Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

For non-mainstream, heterodoxical discussions. Request access to the Heretic Group here.
User avatar
Alexander
the Great
Posts: 4622
Location: amongst the brotherhood of the Black Robed Regiment; cocked hat and cocked rifle

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Alexander »

Magus wrote: September 10th, 2023, 3:04 pm
Blue Marble wrote: August 15th, 2023, 9:34 pm
Magus wrote: August 15th, 2023, 8:47 pm Postulation 6: In other words, higher-law chastity means you could do whatever you want as long as your heart is in the right place, lower-law restrictions would not apply.
Can a man want to have gay sex if his heart in the right place?
I mean, many gay men do want to have gay sex and their heart is in the right place. It was Hinckley who said it's not your sexual desire that is the sin.
If your desire is to sodomize or be sodomized, your heart isn’t the right place foremostly

User avatar
Magus
captain of 100
Posts: 444

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Magus »

Alexander wrote: September 24th, 2023, 1:56 pm
Magus wrote: August 15th, 2023, 8:47 pm Postulation 6: In other words, higher-law chastity means you could do whatever you want as long as your heart is in the right place, lower-law restrictions would not apply.
Good lord yikes
Just putting it up for a challenge to see what people say in response.

User avatar
Magus
captain of 100
Posts: 444

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Magus »

Alexander wrote: September 24th, 2023, 2:01 pm
Magus wrote: September 10th, 2023, 3:04 pm
Blue Marble wrote: August 15th, 2023, 9:34 pm

Can a man want to have gay sex if his heart in the right place?
I mean, many gay men do want to have gay sex and their heart is in the right place. It was Hinckley who said it's not your sexual desire that is the sin.
If your desire is to sodomize or be sodomized, your heart isn’t the right place foremostly
Lol, define sodomy first?

User avatar
Alexander
the Great
Posts: 4622
Location: amongst the brotherhood of the Black Robed Regiment; cocked hat and cocked rifle

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Alexander »

Magus wrote: September 24th, 2023, 3:58 pm
Alexander wrote: September 24th, 2023, 2:01 pm
Magus wrote: September 10th, 2023, 3:04 pm

I mean, many gay men do want to have gay sex and their heart is in the right place. It was Hinckley who said it's not your sexual desire that is the sin.
If your desire is to sodomize or be sodomized, your heart isn’t the right place foremostly
Lol, define sodomy first?
Have a man put his member in your rectum or vice versa, have a man perform fellatio on you or vice versa, be fondled by a man or vice versa, sexual intercourse or making out between someone of the same sex, etc.

User avatar
Magus
captain of 100
Posts: 444

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Magus »

Alexander wrote: September 24th, 2023, 5:22 pm
Magus wrote: September 24th, 2023, 3:58 pm
Alexander wrote: September 24th, 2023, 2:01 pm

If your desire is to sodomize or be sodomized, your heart isn’t the right place foremostly
Lol, define sodomy first?
Have a man put his member in your rectum or vice versa, have a man perform fellatio on you or vice versa, be fondled by a man or vice versa, sexual intercourse or making out between someone of the same sex, etc.
Cuz sodomy can also just be hetero oral/anal with a girl, as well.

Which I am all for.

User avatar
Vernet
captain of 10
Posts: 14

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Vernet »

Shawn Henry wrote: August 14th, 2023, 10:22 am
Blue Marble wrote: August 13th, 2023, 11:59 pm I think I can get behind your theory, but I feel like it doesn’t properly recognize sex as a holy sacrament that brings a couple into union with each other, giving them a peek at their divine potential. Like all sacred rituals, sex performed improperly is invalid and abominable. The law of chastity, therefore, not only steers our heart toward righteousness, but also teaches us the proper performance of an ordinance that itself brings us closer to Godliness.
Sex is definitely not a "holy sacrament". Marriage is holy and becoming one with your spouse is holy, but sex it only a fleshly means to that end.

I can't fathom how an animalistic rhythmic pumping has anything to do with "divine potential". It's a very rudimentary and base act, despite having the benefit of resulting in intimacy.
Our existence on this Earth is to have a physical body. Why? Does God not have a physical body? Do you think that death is the end of everything physical? Why have a resurrection? I think that being physical with your eternal companion is the same now as it will be in the eternities. What is a holy union between man and woman will be forever.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

Vernet wrote: September 30th, 2023, 11:00 am Our existence on this Earth is to have a physical body. Why? Does God not have a physical body? Do you think that death is the end of everything physical? Why have a resurrection? I think that being physical with your eternal companion is the same now as it will be in the eternities. What is a holy union between man and woman will be forever.
The resurrection is definitely real, but that does not mean all are assumptions about it are. You ask, "Does God not have a physical body", according to the Bible, the BoM, and Lectures on Faith, he is a spirit, so if I'm a believer in scripture I would have to side with scripture.

