Don and Rayola Larson are Latter-day Saints who have served in various leadership roles in the Mormon Church. They have been teachers at two Church-owned and operated schools, and completed two proselyting missions. Of their mission to England, they write,
“We began holding classes and taught groups of people…It soon became apparent that some of the members had no foundation in the basic teachings of the gospel. They had retained very little from the discussions that were taught when they joined the church, so we decided to write a study guide on the Plan of Salvation.” (Plan of Salvation, 2004, vii)
The first chapter of this self-published book explains the Mormon doctrine of the pre-existence in simple and easy language, covering the high points of the teaching that all human beings existed in a spiritual state with Heavenly Father before coming to earth and becoming mortal. Apart from the absence of any mention of Heavenly Mother, and the odd statement that “our Father, with his superior technology, probably showed each of us an earth similar to the one where we would all go,” the Larson’s study guide pretty much presents what would be expected. But it got more interesting for me when I got to the proof texts they provide.
Under the heading “Spirit Children” the Larsons include Proverbs 8:22-31:
“The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, …rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.” (The Plan of Salvation, 8, ellipsis in the original.)
That sure sounds like the Mormon doctrine of pre-existence — until you read the passage in its context. The subject of Proverbs 8 is wisdom. In fact,
“The main subject of Proverbs chapters 1–9 is wisdom, which is an abstract quality or character trait rather than a person, but wisdom is treated as a woman from the first chapter right through chapter 9. Wisdom is portrayed as a woman of dazzling attractiveness and virtue, who teaches in the marketplace of the town (1:20), who is romantically embraced (4:8–9), who can be addressed as ‘my sister’ (7:4), who utters a long speech commending herself to the public (chap. 8), and who builds a house and invites people to an alluring banquet (9:1–6).” (Leland Ryken, “Who Is Wisdom in Proverbs 8?”)
Proverbs 8 begins, “Does not wisdom call? Does not understanding raise her voice?” (v. 1) “…at the entrance of the portals she cries aloud: ‘To you, O men, I call, and my cry is to the children of man’” (vv. 3-4). “Hear, for I will speak noble things…” (v. 6). “I, wisdom, dwell with prudence, and I find knowledge and discretion” (v. 12). Throughout Proverbs 8 it is wisdom personified who speaks, not Heavenly Father’s spirit children. It is wisdom who was from the beginning, wisdom who was present when the heavens were prepared, wisdom who was God’s daily delight. If the Larsons intended to say this passage of scripture supports the idea that spirit children were “brought forth” before the hills were formed, they have severely misused it. But perhaps this was not their intent.
The LDS edition of the Bible explains that Proverbs 8 says “the Lord and the sons of men possessed wisdom in the premortal life.” Therefore, perhaps the Larsons meant to focus on the words at the end of the quoted passage: “my delights were with the sons of men” (v. 31). One could reason, if this was before “ever the earth was,” and there were “sons of men” with whom wisdom delighted, the sons of men must also have existed “when there were no depths.” Voila! Spirit children.
But this doesn’t work for the Mormon position, either. In Proverbs 8 wisdom begins with God before creation, and continues with Him as He forms the earth, establishes the clouds, sets the boundaries of the sea…through creation to the point where wisdom rejoices in God’s inhabited world because, as God declared, “it was very good” (Genesis 1:31).
Proverbs 8 does not support the Mormon doctrine of pre-existence. As is so often the case with Mormon proof texts, they have been dangerously twisted to mean something God never intended (2 Peter 3:16).
“You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.” (2 Peter 3:17-18)
Dear Jacob05,
It’s good to have you at the forum. I believe you are new here. Welcome, friend.
I want to know why I wasn’t taught at church that I was free to believe absolutely ANYTHING I wanted! This is so “out there” to me. Why on earth would I need a prophet then? I was taught to follow the prophet no matter what! He knows the way! He can never lead me astray and when the prophet speaks, the thinking has been done for me. What about bishop interviews? What about temple interviews? Either the right questions are not being asked or people are flat out lying.
I have been taught by family members that really all one has to do to make it to Heaven is obey the 10 commandments. This memory really upsets me because my family members are wrong. All we need to get to Heaven is Jesus. John 3:16. I am still amazed at how very little Jesus is even mentioned in Mormonism. Shawn McCraney says that in Mormonism, Jesus is like a little janitor who comes out of his little closet and cleans up once in awhile. It’s so true.
Helen,
First off you were crying BOO HOO, Ricks picking on me in a former thread. No I was being Honest and not mearly picking on you, the saying goes, If the shoe fits…
Again, You asked me a question, I answered it and am still waiting for a reply.
Now you say,
You mean the Usual are not good enough so now we need to make things up?
Your Prophet said Only the prophet can speak for God, and He will not lead the Chruch astray and he does not need to say, Thus saith the Lord to give us scripture.
So it seems to me that if that is all true, then your wrong, other wise Your prophet lied and is not hearing from God. Then if he/They are not really hearing from God and are wrong, then they are false prophets and then even what you believe is wrong, becaus ewhat you heard and believe is/was taught by a former prophet.
Then Adam God and other doctrines we taught as Scripture/fact/truth/ and Doctrine.
“I have been taught by family members that really all one has to do to make it to Heaven is obey the 10 commandments. This memory really upsets me because my family members are wrong. All we need to get to Heaven is Jesus. John 3:16. I am still amazed at how very little Jesus is even mentioned in Mormonism. Shawn McCraney says that in Mormonism, Jesus is like a little janitor who comes out of his little closet and cleans up once in awhile. It’s so true.”
That’s quite an interesting observation, Kate. Thanks. Believe me, I well know how difficult it is to have family members who are lost. Who seem to have a desperate craving for validation; someone (or something) who will convince themselves that they really are good. That they are measuring up. Have keep the Ten Commandments good enough.
I, all the while, know that they have not, do not, will never. If your family is correct, then according to the Bible, the Cross is meaningless: Jesus Christ died in vain (Galatians 2:21).
