What’s In A Name?

mormon_matchThis is kind of a dual subject post, so bear with me. We sometimes place a lot of importance on names. For example, the Mormon Church places a lot of importance on the name of the Church: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

But more recently, with the advent of the internet, “handles” or short screen names have almost become essential with people using sites like Twitter, where short, brief micro messages are the new vogue. According to wiki,

In some countries, Mormon and some phrases including the term are registered trademarks owned by Intellectual Reserve, Inc. (a holding company for the LDS Church’s intellectual property). In the United States, the LDS Church has applied for a trademark on “Mormon” as applied to religious services; however, the United States Patent and Trademark Office rejected the application, stating that the term “Mormon” was too generic, and is popularly understood as referring to a particular kind of church, similar to “Presbyterian” or “Methodist”, rather than a service mark. The application was abandoned as of August 22, 2007. In all, the Intellectual Reserve, Inc. owns more than 60 trademarks related to the term Mormon. [For more info on the Mormon service mark issue see “Mormon” History.]

But it appears that the Church hasn’t abandoned its desire to control the word “Mormon” in the United States after all, for recently they have sought to have a Mormon Dating site shut down for calling itself “Mormon Match.” According to the Daily News,

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is crying foul at Mormon Match’s decision to use [an image of] the Salt Lake Temple and the word “Mormon” on their site, claiming the church has total ownership over those things.

Reportedly, the use of the word Mormon “is the central issue of this case.” The Church’s Intellectual Reserve, Inc. “questioned [Mormon Match’s] right to use the word Mormon anywhere” on the site. To protect the Mormon name, the Church has engaged in what the Daily News calls “backhanded” and “clandestine” tactics. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Stay tuned.

The second part of this post has to do with an issue closer to home, (here at Mormon Coffee).  Recently, we had to ban one of our more prolific Mormon participants here, who went by the handle, faithoffathers (FOF). This was done because FOF had become so trollish that he was not adding anything of value to the discussions he participated in. For examples of his derogatory rhetoric, please read my comments here.

sock puppetWhen someone is banned from Mormon Coffee (see the Mormon Coffee comment policy), Sharon puts them on a list that she keeps for quick reference. This gives us some behind-the-scenes information that allows us to identify the IP Addresses of those who contribute here. Why is this relevant? Because some who get banned simply make up another profile so they can continue to post and disrupt discussions. One might say they engage in backhanded and clandestine tactics.

When Sharon added FOF’s name to that list, she noticed something interesting. FOF had numerous Sockpuppets that he had been posting with, at least one of which had been previously banned.

This wasn’t noticed by Sharon earlier, because let’s face it, who has time to do that kind of thing unless it becomes an issue; and there have been so few people banned (under 10 over the entire life of Mormon Coffee) that it wasn’t really any kind of a priority. Finding FOF’s Sockpuppets led us to analyze the profiles of some of the others that had been banned in the past.

For those who post here regularly, this might come as a surprise, but FOF can be linked to 8 different Sockpuppets, among them David Brown, DJ Brown, D Brown, Brown, Brownie, Observer, Jim Olsen, and Olsen Jim.

Another prolific troll here was HankSaint, who  had 6 different Sockpuppets, including Hank, Henry, Janet, Solid LDS, and Helen Louis Smith.

We also found that Fred Park joined the Mormon Coffee community as fproy222 and, after he was banned from further commenting, returned as Parkman.

As there were only a handful of such deceivers in the over 2000 User Profiles registered here at Mormon Coffee, this is not a common behavior, it seems, and many of those that were banned were Sockpuppets of those mentioned above.

David J. Brown (FOF) claimed to be a surgeon and a faithful Mormon whose goal, he said, was to defend the Church. But he also claimed that he was a “lurker” named Jim Olsen and deceived us with several Sockpuppet profiles.

HankSaint, who is really Richard Johnson as revealed by himself here (after I called him out about it), also claimed to be defending the Church, but used deceptive Sockpuppets to do so, claiming to be someone that he was not, even his own wife.

One method that Sockpuppets use is to refer to their alternate identities in conversations. I found a few examples of comments made by David Brown, for example, did this. Here is one of his FOF comments from 2008:

Michael P,

I must disagree with you. I have outlined several lines of evidence supporting the Book of Mormon on this site. There have been no responses to the specific evidences. DJBrown also listed quite a long list of prophecies in the Book of Mormon that have been fulfilled. I am happy to once again list these evidences, but my guess is the response will be no different- change the subject or fall back on a more general and global dismissal of the church.

Notice how FOF drops the name of DJBrown, who of course is himself. Here is David Brown as “Observer” also referencing himself in another conversation,

I ran across a post from DJBrown a while back that I thought explained this topic well…

And then we have the Sockpuppet Jim Olsen (David Brown) telling Aaron Shafovaloff that he was,

Just a lurker for a long time. But the degree to which you take pleasure in the misfortunes of others is stunning. Lightning strikes a church or temple- and you find enormous meaning in that? You even seem to revel in it. Seems so contrary to what the Bible teaches.

Of course, he wasn’t “just a lurker for a long time,” he was Doctor David J. Brown, who had already been posting under various Sockpuppet identities to try and bolster his own arguments — which itself seems contrary to what the Bible teaches.

There are many more examples, but those should suffice to show the Sockpuppet’s pattern of deception here at Mormon Coffee. Richard Johnson, or HankSaint/Janet – after I had outed him on another forum – actually told someone there,

You can call me HankPriest, Janet, Richard, HankSaint, Jared, etc. It does not bother me since those were the handles I often used.

The fact that he had to deceive people in order to use some of those “handles” didn’t seem to bother him at all, claiming censorship as his reason for doing so. Like many others, he seems oblivious to the behavior that got him (and his Sockpuppets) banned.

The “backhanded and clandestine” behavior employed by both the Mormon Church (as alleged in the Mormon Match conflict), and its overzealous members in their attempts to protect and defend the Mormon name, seems to fall into the category of the-end-justifies-the-means. While claiming allegiance to the Mormon creed that says “We believe in being honest, true…virtuous, and good to all men,” (Articles of Faith 1:13), they find themselves stooping to conduct antithetical to these very principles.

Do you consider someone who would use this kind of tactic to be honest? Is this kind of deception acceptable as an Ambassador of Jesus Christ? (2 Corinthians 5:11-21)

Is this behavior part of the Mormon pattern of “lying for the Lord,” wherein anything goes as long as you are defending the Church?

Would you trust someone who uses deception to reveal what they claim is the truth to you about God and their Church?

What’s in a name? What do you think?

This entry was posted in Friendship, Interaction, and Evangelism, LDS Church, Mormon Culture and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

95 Responses to What’s In A Name?

  1. Rick B says:

    Ralph said

    By the way RickB, you made a personal allegation against me and I asked you to prove it.

    Please refresh my memory on this issue, thanks.

    Ralph said

    I have my testimony that the prophet today, ie Pres. Monson, is God’s prophet on this earth today so I don’t need to ask God any further for verification. I am not, as some would say, following blindly, as I thought about and prayed about him before the sustaining vote and got my answer. I did not consider him the prophet without that answer first.