I think that we make the mistake of thinking the physical is better than the spiritual. My opinion, the physical is just a means to learn and to enhance the spiritual.

User avatar
Vernet
captain of 10
Posts: 14

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Vernet »

Shawn Henry wrote: September 30th, 2023, 11:17 am
Vernet wrote: September 30th, 2023, 11:00 am Our existence on this Earth is to have a physical body. Why? Does God not have a physical body? Do you think that death is the end of everything physical? Why have a resurrection? I think that being physical with your eternal companion is the same now as it will be in the eternities. What is a holy union between man and woman will be forever.
The resurrection is definitely real, but that does not mean all are assumptions about it are. You ask, "Does God not have a physical body", according to the Bible, the BoM, and Lectures on Faith, he is a spirit, so if I'm a believer in scripture I would have to side with scripture.

I think that we make the mistake of thinking the physical is better than the spiritual. My opinion, the physical is just a means to learn and to enhance the spiritual.
“The Father has a body of flesh and bones, as tangible as man’s; the Son also” (DC 130:22)

User avatar
Alexander
the Great
Posts: 4622
Location: amongst the brotherhood of the Black Robed Regiment; cocked hat and cocked rifle

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Alexander »

Shawn Henry wrote: September 30th, 2023, 11:17 am
Vernet wrote: September 30th, 2023, 11:00 am Our existence on this Earth is to have a physical body. Why? Does God not have a physical body? Do you think that death is the end of everything physical? Why have a resurrection? I think that being physical with your eternal companion is the same now as it will be in the eternities. What is a holy union between man and woman will be forever.
The resurrection is definitely real, but that does not mean all are assumptions about it are. You ask, "Does God not have a physical body", according to the Bible, the BoM, and Lectures on Faith, he is a spirit, so if I'm a believer in scripture I would have to side with scripture.

I think that we make the mistake of thinking the physical is better than the spiritual. My opinion, the physical is just a means to learn and to enhance the spiritual.
God as a spirit is embodied, according to the Book of Mormon.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

Vernet wrote: October 1st, 2023, 3:13 pm “The Father has a body of flesh and bones, as tangible as man’s; the Son also” (DC 130:22)
That's not a Joseph Smith scripture. That's an 1876 Brigham Young addition to the D&C. The 3 volumes of scripture produced by JS use spirit consistently.

User avatar
Vernet
captain of 10
Posts: 14

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Vernet »

Shawn Henry wrote: October 1st, 2023, 4:38 pm
Vernet wrote: October 1st, 2023, 3:13 pm “The Father has a body of flesh and bones, as tangible as man’s; the Son also” (DC 130:22)
That's not a Joseph Smith scripture. That's an 1876 Brigham Young addition to the D&C. The 3 volumes of scripture produced by JS use spirit consistently.
Brigham Young was not a prophet? Are we to pick and choose what works for a narrative only? Either these men are prophets or they are not. If it is allowed to dismiss what one prophet introduces as doctrine then the entire church is a lie.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

Vernet wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 9:56 am Brigham Young was not a prophet? Are we to pick and choose what works for a narrative only? Either these men are prophets or they are not. If it is allowed to dismiss what one prophet introduces as doctrine then the entire church is a lie.
BY claimed to not be a prophet. None of the 12 were ever ordained as PSR's. Their ordination was only to the apostleship. Back in Joseph's time they were completely separate quorums with the 12 not even having any jurisdiction within the stakes of Zion. President William Marks warned the 12 to not ex Sidney Rigdon because he was the last PSR and you need a PSR to ordain another to be a PSR. 3 years later BY had himself ordained anyway despite Wilford Woodruff telling BY that it would require a revelation and despite John Taylor and Orson Pratt not supporting him. It would be like a group of deacons getting together and ordaining themselves teachers.

Please remember that Joseph had plenty of time in 1844 to select any new additions to the 1844 D&C and he purposefully rejected the 1876 additions by not including them when he could have.