Heaven is free. Righteousness is a gift. And God gives us blessings because of who he is, not because of who we are. In Martin Luther’s day, society had rejected the gospel in favor of ‘free will.’ Since they had free will, they could keep God’s law and thereby earn heaven. It is true man can do what he wants. In fact, only what he wants. Wants flow from one’s heart and mind. However, the Bible describes the heart and mind of man as depraved.
Every once in a while here on MC we have that AH-HA moment.
I think Rick has pointed one out regarding our Mormon poster Helen.
Helen, it seems, has her own opinions and might I say, personal revelations, regarding what Mormon apostles and prophets have taught and revealed. But here’s the catch. She’s got to keep quiet about her personal beliefs regarding what the prophets of the church, past and present, teach and reveal. It seems to me that Helen has doubts regarding the veracity of the prophets she’s so high on.
I’m wondering what good these Mormon prophets are if individual members who sing praises to them and treat them like rock stars can simply dismiss their pronouncements?
These Mormon prophets are suppose to be hearing from the Mormon god and then communicating the messages to the Mormon faithful. Mormons brag about this. It’s what is suppose to set them apart from all other religious groups. They have a living prophet…….yippee!
So here we are with the Mormon teaching regarding what they call the pre-mortal existence of human beings. There is no Biblical support for this notion despite the Mormon attempts to try and shoe horn some Bible verses into the doctrine. So this notion has been sent via special delivery from the Mormon god to these dubious prophets that that individual Mormons can disagree (privately) with.
It’s obvious that the Mormon god had it in for certain people and gave them black skin to mark them out. It would also seem that if people messed-up in their pre-mortal state they could end up having some sort of handicap when they became human beings. This must be pre-mortal karma or something.
So Helen practices a sort of buffet style Mormonism. She eats what she wants and rejects those tasty tid bits she doesn’t find appetizing.
falcon,
“It would also seem that if people messed-up in their pre-mortal state they could end up having some sort of handicap when they became human beings.”
Actually the opposite is true of handicapped people. Especially the mentally handicapped. These little spirits were the valiant ones who ushered Satan out of Heaven and Satan vowed vengeance on them so God gave them a “protection.”
Kate,
Now that’s a really interesting piece of information! I’m giving you 3 WOWS for that. If we were living in the same area I’d buy you a double something at Starbucks! Could you give a reference for that or is it just Mormon folk doctrine? I need more information on this.
*Satan vowed revenge on them so God gave them a “protection”? How does that work? This sounds like something out of the Lord of the Rings or some other fantasy.
So are there a back log of these people hanging around the Celestial Kingdom waiting for a mortal body? That was a long time ago that Satan got tossed out of heaven. Do these folks have automatic entrance into the Celestial Kingdom and becoming gods? If they were that valiant in the pre-mortal stage, there has to be a payoff.
I have to have a reference on this Kate. Don’t let me down!
Kate,
I couldn’t wait so I did a google search and came to a blog that addresses the topic of a disabled child and the Mormon pre-mortal state topic. The woman wrote about a Mormon woman who told her the following regarding her (first woman) child.
“I really believe that when someone has challenges in this life like XXXXX has, it’s because they were a more perfect spirit in the pre-existence and don’t need the same level of testing that we need.”
Now that’s a real interesting take on the whole topic. Where do these Mormon people come up with this stuff. It’s like a Mormon thing; this spinning of yarns and creative speculation.
The woman with the disabled child writes regarding this Mormon woman’s explanation:
I wasn’t completely sure what to say. My friend was very heartfelt and sincere, and had shared a thought that was obviously very tender to her. And yet, I can’t say I’m entirely comfortable with the idea.
http://www.clobberblog.com/?p=4312
falcon,
Yes these people have automatic entrance into the Celestial Kingdom. They don’t even have to be baptized. I’m not sure where this teaching comes from but if you google it you will read all sorts of people who have had this told to them in patriarchal blessings and spoken at church. If you will get my email from Rick, I will fill you in on what I know and how I know it. I feel that the way I know is way too personal for a public forum. 🙂
(cont. from my above post)
Now the speculation even goes further regarding an LDS “feel better now” explanation to women as to why they can’t receive the priesthood. I must say these Mormon folks sure are creative. But with Helen’s admission that she has, in my words a “take-it-or-leave-it” approach to Mormon prophets and their doctrines, I get this, on a broader scale.
The blogger continues her train of thought from the last paragraph of my previous post.
“But I’m not entirely comfortable with that, because it strikes me as a combination of two other popular LDS explanations for observed detriments, one historic and one current:
1 The pre-1978 doctrine that blacks could not hold the priesthood because they were the spirits of those who were less valiant in the pre-existence.
2The current popular notion that women cannot hold the priesthood because they are actually more spiritual than men and men need it so that they can learn to be on par with women.
It’s like (1) because it draws on alleged pre-existence behavior in an attempt to explain a current situation. However, it’s also like (2) because, it attempts to say that the disabled are actually better than the rest of us—and this is why they do not need healthy minds and bodies. (1) was logically consistent but theologically ugly, while (2) is just incredibly backwards. If women are really more spiritual than men, then that’s all the more reason to put them in places of spiritual leadership where they’ll get the most use out of their superior talents. Likewise, if my daughter is really a more valiant and perfect spirit, isn’t that all the more reason to give her a healthy mind and body where she can do the most good for the human race.”
If anyone, regardless of his position in the Church, were to advance a doctrine that is not substantiated by the standard Church works, meaning the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price, you may know that his statement is merely his private opinion. The only one authorized to bring forth any new doctrine is the President of the Church, who, when he does, will declare it as revelation from God, and it will be so accepted by the Council of the Twelve and sustained by the body of the Church. And if any man speak a doctrine which contradicts what is in the standard Church works, you may know by that same token that it is false and you are not bound to accept it as truth. ~Harold B. Lee
Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.
Sometimes there are those who haggle over words. They might say the prophet gave us counsel, but that we are not obligated to follow it unless he says it is a commandment. But the Lord says of the Prophet Joseph, “Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you” (D&C 21:4).
And speaking of taking counsel from the prophet, in D&C 108:1, the Lord states: “Verily thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Lyman: Your sins are forgiven you, because you have obeyed my voice in coming up hither this morning to receive counsel of him whom I have appointed”.