    Despite what you claim or think, My God never told you the Prophet is Gods mouth piece, the god you heard from is Satan, the god of this world as the Bible says. My God has tried talking to you and you reject what he tells you. He speaks to you through all of us here, but as usual you reject us in favor of a false prophet and sadly it will result in you getting tossed into the lake that burns with fire for all of eternity for rejecting the real God in favor of a false god you would rather serve.

  2. MJP says:

    Ralph,
    “I have my testimony that the prophet today, ie Pres. Monson, is God’s prophet on this earth today so I don’t need to ask God any further for verification. ”

    Is your testimony separate from God? Who provided the testimony?

  3. Rick B says:

    Ralph,
    You have heard many of us say this before, but I will say it again for any lurkers that have never heard it.

    You believe you heard god claim the prophet is really from god to lead you into truth.

    We believe our God spoke to us and said the LDS prophet is false and leading people to an eternal hell.

    LDS claim they believe in the same god as we Christians do. So if according to LDS we are following the same God, and we both claim to hear from Him, but get different answers, so if we both claim to have an added testimony in addition to claiming God spoke to us, we know that we both cannot be correct. So what would you suggest as evidence to prove what you believe is correct?

    Like I said before, I know you and other LDS dont like us saying your wrong and have a false prophet, but remember, were not simply playing a game where one side wins, one side loses, then we can start a new game. This has a matter of eternal consequences and you will or we will be held accountable for all the souls we lead astray by giving them a false gospel.

  4. falcon says:

    Ralph
    Really? You admit that you said you’d kill if ordered to by the prophet but that I sensationalize it because I didn’t add that he had to tell you face to face? Get real man! Do you see why those of us in this ministry go a little nuts at times dealing with you TBMs. The “prophet” communicating to you by phone, e mail, fax, face-to-face Skipe or whatever never crossed my mind.
    Guess what Ralph. What if I told you that God told me that your prophet is a false prophet and what he speaks comes out of his own imagination. Is my claim as legitimate as yours?
    Ralph, I hurt for you.
    You are one diluted puppy. Rick’s right. You’ve had the truth revealed to you on this blog. How do you know that there aren’t some here who have been blessed by the Holy Spirit with the gift of prophecy and are speaking the mind of God to you? Have you ever considered that some here have been gifted by the Holy Spirit with the gift to speak to you a Word of Knowledge or a Word of Wisdom?
    Do you think Ralph that we operate under our own power? All the Christians who post here have been born again by the Spirit of God. In the Body of Christ God has given various offices, including that of prophet, apostle, evangelist, pastor and teacher. In that same Body various Gifts of the Spirit have been distributed as the Spirit wills. (See First Corinthians 12 and 14)
    Again, none who labor here do so under our own power or directive. As such you need to know that God draws you here to be ministered to in the Word and to be convicted and receive the gift of eternal life God is offering you.
    How long will you resits His call Ralph? This is critical for you and your family.

  5. Mike R says:

    Ralph,

    If it’s one thing that is clear concerning what you have heard since being on this blog it is that
    you do not need Thomas Monson , he is not the mouthpiece of God on earth . It’s that simple .

    Mormon prophets are not consistently reliable guides . Their preaching has been so unstable
    through the years that it would’nt surprise me to hear them state at next Conference that
    now Mormons can worship their Heavenly Mother , along with Her husband .
    You deserve better treatment than that . Walk away now , and come to Jesus alone for your
    salvation . We’re going to keep directing you to Him , and away from Mormonism .

  6. Ralph says:

    Falcon,

    You also forget to mention that this has precedence in the Bible. You and the others on this site may not believe in a modern day Prophet who acts as God’s mouthpiece on this earth, but I and other LDS do. If we are correct and our Prophet is like Moses, Samuel, and Elijah (and other prophets in the Bible) then we must follow them as they will tell us God’s will.

    I have asked this a number of times when this topic is broached and all I have received is either a ‘No’ or ‘That’s different’ as an answer; no ‘Yes’ as an answer. But here is the question again – If your God told you to get a gun and go to a certain area and kill everyone there, would you do it? If your answer is ‘No’ (which as I said, some have given this as an answer) then why believe in a God that you will not follow? It shows a complete lack of faith. If your answer is ‘That’s different’ then tell me how, as I believe that God speaks through our Prophet as He spoke through Moses, and Samuel and Elijah and they told the Israelites to kill every man, woman and child and beast. If you say ‘Yes’ then what is the difference between your desire to kill for your God and mine given we both believe that God has told us, one way or another?

  7. Rick B says:

    Ralph, The question you asked Falcon, I have heard that before and could have sworn I answered it before. Maybe not answering you, but I know I have been over this before.

    So here it goes again.
    Their is no place in the OT where God said, go kill that person. Let me put it this way, You wont show me a place where God said, Moses, go kill that person over there, or God said, Samuel, or Elijah, I want you to go kill that person.

    Now yes, we do find spots in the Bible where God tells His people to go kill other groups of people, or we find People claiming to be followers of God, taking it upon themselves and killing people. Now when you say this,

    I believe that God speaks through our Prophet as He spoke through Moses, and Samuel and Elijah and they told the Israelites to kill every man, woman and child and beast.

    This is different, How you ask? Well first off, God is not saying to a single prophet to go kill a single person as I said already. Then as far as the issue you laid out goes, These people were/are enemies of Gods people and they tried to kill them over time and or lead them away from the Lord.

    The Bible is clear that God said who ever bless Israel will be blessed and who ever curses Israel will be cursed. All the people that were killed were like rabid Dogs and in the cases that they were not all killed, it came back to bite the Children of Israel.

    Now when we get into the New Testament, You will never find a spot where Jesus tells His followers to kill anyone for Him. He even rebukes some of His apostles when they want to call down fire upon people.

    Lastly the Bible is clear, We are not to Lie, cheat, steal, murder, commit Adultery, Etc. So knowing this, we cannot read the Bible and say, well, I will pray to God and ask if He will allow this. So God would never ask you to kill for Him. And sadly many people over the years believed they heard from God to kill family or friends, and if I remember correctly, the serial killer Son of Sam supposedly heard God speaking to him through his Dog telling him to kill people.

  8. Rick B says:

    Ralph said

    If you say ‘Yes’ then what is the difference between your desire to kill for your God and mine given we both believe that God has told us, one way or another?

    I think your confusing My God with the God of Muslims, or Islam. Islams god tells the followers to kill for their god, My God does not tells us or ask us to kill, He tells us to Love.

    Also we have been over this before, but as far as prophets go, Read Hebrews, it says, Jesus is above the prophets and we dont need a “Mouth piece” since we have Jesus. Plus the Bible says, we do not need a mediator that goes from Man to God, as in the form of a prophet, we have Jesus as the Mediator.

  9. Clyde6070 says:

    Ralph
    It is interesting when they ask a hypothetical question they focus on the sensationalist view. It is like aaron’s God never sinned project. The belief that God might have gone through what we are doing now and sinned is sensationalized by our answers. The idea that His sins were made as white as snow is never thought of because of the focus of the answers given.
    One thing that is never mentioned is that we never lose our free agency. When asked to do something we still pray about it before carrying it out.

