PDA

View Full Version : Still Waiting For a Good Explanation


peter_mary
14th January 2005, 06:31 PM
I'm still wondering how it is the modern Church condemns those who preach the following:

"When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a 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 spoken--HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do" (emphasis in original).

Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 1:50

"Do any of you know anything about the creation of this world? Oh yes, we understand a good deal from the account given in the Bible. But let us turn our attention to the God with which we have to do. I tell you simply, He is our Father; the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Father of our spirits. Can that be possible? Yes, it is possible, He is the Father of all the spirits of the human family...
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 the 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...
I reckon that Father Adam was a resurrected being, with his wives and posterity, and in the Celestial Kingdom they were crowned with Glory, Immortality, and Eternal Lives with Thrones, Principalities and Powers: and it was said to him: It is your right to organize the elements; and to your Creations and Posterity there shall be no end, but you shall add Kingdom to Kingdom, and Throne to Throne; and still behold the vast eternity of unorganized matter.
Adam then was a resurrected being; and I reckon, Our spirits and the spirits of all the human family were begotten by Adam, and born of Eve...
I will tell you, when you see your Father in the Heavens, you will see Adam." (emphasis mine)

Brigham Young, "I Propose to Speak upon a Subject That Does Not Immediately Concern Yours or My Welfare," 8 Oct. 1854, rpt. in Essential Brigham Young, 86-99.

Anyone really heard a good explaination how "the living Prophet of God," (who according to Ezra Taft Benson "trumps a dead prophet") could teach such "false doctrine," leading the people astray, so to speak, when the Church has always promised that a prophet could not do that? Does it seem peculiar that this was the docrtine du jur during the days of Brigham, but almost immediately upon his death, the Quorum of Twelve appostles rejected it outright? Does it not seem strange that Brigham claimed revelation on this matter, and yet today, if you were to preach this doctrine openly you could be excommunicated?

Funny how easily the Church shifts, changes and distorts to meet its own needs, yet condemns us if we try to think for ourselves. And they wonder why we lost faith in them? It's rather plain to me...

Paul

Unregistered
14th January 2005, 07:44 PM
Funny how easily the Church shifts, changes and distorts to meet its own needs, yet condemns us if we try to think for ourselves. And they wonder why we lost faith in them? It's rather plain to me...

Paul

You know what's really plain? That BY must have been in quite the drunken stupors. It's obvious by his entries.

free thinker
15th January 2005, 12:42 AM
old Brigham was quite a character. He sat back and allowed the Fancher party from Arkansas be murdered at the mountain meadows. It was certain that he knew what was going on!! Then later he let John D Lee take the rap. They executed him!!
As I said in another post, Brigham was a back woods bigot!!! I am gonna stop here because thinking about this makes me so very angry!!

Free Thinker

silverfox
15th January 2005, 10:57 AM
It is obvious when you read from the JoD that BY was no prophet. He was a selfish, manipulating, controlling, pompous psycho.

In my experiences, I have found it interesting that the church won't even acknowledge the JoD unless of course it is to their advantage. They consider it "unapproved" reading. When I asked leaders about questions I had regarding it they wouldn't even acknowledge it. I was told that I shouldn't be reading it and that those writings "were not for me to understand". Period. End of story.

wescape
15th January 2005, 11:52 AM
Pretty interesting isn't it? The Mormon church won't "approve" writings by one of its very own prophets! The standard "you won't understand" is always the answer given when they are up against the wall. I agree that JoD is extremely damaging to the credibility of BY and Mormonism in general.