Said Brigham Young, “I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture” (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints’ Book Depot], 13:95). ~Ezra Taft Benson
The problem with Mormonism, is that you don’t know who to believe because they keep contradicting each other. One Prophet says you can pick and choose, another says you must give heed to ALL their words. When faced with this dilemma, the best thing to do, is not follow either one, but go to a trusted source for answers: THE BIBLE. _johnny
Bruce R McConkie said:
What about the mentally deficient?
It is with them as it is with little children. They never arrive at the years of accountability and are considered as though they were little children. If because of some physical deficiency, or for some other reason unknown to us, they never mature in the spiritual and moral sense, then they never become accountable for sins. They need no baptism; they are alive in Christ; and they will receive, inherit, and possess in eternity on the same basis as do all children.
After revealing that little children are redeemed from the foundation of the world through the atoning sacrifice of Him who died to save us all, and after specifying that Satan has no power to tempt little children until they begin to become accountable, the Lord applied the same principles to those who are mentally deficient: “And, again, I say unto you, that whoso having knowledge, have I not commanded to repent? And he that hath no understanding, it remaineth in me to do according as it is written.” (D&C 29:49–50.) LDS.org – Liahona Article – Salvation of Little Children
Kate,
The Mormon God can make an exception to Baptism in this case, but makes the Church spend billions on temples and work for the dead, for those that died without the Gospel. If God can make ONE exception to his commanded rule that ALL MUST BE BAPTIZED, and it is so important, that they must do all this expensive and time consuming work for the dead, then why would he not have every single person be baptized? (even the mentally challenged) God can just waive his rule for some and take them on an individual basis, but cannot for others?
These kinds of ridiculous contradictions typify Mormonism. If those that never heard the Mormon gospel, died without knowledge – couldn’t they too fall under D&C 29:49-50 and get baptism waived too? This reminds me of the Family Guy Episode where Peter is declared ‘mildly retarded’ and then uses that to get away with anything. The rules just don’t apply here folks – because…?, but God is so strict that he has to have the whole of mankind baptized? I can’t buy into such illogic, or the fact that some limit God, like He can’t judge people and know their hearts whether they knew of Jesus or not. Mormon legalism…
Helen said:
“if commanded of God, I will do exactly as I’m commanded as much as I follow the other commandments of God.”
then said,
Where oh where does it say I have to believe what they say?
How can one ‘be commanded’ if one doesn’t believe what they say? _johnny
grindael,
I know. There is so much contradiction and confusion within Mormonism. I’m so glad that I am out. The sad thing is that Mormons don’t want to see it. I see this within my own family. My family doesn’t want to even talk about anything that may shake their faith. Don’t want to hear anything that isn’t faith promoting. I don’t see how one grows spiritually if they refuse to study the scriptures. I too was stagnant for years. How does one learn new things that God wants us to know? Helen does contradict herself. I don’t know about you, but when I was a Mormon, I followed the prophet and leaders of the church. I didn’t go off on my own and believe what I wanted behind their backs. I still don’t see how there could be an honest bishop or temple interview with this mentality.
Well, I think I might need all six posts today.
First of all: Pre-existence, preexistence
I went through a search of LDS.org (you can do so yourself). The term pre-existence is in use by general authority talks as well as other leaders, although past the 1970’s it appears somewhat to die out with only one article I found in 1981 and other appearances past that time seem to be quotes of past general talks.
The term preexistence seems to have survived much further as I found various uses in some talks and church materials with even a few references in the current mellinium. However they use of it seems to have deminished.
Did I get a special decree from a general authority to push this issue? No. But I have had it explained to me that the term is misguiding as it expresses a time in which we didn’t exist (pre=before, existence=The fact or state of living or having objective reality). As there was never a time in which we didn’t exist that phrase is wrong. You can even look it up in wikipedia, although it doesn’t say who directly made the entry. The idea of preexistence is almost like saying that man’s soul is created ex nihilo (out of nothing).
I think of things in terms of a baby. In the early stages of our lives we tend to show certain traits and characteristics. Even though we may be a geneatic makeup of our parents, we are still a unique individual as far as our personalities. Where did these personalities come from, nowhere?
But you are right, I am not a leader with regards to declaring church doctrine, but you can find this yourself.
Kate,
My faith is what guides me through my understanding. I am sure you will come up with some counter argument to that. But you to have a faith with your beliefs. That is how religion goes. Although the bible is more easily proven with regards to many places and people that where talked about therein there is much more that requires faith to believe in. This is a problem that empiricits have with religion in general. If there is no actual proof for these things than how can these religious people believe in them.
I have posted this question in the past. Through what chemical means can you prove that Christ turned water into wine. No one today can do that. So it must be false, right? Wrong. My faith tells me that it did happen, and no scientist in the world can get me to disbelieve it.
What is the curative value of saliva mixed with dirt for the curing of blindness? I am sure that any medical doctor alive can find no value in that mixture whatsoever, so it must not have happened, right? Wrong. I know that this did happen because of my faith. Not because some religious doctor actually proved it to me.
Much of what scripture says cannot be proven by even the most modern of technologies, so they must be either made up or outright lies, right? Wrong. I have faith in the miracles of Christ, just as I have faith in the validity in the Book of Mormon. No matter what you may conjure up, it will still be firm.
Grindael,
With regards to the statement made in 1949.
I see the part you are trying to stress with regards to the description of the valiance of souls in the premortal existence.
However, I still don’t take it is a straight basis of these specific people being put in that position. I still believe it to be limited temporal thinking of a mind that has been covered by the vail trying to comprehend what exactly occured on the other side of the vail. If you consider it. Countless generation all over the world were without the blessings of the priesthood whether through apostasy, rejection of the gospel, or certain restrictions at the time the gospel existed on the earth. It was lost to many during Adams time when they rejected his words to the point that only eight people in the entire worlds were able to partake of the blessings of the priesthood. Then after the flood there was another apostasy again but for the king of Salem and Abrahams group. Then during the time of the Israelites when they had fallen from remembering the Lord, as well as the restriction of the priesthood to only certain group. Then after the Great Apostasy when the priesthood was taken away until the modern day restoration.