  10. falcon says:

    Ralph,
    Here’s the short answer because I’m heading out the door.
    Can you show me an incident in the NT where God directed someone to kill someone. No! I live under the New Covenant which was sealed in the blood of Jesus. I don’t live under the OT Old Covenant.

    As to your modern day prophet? Please Ralph, these guys are so totally flawed and just plain inane that I can’t believe you follow them.
    My top favorites are Brigham Young with his Adam-God doctrine which those in his era believed and those in your era deny. And of course Joseph Smith with his magic rock and BoA which identified the Egyptian fertility god sitting on a throne exposing himself as the Mormon god. I could go on but needless to say, if you follow these Mormon prophets, you’ll be held responsible for it.
    Now, did you get your question answered or are you going to pull that old LDS trick and say it hasn’t been answered?

  11. MJP says:

    Ralph:

    “If your God told you to get a gun and go to a certain area and kill everyone there, would you do it?”

    No, because my God would not tell me to do that. My God has told me to love my neighbor, and my neighbor is everyone else, even those I despise. My faith is in God, who loves everyone more than I can ever pretend to love, and offers them the opportunity through faith to return to Him who created them.

    Anyone telling me to kill someone else is therefore another spirit.

    Clyde: you admit God may have sinned but was made perfect, white as snow. You also mention agency, which is free will. I presume you mean to suggest Christ made the right choices and actions and was made white as snow so as to become a god. Do you know what actions and choices he made to become a god? Do you know who made him a god? On what basis was he made a god? Now, after you have answered these questions, provide the source for your answers, and be specific.

    A single sin is enough to separate us from God, as the Bible mentions quite often. Yes, Christ restores us, but even with that restoration we can never become what is greater than us. We need his power precisely because he is bigger than us.

  12. fifth monarchy man says:

    Ralph and Clyde,

    This is a very revealing discussion.

    A prophet who would command to kill someone is simply nonsensical in the worldview of a Christian because we live in the New-Covenant.

    You forget that OC Israel was a unique and special place. The reason for it’s existence was to safeguard the promised seed of the coming Savior and to serve as a temporal “type” of the new more perfect eternal spiritual kingdom that Jesus would establish with his blood.

    OC Israel was an earthly theocracy. The Messianic offices of Prophet Priest and King were held by finite human beings. It’s enemies were run of the mill humans.

    Now in the New Covenant our Kingdom is a glorious Spiritual Kingdom.
    Our struggle is no longer with flesh and blood but against powers and principalities in heavenly places. Our victory is assured because God the Son himself is our Prophet Priest and King.

    Please don’t take this the wrong way but that you could even entertain the idea that God after Calvary could possibly command you to take some ones physical life clearly shows that you have no idea of what it means to be a follower of Jesus.

    quote:

    Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.”
    (Joh 18:36)

    and

    For every boot of the tramping warrior in battle tumult and every garment rolled in blood will be burned as fuel for the fire. For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father,……….. Prince of Peace…………… Of the increase of his government …………and of peace…….. there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this.
    (Isa 9:5-7)

    end quote:

    peace

  13. falcon says:

    Ralph,
    What you have is not faith. What you have is fanaticism. You’d be the first guy to don a bomb vest, get on a bus and blow yourself up and kill a bunch of people because your prophet directed you to do it. You would have been right at Jim Jones side mixing up the Kool-Aid with cyanide. You would have stayed inside the bunker with David Koresh and burned like a marshmallow.
    There are all kinds of Mormon prophets who have been “affirmed” by those who follow them. Does the name Warren Jeffs ring a bell. Every member of all of the different Mormon sects affirm their guy as the prophet. The FLDS think you’re bunch are apostates.

    You need to get your thinking straight Ralph. The way you think is a couple of bubbles off of plumb. It’s scary!

  14. Clyde6070 says:

    MJP
    Ralph asked, If your God told you to get a gun and go to a certain area and kill everyone there, would you do it?”
    You answered NO! You did qualify the answer though but you evaded the idea behind the question with the answer. It is a hypothetical question. No to me means you would not obey God. The question is a Hypothetical one. A what if scenario. Does it deserve the answer we have given it? No, because we may never be put in the situation of killing. Would you not follow God? I will assume the answer is you would follow God and do it in your own way.
    For what you addressed to me I cannot give a good answer to. I don’t think you believe that we all preexisted. Even Christ did. I Believe He was chosen to be the Savior before we came to this earth. We backed Him up by keeping our first estate. Your first query bothers me. It seems to suggest that Christ lived on another planet like God may have.

  15. fifth monarchy man says:

    hey Clyde

    you said:

    Ralph asked, If your God told you to get a gun and go to a certain area and kill everyone there, would you do it?”
    You answered NO! You did qualify the answer though but you evaded the idea behind the question with the answer.

    I say,

    That is because to a Christian the question is just utter nonsense. It’s like asking “could a square be a circle?” or “could God create a rock that was so heavy that even he could not lift it?”

    According to our worldview the question itself just does not make any sense and the correct answer to give in such a case is “No of course not” or “are you kidding?” or perhaps “What the heck are you talking about?”

    That you and Ralph don’t immediately see the ridiculousness of the question is very telling and frankly a little scary.

    It tells me you have a concept of God more like a Muslim than a Christian

    peace

  16. Clyde6070 says:

    Fifth
    Do you recognize the question as a what if question? It is hypothetical? It is like asking ‘Would you beat your wife?’ Yes or No. No matter how you answer the question you can be made to look like a Fool.
    If you answer No I would think of you as pathetic. I would then try to find someone else for my bowling team, assuming your wife bowled, so my team can beat her and her team.
    If you answer yes I would council you to leave the house immediately.
    What Ralph was asked was a hypothetical question. His and my answer of yes is being used against us. I really don’t think the situation would arise.
    I have got to admit that you got a rise out of me. I don’t usually get up at three in the morning and look at my computer. But to me it was quite humorous when MJP and Rick B seemed to have to confess that they signed on under different names. The names weren’t that different and it was quite obvious that wyoming willie and Mike R. are one and the same. They are regular posters here and the writing style did not change.

  17. grindael says:

    But to me it was quite humorous when MJP and Rick B seemed to have to confess that they signed on under different names.

    That is because they are HONEST. Mike admitted at the time he was Wyoming.

    The names weren’t that different and it was quite obvious that wyoming willie and Mike R. are one and the same. They are regular posters here and the writing style did not change.

    It is quite humorous to me that you cannot seem to grasp the distinction between what they did and why, and those like FOF and Hank Saint.

    But by all means keep on defending their dishonesty and trying to make honest people look dishonest. It reveals a lot about your character.