User avatar
Magus
captain of 100
Posts: 444

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Magus »

Shawn Henry wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 11:36 am
Vernet wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 9:56 am Brigham Young was not a prophet? Are we to pick and choose what works for a narrative only? Either these men are prophets or they are not. If it is allowed to dismiss what one prophet introduces as doctrine then the entire church is a lie.
BY claimed to not be a prophet. None of the 12 were ever ordained as PSR's. Their ordination was only to the apostleship. Back in Joseph's time they were completely separate quorums with the 12 not even having any jurisdiction within the stakes of Zion. President William Marks warned the 12 to not ex Sidney Rigdon because he was the last PSR and you need a PSR to ordain another to be a PSR. 3 years later BY had himself ordained anyway despite Wilford Woodruff telling BY that it would require a revelation and despite John Taylor and Orson Pratt not supporting him. It would be like a group of deacons getting together and ordaining themselves teachers.

Please remember that Joseph had plenty of time in 1844 to select any new additions to the 1844 D&C and he purposefully rejected the 1876 additions by not including them when he could have.
That's an interesting narrative - but let's not forget Jesus being resurrected and the accounts of that in both the New Testament and the Book of Mormon. The accounts of God being a "Spirit" seem to be pre-Nativity - in which Jehovah was, literally, only a spirit at that point. Unless I'm missing something.

At any rate, I think physicality and spirituality are just two sides of the same coin. Even your spirit is matter. And your intelligence is eternal. Body and spirit compliment each other, and it is the spirit that gives the body life, which I seem to recall Joseph Smith saying. Having a physical dimension only enriches the experience of being alive, and is meant to be enjoyed. But of course, all things in their right place.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

Magus wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:34 am The accounts of God being a "Spirit" seem to be pre-Nativity
Are you saying God the Father had a "pre-nativity"?

The Bible and the BoM are referring to God the Father as a spirit, this is confirmed in the Lectures on Faith.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6076
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by TheDuke »

Shawn Henry wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:47 am
Magus wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:34 am The accounts of God being a "Spirit" seem to be pre-Nativity
Are you saying God the Father had a "pre-nativity"?

The Bible and the BoM are referring to God the Father as a spirit, this is confirmed in the Lectures on Faith.
Yes and according to Joseph's teachings we are all spirits all enlarged intelligences....... I guess I'm not seeing the point of saying god is as spirit? There is no life in any form (even trees and insects) have a spirit and are spirit beings?

Do you think there can be life without spirit?

User avatar
Magus
captain of 100
Posts: 444

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Magus »

Shawn Henry wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:47 am
Magus wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:34 am The accounts of God being a "Spirit" seem to be pre-Nativity
Are you saying God the Father had a "pre-nativity"?

The Bible and the BoM are referring to God the Father as a spirit, this is confirmed in the Lectures on Faith.
I'll have to check Lectures on Faith, unless you have the quote handy.

But Jehovah isn't God the Father (El is). But Jehovah is the God of the Old Testament and El works through him. We pray to El in the name of Jehovah (Jesus).

Just standard Mormon doctrine....other Christian religions would consider Jehovah and El to be two names of the same literal thing.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

TheDuke wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:51 am Yes and according to Joseph's teachings we are all spirits all enlarged intelligences....... I guess I'm not seeing the point of saying god is as spirit? There is no life in any form (even trees and insects) have a spirit and are spirit beings?

Do you think there can be life without spirit?
I'm not necessarily trying to say what the point is of the scriptures using that phraseology, I was just pointing out that they consistently do. Of course, there is spirit in all life. I was simply pointing out to Magus that the JS canon is consistent therein and that the inconsistent outlier is section 130, an 1876 addition from BY, a section which JS purposefully omitted in the 1844 D&C.

But you and I have already had this back and forth. I know you believe 130, which I don't have a problem with as long as you acknowledge it as an outlier.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

Magus wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:58 am But Jehovah isn't God the Father (El is).
The BoM teaches that Jesus is "the very Eternal Father". Capital E and capital F.

Here's a thread listing all the BoM quotes if you are interested. viewtopic.php?p=1394501

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6076
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by TheDuke »

Shawn Henry wrote: October 5th, 2023, 12:06 pm
TheDuke wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:51 am Yes and according to Joseph's teachings we are all spirits all enlarged intelligences....... I guess I'm not seeing the point of saying god is as spirit? There is no life in any form (even trees and insects) have a spirit and are spirit beings?

Do you think there can be life without spirit?
I'm not necessarily trying to say what the point is of the scriptures using that phraseology, I was just pointing out that they consistently do. Of course, there is spirit in all life. I was simply pointing out to Magus that the JS canon is consistent therein and that the inconsistent outlier is section 130, an 1876 addition from BY, a section which JS purposefully omitted in the 1844 D&C.