Countless millions, if not billions were without the priesthood during their lifetimes. I still do not fully understand why black men, who were fully accepted into the church at a time when segregation was growing with religion, were not able to receive the priesthood, and your quote by Brigham Young doesn’t put into unquestionable terms as to being the complete answer. Besides the 1978 revelation is proactive to the beginning as all men can recieve it righteously.
Now I come to you falcon,
It is quite interesting that you use the KKK to forward your argument.
They KKK was established in the 1860’s to attack blacks and white republican sympathizers. Also among the list of those they were against was the LDS faith. Perhaps part of it was due to the growing fear that LDS members were predominantly for abolition of slavery.
Here are some interesting points from the Deseret News over the years in response to the KKK:
http://www.allaboutmormons.com/ENG_racism_6.php
Here is another one on the KKK in Utah history: (I did note that it said some LDS joined it, but the leadership as a whole denounced it)
http://www.media.utah.edu/UHE/k/KKK.html
Now, while you use this a way of saying that you do not sympathize with a group preaching incorrect doctrines. But do you really want to compare the LDS is an organization based on violence that lead to the actual murder of people? Note that LDS missionaries were a target for torture and murder in the southern states.
This is where I have a problem with the way you do things. I don’t expect you to believe anything of what I say. I expect you to zealously stand up for your beliefs. Heck, I do the same thing. But if you want to talk about these in a rational manner, I am all for it. We may not convert each other to the other side, but I generally don’t see that as the point of debate. To me debate is when adults sit down and discuss point an counterpoint on topics they may disagree upon. This does not mean constant gainsay of anything your oponent says. Using misguided phrases and terms for simply rhetoric is called a rant.
Hello Andy,
I know you are addressing Helen on the issue of the Joseph Smith Translation. I hope you don’t consider it rude if I post on that issue.
As you know the JST comes from the work done by Joseph Smith Jr. as he began a retranslation of the bible. During the division some things were retained by Emma Smith and what would be the RLDS (now the Community of Christ). One LDS member was able to jot a few things down with permission by Emma Smith, but the translation as a whole was held in copywrite by the RLDS this is why our church does not publish the intirety as standard work today.
Now, I heard in one of my institute classes as to how we were able to get as much of it as we did. I am sorry I don’t have the exact story right here, I am trying to nail down the exact words of what happened, but I will explain from memory.
There was an incident where the LDS church had some documents which the RLDS church wanted to get their hands on. It was something that dealed directly with Joseph Smith Jr.. Our church offered those documents in exchange with direct viewing of the Joseph Smith Translation and being able to take whatever we wanted from the JST. This is how we have what we have today with regards to the standard works.
Consequentially, I have not seen any outright rejection of the JST in our church. We still consider it a valued work as we do use the various pieces we do legally have. I even know some who have copies and read it.
“If commanded of God, I will do exactly as I’m commanded as much as I follow the other commandments of God.”then said,
Where oh where does it say I have to believe what they say?
How can one ‘be commanded’ if one doesn’t believe what they say?” _johnny
Amused but not a bit surprised at the ruckus my little statement made amongst the wise, the learned and the “discerner” . Smiling 🙂
If commanded of God I imagine anyone here would most likely try to obey, hint, the ten commandments.
Now when it comes to LDS Doctrine, Plan of Salvation and all its principles and commandments I will do my best to follow and be obedient.
But when it come too any sermon or General Conference and the spoken word of our GA’s, if anything was to be other then what I consider Standard Works or the Plan of Salvation, I would pray for confirmation and I suppose most other LDS would also.
So Johnny asks, “How can one ‘be commanded’ if one doesn’t believe what they say?”
Awe, that is really has a simple answer, where oh where has anything been introduced lately that has not been already commanded of us in our Standard Works, again I ask where? My belief is very simple, I have a testimony that Jesus is the Christ, Salvation is part of the Plan of Salvation, The Book of Mormons is Gods word and that the first Principle is Faith in God and His Son, Jesus Christ.
So Johnny, what would be something you can state is not part of the Plan of Salvation and in our Standard works. What specifically would be something that I’m commanded to do that I don’t already have a testimony of?
J/5
Do I actually want to compare the LDS religion to an organization based on violence that actually led to the murder of people?
Well yes I actually would like to do that!
Have you ever heard of the Mountain Meadows Massacre?
Since you invited me to access some websites I’ve got one for you here.
http://1857massacre.com/
Mormon zealots murdered 140 innocent men, women and children in cold blood in September 1857. As heartless and hateful bunch as the KKK is/was, I don’t know if they ever participated in a mass murder on the scale the Mormons did on that September day in 1857. The massacre was heartless, cold blooded and violent.
Have you ever heard of the Danites?
Orrin Porter Rockwell reportedly killed 17 people on behalf of the church and shot the Missouri gov. on orders from Joseph Smith.
William “Wild Bill” Hickman killed 54 people on orders from Brigham Young.
Jacob
I’m sorry, I did not elaborate, nor did I give near enough a complete answer as to why Young enacted his racist doctrine against blacks. I only posted the statement made by G.A. Smith for it’s information on the pre-existence. (And it being ‘official doctrine’ (a First Presidency Statement) puts them in a bit of a pickle, as you will see) The larger issue is much more complex. Young taught,
“There has been a great stir to exalt the Negro and make him equal to the white man, but there is a curse upon the seed of Cain and all hell cannot wipe it out and it cannot be taken off until God takes it off. When a person unlawfully seeks for power and exaltation by taking the blessings which belong to another, he will sink far below the other. As Lucifer, the Son of the Morning, sought the glory that belonged to Christ, the First Born. He was thrust to Hell. So Cain sought Abel’s blessing and took the life of his brother, the consequence was Cain was cursed and his seed and this curse will remain until Abel’s posterity will get all the blessing there its for him; then the curse may be taken from Cain or his posterity, but his posterity will be below Abel’s.” (Woodruff Journals, June 29, 1851)
Brigham Young also taught that no one was neutral during the ‘war’ in heaven, that all took sides and that all ‘spirits’ were born pure. G.A. Smith labors under a myth, fueled by speculation that some did not fight as valiantly as others (or were neutral), hence the reason for the ban on that lineage. The answer by Young was much more simple, and racist. Woodruff again records,
“Lorenzo [Dow] Young asked if the spirits of Negroes were neutral
in heaven. He said someone said Joseph Smith said they were. President Young said no they were not. There were no neutral spirits in heaven at the time of the rebellion. All took sides. He said if anyone said that he heard the Prophet Joseph say that the spirits of the Blacks were neutral in heaven, he would not believe them, for he heard Joseph say to the contrary. All spirits are pure that come from the presence of God. The posterity of Cain are black because he commit murder. He killed Abel and God set a mark upon his posterity. But the spirits are pure that enter their tabernacles and there will be a chance for the redemption of all the children of Adam except the sons of perdition.”