  18. falcon says:

    clyde,
    If someone would ask me if I would beat my wife the answer is no! This is not a trick question. It’s a simple question with a simple answer. It’s the same as what was directed to Ralph. Would you kill or steal if ordered to do so by the LDS prophet? That’s not a trick question. It’s a question getting at the mind-set of a true believing LDS member.
    Does the LDS prophet have the authority to ask someone to commit murder?
    All Ralph would have had to do in response to the question is say, “That’s a stupid question because the prophet wouldn’t ask such a thing.”
    But he didn’t answer that way. He thought his dedication to the prophet was being questioned and answered accordingly. He would do anything asked of him by the prophet. That means that the whole idea of “free agency” in the LDS system is a farce.

  19. Rick B says:

    Clyde,
    The question of do you beat your wife, yes, or no is stupid.
    people have said that question for years and many people are afraid to answer it, they feel trapped by either response.

    If you limit people to a responce, in this case its yes or no, then yes you can accuse them by either responce. But I like to answer that question by saying, never in my life have I beat my wife or ever laid a hand upon her in a harmful way. Answering it that way is truthful and avoids me being trapped.

    As to your issue with me, I was honest in saying, this is rick beaudin using my wife’s account.

    How is fof using the names Helen, hank or any other name not being dishonest when he knows he was banned, then he still comes here, uses fake names and lies. Your using selected moral outrage and shows how hypocritical you really are and how you dont care about the truth.

  20. MJP says:

    “No matter how you answer the question you can be made to look like a Fool.”

    So, you admit asking a trap question?

    You then go on to suggest the question is hypothetical. Its really not hypothetical. Its a question that deserves a straight answer, and a straight answer was given. Certainly, one hopes it never comes to fruition, but the question itself is real. However, I am confident my God will never ask that of me or anyone else for reasons provided by myself and others above quite clearly.

    Get off the equivocation of our actions and FoF’s. If you don’t get the difference, there’s no point in explaining it further. Not only have we all admitted it, but we’ve never tried to hide it. FoF not only hid it, but quoted himself posting as another poster. How you can equate the two is astoundingly dishonest, selective, and biased.

  21. Clyde6070 says:

    OK let’s ask him.
    FOF why did you do it?
    Was it because you wanted to point something out that they had wrong?
    Was their reasoning off in some way?
    Was the 3 or 4 to one ratio of responses to much for you?
    Please answer.

  22. MJP says:

    Oh, and Clyde,

    “Your first query bothers me. It seems to suggest that Christ lived on another planet like God may have.”

    Does this possibility make you uncomfortable? Provide evidence this suggestion is not true, and also describe to me how you come to this conclusion through my question.

    The simple reality of your faith is that you don’t know these answers. Its all a matter of faith, and these questions only start to snowball. You end up with an uncomfortable mess wherein significant questions remain unanswered.

    I suggest there is an alternative that provides much cleaner, more consistent, and more satisfactory answers. Do you wish to know about that alternative? His name is Jesus.

  23. Ralph says:

    Let’s make this a little scenario to make it easier for all –

    Suppose that Jesus came and told you to buy guns, ammo, grenades and flamethrowers and go down to Columbia where there is one of the world’s largest drug cartel and kill every man, woman, child and beast and destroy every crop, building and contents within a 25 km radius from that area. This would decrease the world’s drug supply by 10%. Would you do it?

    I am not asking ‘will your God tell you to do something like this’; I am asking what if He did tell you to do this.

    I also acknowledge (and always have) that we are not living in the OT times. This still does not exclude God asking us to do something like this, it just makes it less likely.

    RickB,

    Yes I know Jesus taught to love your enemy, but one can love their enemy and still kill them, especially if they are an enemy of God and He tells you to do it. Just remember Jesus also taught that man must live by EVERY word that comes from the mouth of God.

    You are right about God not telling Moses to kill someone but that He told Moses to tell the Israelites to destroy (or commit genocide) a number of groups of people on their way towards the Promised Land.

    Samuel told Saul that God had commanded him and his army to go and slaughter the Amalekites – ie kill every man, woman, child and beast. Saul did not; he allowed his men to keep the best cattle so they could make sacrifices, and he also kept the king alive, most likely to gloat. Samuel told Saul after that, that he had lost favour in the sight of God and lost the crown. Then Samuel had the king of the Amalekites brought to him and slaughtered him (the actual phrase used in the KJV Bible is hewed [him] in pieces) because that was what God wanted him to do. This is found in 1 Samuel 15. So God did tell Samuel to kill someone.

    Elijah ‘won’ the ‘contest’ between God and Baal and then told the Israelites to gather the 400+ priests of Baal and take them to a certain area. Here the priests were killed (1 Kings 18). As it reads I am not sure whether it was by Elijah’s hand or by him ordering the Israelites to do it. Although there is nothing in there about God telling him to command the Israelites to do this or for him to do it, the people followed the prophet of God willingly, especially after what they saw happen.

    Falcon,

    Did my question get answered? No, unless you are saying ‘No, you will not follow what God asked you to do’. You are answering the question of whether God would tell you that or not; NOT what would you do if He did tell you.

    MJP,

    So you would say ‘No’ to God would you just because you don’t believe that He could ask you such a thing? What would have happened to Abraham if he said ‘No’ to God when God told him to sacrifice his son? Maybe God will ask you to try your faith in Him and supply a scapegoat as He did for Abraham before you need to do any killing. So if you will say ‘No’ to what He asks, it shows you do not have true faith in Him.

  24. MJP says:

    OK, Ralph, if a being came to me telling me to kill I would tell him to leave, in the name of Jesus. Why? Because Jesus would not tell me to kill. Now, if this being persists, I would further test the spirit as we are commanded to do in the Bible. I would further bring the matter to God through prayer and discuss it with other Christians and my pastor.

    I am reminded of the story of Samuel, who had to be called by God several times before he listened. If God really wanted me to kill, it would have to be that sort of communication from God, and one that can be verified through scripture, prayer, and consultation with other Christians. I expect the answer will be what we have been telling you all along: that spirit is not one of God, but one of the deceiver.

    You say this: “I also acknowledge (and always have) that we are not living in the OT times. This still does not exclude God asking us to do something like this, it just makes it less likely.” But what do you do immediately following? You go to an Old Testament event to prove your point. Can you support your position using the New Testament? Thanks.

  25. fifth monarchy man says:

    Ralph said,

    I also acknowledge (and always have) that we are not living in the OT times. This still does not exclude God asking us to do something like this, it just makes it less likely.

    I say,

    Yes it does, The New Covenant is not like the Old Covenant.

    We know that in the NC God will not command us to kill the same way we know that God will not command us to offer blood sacrifices.

    I can not believe you don’t understand this this is just basic Christianity 101

    peace

  26. Rick B says:

    Ralph,
    All the issues in the OT you brought up I addressed if I remember correctly.
    I told you that God wanted them Dead because in the OT God Gave land to the children of Israel, and God said He would protect them. God Also stated that people like False teachers and prophets were to be put to death, IE the prophets of Baal.

    Now Ralph you said this

    I am not asking ‘will your God tell you to do something like this’; I am asking what if He did tell you to do this.

    I suspect many will tell you the same thing or something along the lines of what I say.
    This would not happen, it’s not a matter of would we do it if God asked, like you say, it’s a matter of, it would never happen, so the question is a red herring and shows you want to believe what you want to believe.