But you and I have already had this back and forth. I know you believe 130, which I don't have a problem with as long as you acknowledge it as an outlier.
I don't recall (not saying I haven't) discussing D&C 130 about the Holy Ghost? are you referring to these verses?

22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.

23 A man may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him and not tarry with him.

I'm missing any outliers?

We surely can find scriptures from Joseph that say the father and the son are spirits and also that they have bodies. We see the Holy Ghost, which is NOT the spirit of god (neither the father or son) but another entity does not have physical body, at least relative to this creation up until now anyway (not wanting to tread on Alaris' future where he becomes the Davidic Servant as I see no value in that discussion here).

Having experience with both. I can tell you the secret that Joseph is leading to. The HG can visit you in the flesh (our flesh) as a being and you can stand it. The father and/or the son cannot. When then visit (not a vision a visit) it must be in another realm or by quickening or by temporary translation, pick your terms. that is a huge difference. I mean you could not withstand the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost if he had a celestial glorified body at this time! That would nullify the whole path to salvation, would it not?

BTW if we've discussed this, as I don't recall, then you'll know I believe in MMP. and I believe all celestial beings that participate in this creation already have celestial bodies and that they "condescend" to leave them temporarily to come serve as the great ones and as the noble ones. So, to me (my opinion only from my own revelations) the Holy Ghost does have a body in the celestial realm, he chose to leave it behind for a while (what 6000 years or so) as he condescended to come to this earth to serve both the father and the son as part of our godhead for this creation. Again this part is my understanding and I'm not interested in providing canon to support it as it really doesn't affect anyone's salvation but does help me know who I am a my relationship with deity (all of them).

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

TheDuke wrote: October 5th, 2023, 12:22 pm I don't recall (not saying I haven't) discussing D&C 130 about the Holy Ghost? are you referring to these verses?

22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.

23 A man may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him and not tarry with him.

I'm missing any outliers?

We surely can find scriptures from Joseph that say the father and the son are spirits and also that they have bodies. We see the Holy Ghost, which is NOT the spirit of god (neither the father or son) but another entity does not have physical body, at least relative to this creation up until now anyway (not wanting to tread on Alaris' future where he becomes the Davidic Servant as I see no value in that discussion here).

Having experience with both. I can tell you the secret that Joseph is leading to. The HG can visit you in the flesh (our flesh) as a being and you can stand it. The father and/or the son cannot. When then visit (not a vision a visit) it must be in another realm or by quickening or by temporary translation, pick your terms. that is a huge difference. I mean you could not withstand the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost if he had a celestial glorified body at this time! That would nullify the whole path to salvation, would it not?

BTW if we've discussed this, as I don't recall, then you'll know I believe in MMP. and I believe all celestial beings that participate in this creation already have celestial bodies and that they "condescend" to leave them temporarily to come serve as the great ones and as the noble ones. So, to me (my opinion only from my own revelations) the Holy Ghost does have a body in the celestial realm, he chose to leave it behind for a while (what 6000 years or so) as he condescended to come to this earth to serve both the father and the son as part of our godhead for this creation. Again this part is my understanding and I'm not interested in providing canon to support it as it really doesn't affect anyone's salvation but does help me know who I am a my relationship with deity (all of them).
"We surely can find scriptures from Joseph that say the father and the son are spirits and also that they have bodies." No, we can't. That's my whole point. JS's scriptures says God is a spirit. Section 130, where he has a body, is from BY. That's the problem.

The holy spirit teachings are another reason we can know 130 is false. The scriptures teach that the holy spirit is Christ's own spirit and Lectures on Faith teach that it is not a personage and that it is the mind of God.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6076
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by TheDuke »

Shawn Henry wrote: October 5th, 2023, 12:58 pm
TheDuke wrote: October 5th, 2023, 12:22 pm I don't recall (not saying I haven't) discussing D&C 130 about the Holy Ghost? are you referring to these verses?

22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.

23 A man may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him and not tarry with him.

I'm missing any outliers?

We surely can find scriptures from Joseph that say the father and the son are spirits and also that they have bodies. We see the Holy Ghost, which is NOT the spirit of god (neither the father or son) but another entity does not have physical body, at least relative to this creation up until now anyway (not wanting to tread on Alaris' future where he becomes the Davidic Servant as I see no value in that discussion here).