G.A. Smith’s explanation was born out of desperation to put this issue in a non-racist light. This cannot be done, when one understands the history of the ban on blacks. Nowhere can any Mormon Authority explain how a whole lineage is responsible for Cain’s transgression. Since Mormons believe that Adam’s posterity were not cursed because of his transgression, (AOF #2) it is inconceivable to believe that a whole race of people could be cursed because of Cain’s.
Placing the blame for this on some ‘sin’ committed in the pre-existence nicely gets them out of this jam. On the one hand, they quote Young in support of the doctrine as a command from God, but on the other, we have Young making statements that shatter their argument for the pre-existence explanation. They can’t have it both ways. Young taught,
“Jesus Christ was the first born of the Father and He was the candidate and elected to redeem the world. Lucifer sat up as a candidate to run against Jesus Christ, but he
was overcome and thrust down to Hell with all that followed him.” (Woodruff Journals, July 27, 1851)
Here Young tells us that all were cast out with Satan, and all took sides. There were no ‘fence sitters’ or some ‘less valiant’ than others. He elaborates in another speech early the next year:
“The Lord said I will not kill Cain, but I will put a mark upon him and it is seen in the face of every Negro on the earth, and it is the decree of God that that mark shall remain upon the seed of Cain and the curse until all the seed of Abel should be redeemed and Cain will not receive the Priesthood or salvation until all the seed of Abel are redeemed. Any man having one drop of the seed of Cain in him cannot hold the Priesthood, and if no other prophet ever spake it before I will say it now in the name of Jesus Christ. I know it is true and others know it. The Negro cannot hold one part of Government.” (Woodruff Journals, January 1852)
The reason this came up at this time, was that Young as territorial Governor of the State of Deseret, was making policy on slavery and laying the groundwork for it’s eventual passage by the legislature. (The above was delivered in a speech to that body). He continues,
“There is not one of the seed of old Cain that is permitted to rule and reign over the seed of Abel and you nor I cannot help it. firstlings and best of the flock were sacrificed on the altar, and in some instances many men and almost whole nations were sacrificed or put to death because of their sins and wickedness. This was the only way they could be saved at all.”
Young also said that he was ‘opposed to the present system of slavery’ and that the seed of Cain should serve the seed of Abel, but ‘it should be done right’. He then concludes:
“Some may think I don’t know as much as they do, but I know that I know more than they do. The Lord will watch us all; the Devil would like to rule part of the time, but I am determined he shall not rule at all, and Negroes shall not rule us. I will not admit of the Devil ruling at all. I will not consent for the seed of Cain to vote for me or my brethren. If you want to know why we did not speak of it in the Constitution, it was because it was none of their business.” (ibid)
This was brought about because a black man, who was given the Priesthood, had married a white woman, and they had a child. This irked one racist Stake President, William Appleby, who wrote,
“At Lowell…I found a coloured brother by name of ‘Lewis’ a barber, an Elder in the Church, ordained some years ago by William Smith. This Lewis I was informed has also a son who is married to a white girl [Enoch Lovejoy Lewis and Mary Matilda Webster Lewis]. and both members of the Church there. Now dear Br. I wish to know if this is the order of God or tolerated in this Church ie to ordain Negroes to the
Priesthood and allow amalgamation [inter-racial marriage]. If it is I desire to Know, as I have Yet got to learn it.” (William I. Appleby Journal, 31 May, 1847.)
After writing a letter to Young, and arriving in Salt Lake, Young had a ‘revelation’ that the Book of Abraham
forbids Negroes from holding the Priesthood, and this new ‘revelation’ caused Young to take seriously any intermarriage between races, as documented by Michael Quinn:
3 Dec 1847 – “Informed that an African-American Mormon in Boston had married a white woman [Enoch L. and Mary Matilda Lewis], Brigham Young privately told the apostles, he would have both of them killed ‘if they were far away from the Gentiles’ instead of in Boston. The reach of his “Be’-hoys” did not extend that far.” (D. Michael Quinn, Origins of Power, p. 478 Quinn explains that, “Danites, non-Danites, and some trusted Mormon criminals on specific assignments against anti-Mormons and apostates [were] called “Minute Men,” or “Be’-hoys,” or “Brigham’s Boys,”)
This is a very brief overview of what transpired, there is of course, much more to this, but space limits my response at this time. _johnny
Helen said,
“What I consider…
Thanks, that gives me insight, that it’s all about what you want to consider the ‘standard works’ but doesn’t answer the question. Nice dodge. As for causing a “ruckus”, well, if a “ruckus” is asking a question borne out of illogical statements, then yeah, I guess I’m guilty.
Where was the Word of Wisdom COMMANDED in the standard works? _johnny
Grindael, “Where was the Word of Wisdom COMMANDED in the standard works? “_johnny
Where does is say “commanded” — period. Not by “commandment” or constraint, but a word of wisdom. It is temporal and temporary but no less the “will” of God. What is the greatest gift one can give back to God, to be obedient and freely give of your “will” to serve.
Commandment or principle? Temporal or spiritual?
A commandment “You must do this!” A Word of Wisdom you must judge for yourself. Where Grindael, do we make it a covenant or promise?
Temple Interview for TR, “do you keep the WW, yea or no”. Well Bishop, I do drink pepsi and coke and occasionally a red bull. Well member, try and improve on this by drinking less at first and then see if you can completely give it up. We are trying to encourage all members that the Word of Wisdom means you must judge for yourself. TR approved.