    The NT is clear, this would never happen, and for anyone to claim to be a christian to even entertain this thought like you do, might lead them to actually kill in the name of God. Remember as I pointed out about the son of sam serial killer. Things like that would happen.

  27. Clyde6070 says:

    Life is an interesting puzzle. We ask hypothetical questions and get some what evasive answers. I remember what happened to a presidential candidate once. The name escapes me but he was ahead in the polls on the weekend before the election. He made an erroneous comment about an issue on the election. It was picked up by the newspapers and by election day what was suppose to be a victory for him was a defeat due to the comment he made.
    I don’t think locking someone into an answer is totally fair. We tend to use their answer against them in some way. Ricks’ answer of
    If you limit people to a responce, in this case its yes or no, then yes you can accuse them by either responce. But I like to answer that question by saying, never in my life have I beat my wife or ever laid a hand upon her in a harmful way. Answering it that way is truthful and avoids me being trapped.
    Is a good answer. But we can also twist the answer slightly-Boy rick you let your wife win at all the games to. So we jump to strange conclusions that might lead us to believe (these are my words and I do not mean to be offensive to anyone because it applies to me as well) are they on the same page as we are. To rick
    Whether you’re Rick B. or rick the hammer does not matter to me. My mentioning of Mike R. and Wyoming Willie being one and the same was made in jest because it was obvious because his writing style did not change.
    MJP
    From your initial query
    1. I presume you mean to suggest Christ made the right choices and actions and was made white as snow so as to become a god. This bothers me because you do not know about preexistence and Christ relationship to it and to all of us. It does not mean what you presume it to mean.
    2. For me to answer the other querys would be like casting pearls before swine. I am not that good at it and I don’t think you would completely understand. The other querys seemed to be based on a lack of knowledge previously mention.

  28. grindael says:

    Let’s make this a little scenario to make it easier for all – Suppose that Jesus came and told you to buy guns, ammo, grenades and flamethrowers and go down to Columbia where there is one of the world’s largest drug cartel and kill every man, woman, child and beast and destroy every crop, building and contents within a 25 km radius from that area. This would decrease the world’s drug supply by 10%. Would you do it? I am not asking ‘will your God tell you to do something like this’; I am asking what if He did tell you to do this. I also acknowledge (and always have) that we are not living in the OT times. This still does not exclude God asking us to do something like this, it just makes it less likely.

    The fact here is, that Jesus would not tell us to do something like this, because we know what Jesus would have said, since we have His Gospels. The only ones who ask such questions, are those like the Pharisees, who wish to trap others, or those with confusion or evil in their hearts. So, as Jesus said, Get behind me Satan… you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.

    God WILL NOT ask us to do such a thing. Those who have and understand the Holy Spirit, would not even pose this as a “hypothetical”. I’ve let this divert the thread enough. Time to move on.

  29. grindael says:

    Life is an interesting puzzle. We ask hypothetical questions and get some what evasive answers. I remember what happened to a presidential candidate once. The name escapes me but he was ahead in the polls on the weekend before the election. He made an erroneous comment about an issue on the election. It was picked up by the newspapers and by election day what was suppose to be a victory for him was a defeat due to the comment he made.

    As for getting “evasive” answers to some “hypothetical” questions, that is in the eye of the beholder, which is not necessarily the truth of the matter.

  30. grindael says:

    FMM,

    The problem that Mormons have, is that they are locked into Smith’s “restoration of all things” invention, and therefore have to incorporate into the New Covenant, the old one. That is why Smith taught that there would someday be authorized blood sacrifices in Mormon Temples. This of course would be a total affront to God, but that doesn’t even dawn on them. They cannot accept that Jesus and the Holy Spirit supersedes Old Testament prophets as “spokesman”, because that would nullify the whole structure of the Mormon Church. This is why many Mormons disdain the writings of Paul, and look at the Bible as an inferior book compared with “modern revelation”.

    Oliver B. Huntington: I heard the Prophet reply to the question: “Will there ever be any more offering of sheep and heifers and bullocks upon altars, as used to be required of Israel?”

    He said: “Yes, there will; for there were never any rites, ordinances of laws in the priesthood of any gospel dispensation upon this earth but what will have to be finished and perfected in this last dispensation of time — the dispensation of all dispensations.” (Hyrum L. Andrus & Helen Mae Andrus, They Knew the Prophet, [SLC: Bookcraft, 1974], 62.)

    If one thinks about this comment, it is appalling in relation to Christ finishing his work on the cross. But Smith had an answer to that, and see if it makes any sense at all:

    Sacrifice to Be Part of Restoration

    It will be necessary here to make a few observations on the doctrine set forth in the above quotation, and it is generally supposed that sacrifice was entirely done away when the Great Sacrifice [i.e.,] the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus was offered up, and that there will be no necessity for the ordinance of sacrifice in future; but those who assert this are certainly not acquainted with the duties, privileges and authority of the Priesthood, or with the Prophets.

    The offering of sacrifice has ever been connected and forms a part of the duties of the Priesthood. It began with the Priesthood, and will be continued until after the coming of Christ, from generation to generation. We frequently have mention made of the offering of sacrifice by the servants of the Most High in ancient days, prior to the law of Moses; which ordinances will be continued when the Priesthood is restored with all its authority, power and blessings.…

    All Ordinances Restored

    These sacrifices, as well as every ordinance belonging to the Priesthood, will, when the Temple of the Lord shall be built, and the sons of Levi be purified, be fully restored and attended to in all their powers, ramifications, and blessings. This ever did and ever will exist when the powers of the Melchizedek Priesthood are sufficiently manifest; else how can the restitution of all things spoken of by the Holy Prophets be brought to pass? It is not to be understood that the law of Moses will be established again with all its rites and variety of ceremonies; this has never been spoken of by the prophets; but those things which existed prior to Moses’ day, namely, sacrifice, will be continued.

    It may be asked by some, what necessity for sacrifice, since the Great Sacrifice was offered? In answer to which, if repentance, baptism, and faith existed prior to the days of Christ, what necessity for them since that time? The Priesthood has descended in a regular line from father to son, through their succeeding generations. (See Book of Doctrine and Covenants.) (October 5, 1840.) HC 4:207-212.

    It doesn’t.

  31. Clyde6070 says:

    Grindael
    The election I am talking about happened before the internet. I believe the 1920′s but it may have been during the late 1800′s. If I find the article I will try to update when it really happened.

  32. grindael says:

    1. I presume you mean to suggest Christ made the right choices and actions and was made white as snow so as to become a god. This bothers me because you do not know about preexistence and Christ relationship to it and to all of us. It does not mean what you presume it to mean.

    Actually, you don’t know what you are talking about Clyde. We know a lot about Jesus pre-existence, as taught by Mormon “prophets” and other “authorities”. FMM is not wrong. Here are some examples. (There are many, many more that I could copy here).

