Grow up a little.
me? at 50, I think I done enough, whilst I think you have to outgrow that greek mythology that you practice, or is it hindu-greek? since you claim to be little gods-in-training, must get on your nerves, a little (always will be human) David, throwing well placed stones at your Goliath (wants to be a god) forehead, how ego-deflating & irritating that must be to a god-in-training?

it's my pleasure :D
 
Marlin said:
Do you think of your own father as just a "creature with a penis"?
our fathers are human, thus they do have penises, God is our spiritual Father, not by human means, but by spiritual means, but because God is spirit, spirits are neither 'male' nor 'female', they are not human, unless, of course, you believe in a cult, then everything goes
That is the most ludicrous thing I've heard all year.
no, I think what you just said qualifies in the top 1 thru 10
God is our Father in Heaven, the father of our spirits. He couldn't be more "fellow human" than He is, as our exalted Parent.
God is not our 'parent' or "Parent', He is our spiritual "Father", I know its a hard concept for you mormons, but I can't help it if you are "ever hearing, never understanding"
 
Marlin said:
Oh please, water. Do you think of your own father as just a "creature with a penis"?

God has a penis? news for me. So why does he have that, what does he use it for? There is only one God right, but what if he has sex with someone? after all, many Christians (mormons or whatever) make it sound like God is simply a human being, he's personal, he's a male, has feelings and thoughts... Don't you think God is a bit more than that?

God manifested physically as male in Jesus, but that doesn't mean that he is male. God is omnipresent, he is in everything. both male and female (which means he is neither)... seriously, this is ridiculous.. i don't understand how someone could believe that god is a man.

I'm merely a human being, but even I know that I am neither man or woman, I am just me. of course, the body is always male or female, due to natural laws. But is God all mighty-- the creator of nature and its laws-- not "above" nature, ie. is he really affected by natural laws, like physical things are?

when God created us in his image, do you really believe that god is physically like us? he didn't mean physical image, but we resemble him because we are creative and can create things, similarly to god.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, Mormons believe that God is an exalted, glorified Man. This is not a Greek concept (I find iti terrifically ironic that WBY is calling the LDS God "Greek" when it is the traditional Hellenized Christian God who is defined according to Greek philosophy in the creeds). God does have sexual characteristics and I can only assume that He has them for a purpose, to beget spirit children. However, this is speculation on my part, as God hasn't revealed the way that spirits are created yet.
 
Marlin said:
Jenyar, a couple of things came to mind when I read your latest post.

1) You say that laws are not important, yet Jesus plainly taught that "if you love me, keep my commandments." And when you say I'm in trouble if I'm to be judged by "what [I've] done according to a law or ordinance," you're right--everyone who doesn't keep the laws of Christ is in some degree in trouble. Remember, Revelation says that the dead will be judged, small and great, according to their works. And James 2 tells us that "faith without works is dead," so we do have to keep the laws of God to keep our faith alive. Or are the Ten Commandments outdated by the New Covenant?

2) The Melchizedek Priesthood was taken away from the Israelites when they were given the Law of Moses, a lesser law. The Melchizedek Priesthood encompasses and is greater than the Aaronic Priesthood. It was restored to the Prophet Joseph Smith through Peter, James and John laying their hands on his head and conferring it upon him. If you accept Joseph's testimony, then you will believe that the Melchizedek Priesthood has indeed been restored and is held by many. If you don't, well, you don't.

3) I find it ironic that someone who believes in a "priesthood of all believers" also says that Mormons cannot hold the Priesthood (correct me if I'm wrong). In actuality, every worthy male member of the Church may hold the Priesthood, so in a way, the priesthood of all believers concept is correct, only the LDS are the only ones who legitimately hold and exercise said Priesthood, and females are excluded from holding it.

4) You need to understand that there is a difference between the laws of God and the Law of Moses. The latter is what the New Testament supercedes, and is "the law" mentioned in so many verses. The former are in force and always have been, and always will be. God doesn't change; His laws are eternal and immutable in nature. He gave the Israelites the lesser "Law of Moses" because they showed that they could not handle the greater law. The Law of Moses was meant to point them to Christ, and it is this Law of sacrificial rites that had an end in Jesus's new covenant, not the immutable, unchangeable laws of the Kingdom of God. Make the distinction. The Law of Moses and the laws of God are not the same, nor does the New Testament end all ordinances and laws in favor of grace.

The Melchizedek Priesthood consisted of a direct line of faithful ones who still could spiritually and physically relate to The Creator. If you still cannot understand the significance of this then perhaps a better understanding would be obtained by you if you knew that The Christ was in effect spirituatually part of that priesthood.

For you to claim that joseph smith cotinued that priest hood is to claim that joseph smith and his believers are in effect spiritually greater then even the Disciples and Apostle Paul - where do you get off making such blasphemous claims???

It is views like this that make my skin shivver - because I can see the handiworks of the devil!!!!!
 
Angelic Being said:
The Melchizedek Priesthood consisted of a direct line of faithful ones who still could spiritually and physically relate to The Creator. If you still cannot understand the significance of this then perhaps a better understanding would be obtained by you if you knew that The Christ was in effect spirituatually part of that priesthood.

Yes, we already understand that. In fact, Christ is the source of the Melchizedek Priesthood.

For you to claim that joseph smith cotinued that priest hood is to claim that joseph smith and his believers are in effect spiritually greater then even the Disciples and Apostle Paul - where do you get off making such blasphemous claims???

It is views like this that make my skin shivver - because I can see the handiworks of the devil!!!!!

Joseph Smith received the Melchizedek Priesthood directly from Peter, James and John by divine visitation and the laying on of hands. The Apostles and Paul held the keys to this Priesthood and it had to be restored, as it had been lost from the earth as the Great Apostasy took place. Joseph Smith wasn't "greater than" the Apostles, but he was one of them in our times.
 
If God is a man, he is not God.

God can't be both a man and God, both separated and united - sinful and sinless - visible and invisible.

Man is separated from God, from the unity of the negative and positive. In this state there is no attraction or repulsion, the positive and negative exist, but are invisible. This can be likened to two opposite colors which blend together, or a blank paper before you draw something on it.

Two things can't be on the same space and time in the material world, so the unity, which is God, separated into 2 poles, which together imitate the oneness. Even though they are separated, the oneness, God, still exists between them and brings them together. Love is so strong because it is the manifestation of the unity, of God. So, when male and female seek each other, they actually seek unification, the life, which is God. Sometimes, people who fall in love feel as though they have met because once they were unified-- they were God.

The primal state of God is reflected in the material world and a child is born when the negative and positive try to merge, but because of material laws it still just manifests one pole.

Man identifies himself with his body, so he thinks that his complementary half is another human being, which manifests the opposite pole. Nature knows this and uses it for reproduction.

God is not an entity, fallen from oneness, seeking its complementary half. He is the oneness itself, which binds all opposites together.
 
Yorda_7, that's a very interesting perspective, but I disagree that God cannot be a man (that is, a perfected, immortal, exalted and glorified Personage) and still be sinless. The LDS perspective teaches that God is both a spirit and a physically embodied man, united and perfect.
 
LSD? Why do you believe in that perspective? Because you had mormon parents?

so if God is physical, where is he? Is there a way to see him? Is he here on earth or somewhere in "heaven" on another planet perhaps?
 
Back
Top