Helen said, ” My belief is very simple, I have a testimony that Jesus is the Christ,
salvation is part of the plan of salvation , the Book of Mormon is Gods word and
that the first principle is faith in God and His Son Jesus Christ. ”
That statement sounds like it came from a RLDS . To coin a phrase made popular by
radio commentator Paul Harvey , people need to ” know the rest of the story “.
Amused again, Falcon marvels at the follwoing: “But here’s the catch. She’s got to keep quiet about her personal beliefs regarding what the prophets of the church, past and present, teach and reveal. It seems to me that Helen has doubts regarding the veracity of the prophets she’s so high on.”
What is the catch? Keeping quiet? pardon me, I said that I can’t teach or give a talk that is not within the bounds of the Standard Works or Plan of Salvation.
Oh gosh, sister friend, let me first check my home to make sure there are no hidden microphones or tapes or video cameras that might record my talk with you here in private. You see there were some sermons by BY that if I was to even suggest that they may have some substance or validity and the Bishop or Stake Pres. were to get drift that I personally had this conversation, all hell would break out. Dear sister, we both could get excommunicated for thinking outside the box. I know there is much to do and consternation over some of the old non recorded sermons, did you know sister member they didn’t even have recorders or videos in those days, everything had to be recorded as it was spoken, you know written down by hand, can you just imagine. BY, it’s getting to the point I have heard that they might even say he was never really a prophet of God or if he was he got it all messed up, at least that is what those wonderful Evangelicals think. Dear me, what’s a good TBM to do? I guess never mention the name of BY in church. We must be careful.
Brian,
Just curious since I really dont know. Are you a currant LDS member? Or are some a Non-LDS christian? Or something else?
Also You said
I just want to let you know, I believe in Free will, But even though I believe in free will, I believe we use are free will to either except Jesus as Lord and Saviour, Or we Reject Jesus and Go to hell. Yes He gives us a choice and we use that gift of free will to choose or reject Him.
Jacob said
I believe in Creation Ex-nihilo. I hold to this postion that God created us out of nothing. I dont believe we existed before. And I am not the only Christian that believes this.
Oh Helen, you know darn well that if you started blabbing to other members about the doctrines of Brigham Young that the LDS church has marked as false doctrine and just his opinion, you would be called in for an interview and told to stop. They would set you straight on what you are teaching and tell you that you are leading others astray. They may tell you that you can believe whatever you want, but you CAN NOT teach it to others.
JacobO5,
Yes I have faith. Faith in the Lord and faith in his Holy Word. But we are not to live by blind faith. We are to test every spirit against the Word of God and if it is found lacking, we are to reject it. LDS prophets do not line up with the Word of God. Jesus himself warns us against false prophets. I have tested these prophets against God’s Word and they do not line up. They teach another gospel, not the one taught by Jesus and his true Apostles. Galatians 1:8. It really is Jesus or Joseph.
How do you know what to have faith in? LDS doctrine has changed constantly over the years. The bottom line is, if you aren’t worshiping the true and living God of the Bible, you are worshiping a false God and that gets you nowhere.
Helen said, ” Temple Interview for TR , ‘ do you keep the WW, yes or no ‘ . Well
Bishop , I do drink pepsi and coke and occasionally a red bull . Well member, try and
improve on this by drinking less at first and see if you can completely give it up. We
are trying to encourage all members that the WW means you must judge for yourself.
TR approved.’ ”
Since these soft drinks contain caffeine , why not use tea or coffee as an
example here ? Trying to give up tea meets with the Bishop’s approval ? Can you
reference a Bishop’s counsel that the WW means you must judge for yourself what is
actually approved . The Bishop [ and Stake Pres. ] is said to be the ” judge in Israel “.
That being the case , how are you the judge of what constitutes approval to enter God’s
house ? Am I understanding you on this ? From my study of Mormonism I see a lot
of statements like this , ” the teachings of the Church are…..” , and that we can trust the
Mormon prophets because they constitute the “appointed channel” that God uses today
to inform us of His will in important matters related to our relationship with Him etc.
However, there are examples of this that while being the ” teachings of the Church ” , they
are not the teachings of scripture, even the Standard Works. The WW joins other
requirements issued by men , in the last 180 yrs
Helen,
What in the world are you talking about? You sound like the cartoon character Road Runner on speed. Do you have a point?
Who is “sister friend” and “dear sister”? I have no clue who or about who you are speaking. What’s your rant about? Are you pretending to have a conversation with another Molly Mormon?
You’re the one who intimated that you can believe whatever you want in Mormonism, you just can’t discuss it openly. You sound a little desperate Helen; like you’re on the run.
You tell us you have a testimony of Jesus Christ but you don’t define who this Jesus is. You say that the BoM is a testimony of Jesus Christ, that you have a testimony of the BoM but despite being asked several times, you won’t tell us if you believe the BoM is accurate historically, linguistically, archeologically, and scientifically. You’ve never shared your views on the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible.
Mike R. is right. You sound more like a member of the RLDS than you do a member of the SLC denomination of Mormonism.
The apostles said to Jesus,
So I point this out because we dont see Jesus saying This man sinned when he was in the pre-existance, he was not valiant so he was struck Blind or Black.
Jesus also Said it was not a result of His parents or anything they did. Jesus said it was so He could manifest the works of God. This was a way Jesus could prove He was who He said He was. He healed the guy and that one only one of many miracles Jesus did to prove He was God.
Dear Rick,
I’m a born-again Christian. I have many friends and family who are LDS. I enjoy the MRM ministry since it helps me understand some of the challenges in witnessing to our LDS friends.
“I just want to let you know, I believe in Free will, But even though I believe in free will, I believe we use are free will to either except Jesus as Lord and Saviour, Or we Reject Jesus and Go to hell. Yes He gives us a choice and we use that gift of free will to choose or reject Him.”
I agree with you, Rick, on most of this. People have free will to do whatever springs from their hearts or minds. And yes, people who accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior will live forever with him in Heaven. Those who reject him will go to Hell. (John 3:36 puts is very succinctly.) Both are forever.