    B.H. Roberts,

    In a revelation to Joseph Smith this same truth is repeated and more is added to it, as follows:

    Verily, I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the first-born. * * * Ye [referring to the Elders in whose presence the revelation was given] were also in the beginning with the Father; that which is spirit [that is, that part of man which is spirit, that was in the beginning with the Father]. * * Man [i.e., the race, the term is generic] was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

    The doctrine in the foregoing quotation is in harmony with the Book of Mormon and with the Bible; but goes beyond them in that it gives us the understanding “that intelligence was not created or made, neither indeed can be.” That is to say, the individual intelligence in all men was not created or made, “neither indeed can be”–it is not only not created but is uncreatable. (B.H. Roberts, New Witnesses for God, Vol.3, Ch.40, p.196 – p.197)

    George Q. Cannon,

    Now, who is there, with the light that is possessed by the religious world, that can explain in a satisfactory manner how it was that Jesus, our Redeemer, in whose name we approach the Father, existed as God in a previous state—that is, that He existed and exercised power and dominion, and then became a little child, born of [p.169] a mortal woman? Is there any religion on the earth that can give any explanation of this great event? I have not met with any religion that will answer satisfactorily questions that arise connected with the pre-existence and the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. But it is supposed to be clothed in mystery—a mystery that cannot be explained, and that is beyond human ken; and if inquiry arises it is suppressed, because it is considered almost blasphemous to think of such things. So it is with most of these questions that I have briefly alluded to.

    In the religion that God has revealed to us, there is light and intelligence thrown upon all these questions. We are not left to grope in the dark and in uncertainty as to why we are here. The object that God had in placing us upon this earth has been made perfectly plain to us; of course, not in its fulness, not as we will be able to comprehend it in eternity, but sufficiently so to satisfy our inquires, and to remove from our minds doubt and uncertainty concerning this important matter. I say that our religion is philosophical, and that it will satisfy intelligent men. They may not believe that which we tell them; but it is the only religion that I know of that attempts to meet these questions and to answer them, and it does so effectually. (George Q. Cannon, Brian Stuy, Collected Discourses Vol.3, p. 169, Oct. 9, 1892)

    This tells us that our inquiries, on this subject can be sufficiently answered.

    George Q. Cannon,

    Now, we are told that there is no such thing as pre-existence; that our spirits came into existence just as we were born into the earth, or a few minutes before; that this eternal spirit that we possess never had a beginning until a few minutes before our birth. This is the doctrine that is believed by the Christian world, and the idea of pre-existence is ridiculed. Yet it is ridiculed in face of the great and incontrovertible fact that Jesus, who was the Son of God, who was God Himself, was born of a woman. When Jesus said, “I am that I am;” when He appeared unto the brother of Jared; when He appeared unto Moses, He was doubtless then at the full stature of a man. Yet He was born of a woman. I do not wonder at Paul saying, “Great is the mystery of godliness.” God manifested in the flesh! It is a mystery to human beings; for they do not comprehend these things. But if Jesus, who was at one time at the full stature of a man, was compressed that He could enter the world as an infant, is it unreasonable to say that the rest of mankind could be born in that way? I think not. It appears to me that if Jesus could be born that way we could be; that our spirits could be compressed, although we might be six feet six inches in height, or weigh 300 pounds, so as to be born as a little infant. (George Q. Cannon, Collected Discourses Vol. 1, p. 234, April 7, 1889)

    God, in His infinite mercy, has revealed to us that we had a pre-existence, that we lived with Him [p.70] before we came here in the flesh, just as our Savior did. The Apostle Paul, quoting from the Psalms, says of the Savior, “Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” Who were His fellows? We were His fellows—we who are here today, and all the children of men upon the face of the earth. We were all companions of the Son of God in the eternal worlds, born in the spirit, living with Christ before He became our earthly Savior. God foreordained Him, chose Him, elected Him, to come forth and perform the work of a Savior upon the earth. He was ordained to this express work, God knowing before hand that He would do this. (George Cannon, Collected Discourses Vol.2, p. 69, Apr. 27, 1890)

    Abraham H. Cannon,

    Is it blasphemy to say that we are brothers of and joint heirs with Jesus Christ? And to say that we will some day be as our Heavenly Father is, creating and controlling worlds; that our posterity shall be, like the promise which was given to Abraham, as numerous as the sand upon the seashore, or as the stars of Heaven? No, it is not blasphemy. It is the aspiration that should fill every soul and that should prompt us to walk steadily forward in the way that God has marked out. (Abraham H. Cannon, Collected Discourses Vol. 4, p.115, June 24, 1894)

    B.H. Roberts,

    “Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones; and God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said, These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good, and he said unto me, Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.” He, in other words, was just like Jeremiah, and like the Son of God, the noblest and the best of them all—chosen and ordained to the work that He performed in this life. The Prophet Joseph, enlarging upon this theme, declared that not only did man’s spirit have a pre-existence, but that when the plan of salvation was formed we were all present. We saw the Savior chosen; we voted to sustain and uphold Him in that capacity, and doubtless it is because of this circumstance that condemnation will come to those who reject Him; for all the light and intelligence unto which man attained in his pre-existent state has not been blotted out and obliterated by his coming to this world. Sometimes like the fragments of a half forgotten dream, knowledge and intelligence unto which man had attained in his pre-existence comes back to him. (B.H.Roberts, Collected Discourses Vol. 4, p.235, Jan. 27, 1895)

    Why is the Priesthood granted to one race and denied to another? Why is there in the one case no limit to progress and exaltation, and in the other case there are limits placed? Remember, we must keep in view the fact that God is just, and no respecter of persons. Then how do you reconcile this fact I have pointed out with the justice of God? I reconcile it by the knowledge which comes to us through the doctrine of the pre-existence of man’s spirit, and I believe that conditions in this life are influenced and fixed by the degree of faithfulness, by the degree of development in the pre-existent state. Otherwise the diversified conditions in which men find themselves placed cannot be reconciled with the justice of God.(B.H.Roberts, ibid)

    This means that Jesus in the pre-existence did not sin, (you could sin there according to Mormon “Prophets”) and that through obedience and knowledge he progressed to Godhood there. Orson R. Whitney,

    Adam was chosen for this work, as Jesus was chosen for his mission, as Abraham, Jeremiah and others were chosen for theirs. They were foreordained in the presence of God. Joseph Smith says that every man who has a calling to minister to the inhabitants of this world was ordained to that very purpose in the councils of heaven, before this world was. They are the “noble and great ones” spoken of in the Book of Abraham, translated by the Prophet Joseph, who, as well as Abraham, was one of the choice souls of whom the Lord said: “These I will make my rulers.” He showed unto Abraham the mysteries of the pre-existence, and the glories of the starry heavens. He told him that there was a great planet named Kolob, which was nearest his throne, and that it revolved once in a thousand years. That period, then, is one day with God, as the Apostle Peter declares. It was evidently such a “day” that was referred to when the Lord said to Adam: “The day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die;” for Adam lived to be 930 years old. That day could not have been less than 930 years; for we cannot conceive of a mistake being made by the Almighty. It was seven of these days, or seven thousand years, that were to complete the earth’s probation—the earth, which keeps all the commandments of God, and, unlike man, transgresseth not the law. Will it not then keep the Sabbath day? Is not that a law of God? Will the earth labor for seven days, or will it labor but six days, as God labored when he created it, and rest upon the seventh? (Orson F. Whitney, Collected Discourses Vol. 5, p.77, December 1895)

    We are now into the “7th Day” according to Smith’s timetable. No Millennium. Don’t hold your breath. Bruce R. McConkie,

    We believe, and I certify that Jesus Christ is the Firstborn Spirit Child of Elohim who is God, our Heavenly Father. We believe that while he lived in the pre-existent world, by virtue of his superior intelligence, progression, and obedience, he attained unto the station of a God. And he then became, under the Father, the Creator of this world and all things that are in it, as also the Creator of worlds without number. (Bruce R. McConkie, Conference Report, October 1948, p.24)

    Milton R. Hunter,

    In the doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints we have a rather comprehensive understanding of our pre-mortal life. We are taught that you and I are brothers and sisters; in fact, all the men, women, and children who have ever come into this world are brothers and sisters, and they were all sons and daughters of God the Eternal Father and our Eternal Mother in that celestial spirit realm before we came into mortality. We are taught that we were born into that spirit realm as babies, and that we grew to maturity there, undergoing the various experiences which were there for us prior to our coming to mortality. Also through revelation we have learned that the gods held a council preparatory to the peopling of this earth in which the plans for mortality were discussed and proclaimed.(Milton R Hunter, Conference Report, April 1949, p.67).

    During his pre-mortal life Jesus Christ rose to the status of Godhood. At that time he was foreordained to be the Savior of this world. Father Abraham was privileged to see in vision the grand council in heaven that was held prior to the peopling of this earth, and he saw, as the Lord showed him, “many of the noble and great ones.” The Lord pointed out: These I will make my rulers …. Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born. Abraham 3:23. (ibid, p.69)

    Bruce R. McConkie,

    Joseph Smith sat with Father Abraham in the councils of eternity, and Joseph Smith was ordained as Abraham was ordained to come down and be the head of a gospel dispensation here. He had ascended by virtue of obedience, intelligence, progression, and righteousness to a high state of spiritual perfection in that world. When he came here, he brought with him the talents and abilities, the deep spirituality, and the innate righteousness that he developed back there under the tutelage of God the Father. In the eternal worlds, the Firstborn spirit offspring of the Father was Jehovah who is Jesus Christ. He was pre-eminent. Standing next to Christ was the great spirit, Michael. Christ was ordained as a lamb slain from the foundation of the world, chosen to come here and be the Redeemer. Michael was prepared and chosen and sent here as Father Adam, the first man of all men, the first flesh upon the earth, the head of the human race, and the presiding high priest, under Christ, over all the earth. (Bruce R. McConkie, Conference Report, October 1951, p.148).

    Article from The Ensign,

    By taking on a body of flesh, the Lord, like us, takes a step toward perfection. In so doing, like us, he extends his powers of sensation and perception. The only difference is that the greatest spirit has entered flesh begotten of the Father, and consequently his range is immensely wider than ours . . . He was capable of experiencing more pain (as in Gethsemane) and more joy (as in the resurrection) than we are. (Arthur H. King, “Atonement, The Only Wholeness,” Ensign 5 (Apr. 1975): 17).

    Brigham Young’s teachings quoted by Eliza R. Snow & Edward Tullidge in The Women of Mormondom,

    “Adam is our Father and God. He is the God of the earth.” So says Brigham Young. Adam is the great archangel of this creation. He is Michael. He is the Ancient of Days. He is the father of our elder brother, Jesus Christ—the father of him who shall also come as Messiah to reign. He is the father of the spirits as well as the tabernacles of the sons and daughters of man. Adam! Michael is one of the grand mystical names in the works of creation, redemptions, and resurrections. Jehovah is the second and the higher name. Eloheim–signifying the Gods–is the first name of the celestial trinity. Michael was a celestial, resurrected being, of another world. “In the beginning” the Gods created the heavens and the earths. In their councils they said, let us make man in our own image. So, in the likeness of the Fathers, and the Mothers–the Gods–created they man–male and female. When this earth was prepared for mankind, Michael, as Adam, came down. He brought with him one of his wives, and he called her name Eve. Adam and Eve are the names of the fathers and mothers of worlds. Adam was not made out of a lump of clay, as we make a brick, nor was Eve taken as a rib–a bone–from his side. They came by generation. But woman, as the wife or mate of man, was a rib of man. She was taken from his side, in their glorified world, and brought by him to earth to be the mother of a race. These were father and mother of a world of spirits who had been born to them in heaven. These spirits had been waiting for the grand period of their probation, when they should have bodies or tabernacles, so that they might become, in the resurrection, like Gods. When this earth had become an abode for mankind, with its Garden of Eden, then it was that the morning stars sang together, and the sons and daughters of God shouted for joy. They were coming down to earth. The children of the sun, at least, knew what the grand scheme of the everlasting Fathers and the everlasting Mothers meant, and they, both sons and daughters, shouted for joy. The temple of the eternities shook with their hosannas, and trembled with divine emotions. The father and mother were at length in their Garden of Eden. They came on purpose to fall. They fell “that man might be; and man is, that he “might have joy.” They ate of the tree of mortal life, partook of the elements of this earth that they might again become mortal for their children’s sake. They fell that another world might have a probation, redemption and resurrection. (pp. 179-180)

    God the Father and God the Mother stand, in the grand pre-existing view, as the origin and centre of the spirits of all the generations of mortals who had been tabernacled on this earth. First and noblest of this great family was Jesus Christ, who was the elder brother, in spirit, of the whole human race. These constituted a world-family of pre-existing souls. Brightest among these spirits, and nearest in the circle to our Father and Mother in heaven (the Father being Adam), were Seth, Enoch, Noah and Abraham, Moses, David, and Jesus Christ–indeed that glorious cohort of men and women, whose lives have left immortal records in the worlds’s history. Among these the Mormon faith would rank Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and their compeers.

    * * *

    These are the sons and daughters of Adam–the Ancient of Days–the Father and God of the whole human family. These are the sons and daughters of Michael, who is Adam, the father of the spirits of all our race. These are the sons and daughters of Eve, the Mother of a world. What a practical Unitarianism is this! The Christ is not dragged from his heavenly estate, to be mere mortal, but mortals are lifted up to his celestial plane. He is still the God-Man; but he is one among many brethren who are also God-Men. Moreover, Jesus is one of a grand order of Saviours. Every world has its distinctive Saviour, and every dispensation its Christ. There is a glorious Masonic scheme among the Gods. The everlasting orders come down to us with their mystic and official names. The heavens and the earth have a grand leveling; not by pulling down celestial spheres, but by the lifting up of mortal spheres.