(Continues)
When I spoke of Martin Luther and the free will advanced by his society, I had in mind advocating works-righteousness. I didn’t state this very clearly; sorry for the confusion. In Martin’s commentary on Galatians 2:16, he wrote:
“You can see how far from the truth these blind guides have wandered, and how by this wicked and blasphemous doctrine they have not only darkened the gospel but have taken it clean away, and buried Christ utterly. For if I being in deadly sin, can do any little work which is not only acceptable in God’s sight of itself, but also is able to deserve grace, and if when I have received grace, I may do works according to grace, that is to say, according to charity, and get eternal life; what need have I now of the grace of God, forgiveness of sins, and of the death and victory of Christ? According to this argument Christ is now to me unprofitable, and His benefit of no effect: for I have free will and power to do good works, whereby I deserve grace, and afterwards, by the worthiness of my work, eternal life.”
Helen,
You know quite well that Cola drinks and Red Bull are not a part of the WOW regulation. It is coffee, tea, tobacco and alcohol. Your little exercise in lackadaisical temperance doesn’t work in that instance. The WOW is a COMMANDMENT that was NOT a commandment once upon a time, and to live it as a COMMANDMENT one must BELIEVE something a Mormon Prophet said that is not in the Standard works. Your argument is ill-conceived, and your hackneyed arguments won’t work with those of us who understand Mormonism far better than those you may be trying to snow. Your leaders claim to speak for GOD. If you want to say that you have left the right path of Mormonism, and have become a ‘law unto yourself’, go right ahead, but what you convey, is NOT Mormonism, it is someone who picks and chooses what to believe (which is your right of course), but that doesn’t change a wit what your leaders have said, and that their words are conveyed and to be taken as modern scripture. _johnny
I don’t know if Helen is all that confident in the Mormon prophets. If the teachings and pronouncements of these prophets can be questioned, accepted or dismissed by one’s own personal revelation, then why need the prophet?
The basis for Mormonism isn’t the priesthood, but it’s the prophets. It’s the supposition that the Mormon prophets are hearing directly from the Mormon god that is the super WOW YIPPIE KI-A factor in Mormonism. This supposed strength and advantage that Mormonism claims is really just the opposite. It’s the greatest weakness. Way too many alibis and excuses have to be made for the Mormon prophets in order to prop them up. They could be likened to the prophets of Baal in the OT.
This whole idea of a pre-mortal existence is one specific example. What this amounts to is mindless speculation by a bunch of people who are totally clueless when it comes to what is clearly revealed in Scripture. Like so much in Mormonism, it isn’t even good heresy. It’s childish and immature. The desire to want to believe Joseph Smith’s far fetched tale simply leads to more complete nonsense. It really reflects the time/era in which Smith birthed his religion.
Thankfully most of those who have had a run at Mormonism leave the sect. Sadly, too many become atheists because of what they observed within Mormonism.
“What we get out of general conference is a build-up of our spirits as we listen to those particular principles and practices of the gospel which the Lord inspires the present leadership of the Church to bring to our attention at the time. He knows why he inspired Brother Joseph F. Merrill to give the talk he just gave. He knows why he inspired the other brethren who have talked in this conference to say what they have said. It is our high privilege to hear, through these men, what the Lord would say if he were here. If we do not agree with what they say, it is because we are out of harmony with the Spirit of the Lord. ~Marion G. Romney, Conference Report, October 1950, p.126 _johnny
Very good grindael!
One of the things that I noticed about Mormonism when I started this gig was how much of what the people say sounds like evangelical Christian “speak”. The quote you offered above is a good example of this. Those words could have been spoken by some of the Pentecostal Christians I hang around with but also the evangelical folks.
Mormonism lingo can sound a lot like Christianese. I think that’s where people can get fooled. I think it’s also why some who leave Mormonism and walk into an evangelical Christian church may end up turning around and walking out. They hear the same vocabulary, phrases and quality of voice they heard in an LDS church. I’m talking surface level here. That’s why we see people joining the LDS church thinking they’re in a denomination of Christianity.
However once a person gets past the window dressing and sees the substantial doctrinal differences between Christianity and Mormonism the stark differences are apparent.
Even the talk about Joseph Smith encountering God and receiving a special message wouldn’t be all that unusual to say someone of my era brought up Catholic. That is not all that unusual in the Catholic faith. The difference is, of course, that the Catholic people buying into the whole supernatural appearance thing don’t abandon the doctrines of the Church. The Church will sometimes even validate a “devotion” to the supernatural revelation or appearance.
I’ve posted this before but I’ll do it again because it’s worth a look and related to Mormonism in that the person receiving the “revelation” was a Mormon who converted to the Catholic faith in the early part of the last century.
Our buddy Helen, for all of her protestations, really doesn’t think outside of the Mormon box. Anyone who does, won’t stay Mormon long.
http://www.parishretreat.org/
grindael,
I decided to post a little of the “testimony” regarding Cora Evans. I do this for the Mormons who might think that Joseph Smith’s accounts of the first vision (all eight of the accounts) are something super special. There are all kinds of mystics running around within and outside of the Christian faith. The challenge for the Christian is to judge whether or not these claims of revelation and super natural encounters with God or some other spirit being are legitimate. There is a test and it isn’t the burning in the bosom or confirming feeling that Mormons speak of. God provides those who are born again by His Holy Spirit with gifts, distributed to the Body as God wills, to make judgements regarding the legitimacy of revelations and supernatural manifestations.
On February 19, 1945, in response to Cora’s wishes, the Provincial of the California Province of the Jesuits, Father Joseph King, S.J., appointed a confessor and spiritual director to guide her soul – Father Frank Parrish, S.J. (1911-2003). She had numerous visionary experiences and wrote many manuscripts during this time.
Her visions vividly interpreted the word of God calling the faithful to become more aware of the living indwelling presence of Jesus in the ordinary circumstances of life.
Cora loved the Mormons and often referred to them as her heritage people. She wanted all Mormons to learn the truth about Jesus and embrace the gift of faith He offers. A great number of Mormons will be influenced by Cora’s writings.
A Unique Mission From Christ
“Spread the Mystical Humanity of Christ Throughout the World”
Cora’s mission is the promulgation of the Mystical Humanity of Christ – the Divine Indwelling – throughout the world – to encourage the faithful to live with a heightened awareness of the living presence of Jesus in their daily lives.