    * * *

    Woman is heiress of the Gods. She is joint heir with her elder brother, Jesus the Christ; but she inherits from her God-Father and her God-Mother. Jesus is the “beloved” of that Father and Mother–their well-tried Son, chosen to work out the salvation and exaltation of the whole human family. And shall it not be said then that the subject rises from the God-Father to the God- Mother? Surely it is a rising in the sense of the culmination of the divine idea. The God-Father is not robbed of his everlasting glory by this maternal completion of himself. It is an expansion both of deity and humanity. They twain are one God! The supreme Unitarian conception is here; the God-Father and the God-Mother! The grand unity of God is in them–in the divine Fatherhood and the divine Motherhood–the very beginning and consummation of creation. Not in the God-Father and the God-Son can the unity of the heavens and the earths be worked out; neither with any logic of facts nor of idealities. In them the Masonic trinities; in the everlasting Fathers and the everlasting Mothers the unities of creations. Our Mother in heaven is decidedly a new revelation, as beautiful and delicate to the masculine sense of the race as it is just and exalting to the feminine.(Women of Mormondom; March 1877, pp. 190-193)[Note: This book was written by permission of Brigham Young by Eliza R. Snow, and Elder Edward Tullidge]

    Brigham Young,

    President Young said There never was any world Created & Peopled Nor never would be but what would be redeemed by the sheding of the blood of the Savior of that world. If we are Ever Exhalted and Crowned in the presence of God we shall become Saviors of a world which we shall Create & People. I know why the Blood of Jesus was shed. I know why the blood of Joseph, & Hiram & others have been shed and the blood of others will be shed. It is all to answer a purpose and has its Effect. Adam made this world and Suffered himself to take a body and subject himself to sin that Redemption & Exaltation might Come to man. Without descending below all things we Cannot asscend above all things. There never will be any Change of the gospel of Salvation. It is an Eternal gospel and the same in all worlds and always will be to the Endless ages of Eternity. There never was a period but what worlds Exhisted & never will be, and they all have the same Gospel & Law of Salvation. (Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, Vol. 6, p.344, May 12, 1867)

    So, anything to add, Clyde? Are you still going to claim that we don’t understand?

  33. grindael says:

    Grindael
    The election I am talking about happened before the internet. I believe the 1920′s but it may have been during the late 1800′s. If I find the article I will try to update when it really happened.

    Sorry for misinterpreting that, but you were rather vague. I’ve deleted that part of my comment since it is now irrelevant.

  34. Rick B says:

    Clyde,
    you will say what ever you need to defend a lie won’t you?
    Now your going from saying, do you beat your wife, to changing it to, do you beat your wife at games? Does it ever end with you?

    I could then say, I dont play games, or I could say, when I play games with my wife, I lose at them. So again, its not, either or, question.

  35. fifth monarchy man says:

    grindael

    Thank you for the information on JS and blood sacrifices. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that he could not have been a Prophet. Anyone that has any knowledge at all about the New Covenant would have known that to offer sacrifices in the NC would be a terrible affront to God.

    quote:

    These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
    (Col 2:17)

    (which is symbolic for the present age). According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, ……………until the time of reformation.
    (Heb 9:9-10)

    end quote:

    If fact even to claim to be a (big P) prophet in the New Covenant is an affront to God.

    quote:
    Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,
    (Heb 1:1-2a)
    end quote:

    Now that I think about it every heresy that ever existed is rooted in a profound lack of understanding of the glorious New Covenant.

    Pardon the long quote:

    Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice to the nations. He will not cry aloud or lift up his voice, or make it heard in the street; a bruised reed he will not break, and a faintly burning wick he will not quench; he will faithfully bring forth justice. He will not grow faint or be discouraged till he has established justice in the earth; and the coastlands wait for his law. Thus says God, the LORD, who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and what comes from it, who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it: “I am the LORD; I have called you in righteousness; I will take you by the hand and keep you;……………………I will give you as a covenant for the people,—————— a light for the nations, to open the eyes that are blind, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon, from the prison those who sit in darkness. I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols. Behold, the former things have come to pass, and new things I now declare; before they spring forth I tell you of them.”
    (Isa 42:1-9)

    end quote:

    peace

  36. grindael says:

    You’re welcome. Fifth Monarchy Man. I wonder if any of our Mormon Commenters can explain it? The great speech by Peter in Acts that Mormons love to say is about their “modern day Restoration”, if read in context shows that their interpretation is completely in error:

    17 “And now, brothers, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers. 18 But what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ would suffer, he thus fulfilled. 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, 20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, 21 whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago. 22 Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you. 23 And it shall be that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.’ 24 And all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel and those who came after him, also proclaimed THESE DAYS. 25 You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.’ 26 God, having raised up his servant, sent him to you first, to bless you by turning every one of you from your wickedness.” (Acts 3)

    The “times of refreshing” were brought about by Jesus. They were the “sons of the prophets”, the prophets who had finished their work with the coming of Jesus. The “restoring of all things”, was the promised restoration of Israel that would happen before Jesus came again, not the restoration of His Gospel.

  37. MJP says:

    Hey Ralph and Clyde:

    If God were to speak to you and tell you Joseph Smith was a fraud, what would you do?

    I don’t mean to so much trap you with this question but to demonstrate the incredulity of your question, and the point of our answer.

    Having said that, there is still a very real answer to the question, whatever that may be.

  38. MJP says:

    Off topic, but it can be brought in to the topic:

    http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/crime_courts/2014/05/02/mormon-missionary-sexual-abuse-lawsuit/8628203/

    An article stating a woman has filed a lawsuit against the LDS church for sexual abuse from a missionary. Looks like Mormons aren’t immune to this, either.

    This behavior is despicable, no matter who does it.

  39. Rick B says:

    MJP said

    Hey Ralph and Clyde:

    If God were to speak to you and tell you Joseph Smith was a fraud, what would you do?

    I think that is a good question to ask, but something tells me these guys either will not touch this question, or if they do, they will say, God would never say that to them.

    But as I have said to them before, God is speaking to them through other Christians telling them that and what will happen in eterinty if they reject the Gospel, and sadly they choose death over life.

  40. MJP says:

    [[Deleted Comment, we are no longer addressing this question, it is a red herring.]]

  41. Clyde6070 says:

    [[Deleted Comment, we are no longer addressing this question, it is a red herring.]]

  42. Rick B says:

    [[Deleted Comment, we are no longer addressing this question, it is a red herring.]]

  43. grindael says:

    Since the Bible tells us that we must “test” those that claim to be apostles, then the question about Joseph Smith is valid. Please address only this in your answers (if you choose to). Anything to do with God ordering people to kill others will be deleted, since that question is a red herring, and judging that people won’t follow God because they refuse to answer it yes or no is precisely why this is a fruitless endeavor and only a distraction.

  44. Rick B says:

    MJP said

    Hey Ralph and Clyde:

    If God were to speak to you and tell you Joseph Smith was a fraud, what would you do?

    Over the years that I have been speaking with Mormons, I notice the MM’s always ask me to pray about the BoM or JS. I know many believers claim I should simply say no, I wont pray, but I do.

    God has always every time given me a response to say to them. For the most past He simply says, JS and the BoM are false, sometimes the answer is more in depth and something I share with the MM’s.

    So we need to do more than just pray about it. So Ralph and Clyde, out side of prayer, what evidence do you use to claim JS is a true prophet?

  45. Pingback: Litigation and the Mormon Church | Mormon Coffee

Leave a Reply