Hello Helen, You said to me/asked me this:
I answered your questions and told you that we are all sinners and sinned as a result of Adam and that sin entered the world as a result of Adam. Then I pointed out that you said
So if you dont believe that we are sinners as of a result of Adam then how do you explain the fact your a sinner? How exactly did you fall? Were you born sinless, you had to of been, so how exactly do LDS go from being born perfect to being fallen sinners in need of a saviour? How come this is never taught in LDS church? The idea that your child will be born perfect and you can help them walk in perfection and never sin.
Please answer these questions since you brought up the topic and asked me my thoughts on this issue.
If you don’t respond to these questions, then I am forced to conclude that you are unable to articulate your beliefs or defend your departure from biblical teaching.
Hay rick,
Did Mormons, at least some of them, sin in their pre-mortal state? Wouldn’t they be born sinners? I would guess that since their god was a sinner and that BY taught that Adam was god and he/Adam sinned, …………you can see where I’m going with this.
The whole pre-mortal existence is all religious mumbo jumbo anyway. Besides, Mormons can pick and choose what they want to believe about it anyway. At least Helen has a special dispensation to do so as long as she’s quiet shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh about it.
Jesus personally warned His followers of future false prophets . His apostles took that
warning to heart and spread His warning in their travels — 1 Jn.4:1 . Many people seem to
tire of the simple gospel message, in doing so they can become vulnerable to deception by
false teachers who come with claims of “new light”from God, truths hidden for the last 2000
years kept from everyone and now made known through a prophet. Such is many of the
important doctrines of Mormonism, including that of a pre-mortal life in heaven lived by
the human family. This is foundational doctrine of Mormonism. I don’t understand why
Mormons try to prove his doctrine is taught in the Bible, it’s not. It’s one thing to believe
it is truth revealed by a modern day prophet, but to say that the prophets and apostles of
the Bible taught this doctrine is quite another. When God wants us to know about important
truths He reveals it in a clear manner [ Isa. 43:10; Rom 1:20; compare Alma 13:23 ] . The
reason for this is simple, He wants us to know and embrace these truths. When a foundational
doctrine is only an implied one then we are on slippery ground and need to be careful as to
proclaiming it as gospel etc. The Mormon First Presidency is on record as stating that this
doctrine is only implied in the Bible. [ the old excuse of many truths were removed from the
“Jewish scriptures” is utilized for this position as to why the Bible does’nt plainly teach it ].
Now that we know that the Bible does not clearly teach this doctrine let’s see what Mormon
leaders have gone on to teach about it.[cont]
Falcon,
Helen just proves my point, she is so quite about what she belives she cannot answer my questions, Or yours or Kates or anyone. Then it simply keeps going back to the bigger point I made, Where is the Love of Christ in these people?
Helen is not showing love by not sharing the gospel. As I’m sure everyone can tell, I am vocal about what I believe, I can see from scripture where we are told many times and in many places, Preach the Gospel, In season and out. Helen does not do this. In my book Helen has no clue about the Bible or even what she believes and I really dont think anyone here takes her serious. She honestly should move on, or even simply be removed from posting since she clearly does not want to talk, accuses us of being clueless yet cannot back up her statments. But I cannot ban her or make her talk, but either way, I speak my mind, and I do hold back what I say and think due to the rules.
[cont]
While Mormon leaders have proclaimed a pre-mortal life for the human family , the reason
we can’t remember a lot of went on there is because God took that memory from us when we
were born here on earth. It is interesting though what we do learn about this life in heaven
from Mormon authorities . Mormon leaders teach that God is fullfilling His duty by
living the patriarchal order of marriage in heaven with His wives by whom He has sexually
sired myriads of spirit children. His directive to righteous men on earth is to follow His example
and do their duty by producing bodies in like manner with their wife(s) for these spirit children
to obtain when born here on earth . A Mormon prophet counsels : ” It s the duty of every
righteous man and woman to prepare tabernacles for all the spirits they can…” [ Brigham
Young ]. Other teachings on this issue is that the spirit children born in heaven grow and mature
as they live by a multitude of laws, and some spirits are more successful at being “worthy” than
others. One apostle even taught that there were horses in heaven( Maybe spirit persons were
riding horses? I’m a cowboy, maybe I got my first experience with horses in heaven before I was
born on a ranch here on earth ! ) All I know is that Jesus warned of future false prophets, these
men would seek to introduce doctrines claimed to be foundational to the Christian faith and
consistent with the teachings of Jesus through His original apostles, but they are only the
reasonings of men and are to be dismissed-2Jn1:9
Some may say to me, “Why, Brother Brigham, you seem to know it all.” I say, Oh no, I know but very little, but I have an eternity of knowledge before me, and I never expect to see the time when I shall cease to learn, never, no never, but I expect to keep on learning for ever and ever, going on from exaltation to exaltation, glory to glory, power to power, ever pressing forward to greater and higher attainments, as the Gods do. That is an idea that drowns the whole Christian world in a moment. Let them try to entertain it and they are out of sight of land without a ship, and if they had a ship it would have neither sail, rudder nor compass. “What,” say they, “God progress?” Now, do not lariet [lariat] the God that I serve and say that he can not learn any more; I do not believe in such a character.
“Why,” say they, “does not the Lord know it all?” Well, if he does, he must know an immense amount. No matter about that, the mind of man does not reach that any more than it comprehends the heaven beyond the bounds of time and space in which the Christians expect to sit and sing themselves away to everlasting bliss, and where they say they shall live for ever and for ever. If we look forward we can actually comprehend a little of the idea that we shall live for ever and ever; but you take a rear-sight, and try and contemplate and meditate upon the fact that there never was a beginning and you [76] are lost at once. The present and the future we can comprehend some little about, but the past is all a blank, and it is right and reasonable that it should be so. But if we are faithful in the things of God they will open up, open up, open up, our minds will expand, reach forth and receive more and more, and by and by we can begin to see that the Gods have been for ever and for ever. ~Brigham Young, June 18, 1873 as published in the Deseret News