Having experience with both. I can tell you the secret that Joseph is leading to. The HG can visit you in the flesh (our flesh) as a being and you can stand it. The father and/or the son cannot. When then visit (not a vision a visit) it must be in another realm or by quickening or by temporary translation, pick your terms. that is a huge difference. I mean you could not withstand the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost if he had a celestial glorified body at this time! That would nullify the whole path to salvation, would it not?

BTW if we've discussed this, as I don't recall, then you'll know I believe in MMP. and I believe all celestial beings that participate in this creation already have celestial bodies and that they "condescend" to leave them temporarily to come serve as the great ones and as the noble ones. So, to me (my opinion only from my own revelations) the Holy Ghost does have a body in the celestial realm, he chose to leave it behind for a while (what 6000 years or so) as he condescended to come to this earth to serve both the father and the son as part of our godhead for this creation. Again this part is my understanding and I'm not interested in providing canon to support it as it really doesn't affect anyone's salvation but does help me know who I am a my relationship with deity (all of them).
"We surely can find scriptures from Joseph that say the father and the son are spirits and also that they have bodies." No, we can't. That's my whole point. JS's scriptures says God is a spirit. Section 130, where he has a body, is from BY. That's the problem.

The holy spirit teachings are another reason we can know 130 is false. The scriptures teach that the holy spirit is Christ's own spirit and Lectures on Faith teach that it is not a personage and that it is the mind of God.
never read the KFD or first vision or articles of faith..............

guess not.

User avatar
Dusty Wanderer
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1458

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Dusty Wanderer »

Magus wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:58 am
Shawn Henry wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:47 am
Magus wrote: October 5th, 2023, 11:34 am The accounts of God being a "Spirit" seem to be pre-Nativity
Are you saying God the Father had a "pre-nativity"?

The Bible and the BoM are referring to God the Father as a spirit, this is confirmed in the Lectures on Faith.
I'll have to check Lectures on Faith, unless you have the quote handy.
Lecture 5.2
They are the Father and the Son-the Father being a personage of spirit, glory, and power, possessing all perfection and fullness the Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle, made or fashioned like unto man, or being in the form and likeness of man, or rather man was formed after his likeness and in his image... And he being the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, and having overcome, received a fullness of the glory of the Father, possessing the same mind with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit, that bears record of the Father and the Son, and these three are one...

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

TheDuke wrote: October 5th, 2023, 3:45 pm never read the KFD or first vision or articles of faith..............

guess not.
Duke, why are you placing the works of men above scripture?

By the way, the 1832 account, the only one in Joseph's handwriting, mentions only seeing the Savior. The KFD is a talk at a funeral. Talks at funerals are placed well below scripture and if they contradict scripture like the KFD does, you know it is false. The articles of faith simply correctly state what we falsely believe.

Why do you let what others tell you Joseph said trump the Iron Rod of scripture? Makes no sense to me.

User avatar
Magus
captain of 100
Posts: 444

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Magus »

Shawn Henry wrote: October 5th, 2023, 12:58 pm
TheDuke wrote: October 5th, 2023, 12:22 pm I don't recall (not saying I haven't) discussing D&C 130 about the Holy Ghost? are you referring to these verses?

22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.

23 A man may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him and not tarry with him.

I'm missing any outliers?

We surely can find scriptures from Joseph that say the father and the son are spirits and also that they have bodies. We see the Holy Ghost, which is NOT the spirit of god (neither the father or son) but another entity does not have physical body, at least relative to this creation up until now anyway (not wanting to tread on Alaris' future where he becomes the Davidic Servant as I see no value in that discussion here).

Having experience with both. I can tell you the secret that Joseph is leading to. The HG can visit you in the flesh (our flesh) as a being and you can stand it. The father and/or the son cannot. When then visit (not a vision a visit) it must be in another realm or by quickening or by temporary translation, pick your terms. that is a huge difference. I mean you could not withstand the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost if he had a celestial glorified body at this time! That would nullify the whole path to salvation, would it not?

BTW if we've discussed this, as I don't recall, then you'll know I believe in MMP. and I believe all celestial beings that participate in this creation already have celestial bodies and that they "condescend" to leave them temporarily to come serve as the great ones and as the noble ones. So, to me (my opinion only from my own revelations) the Holy Ghost does have a body in the celestial realm, he chose to leave it behind for a while (what 6000 years or so) as he condescended to come to this earth to serve both the father and the son as part of our godhead for this creation. Again this part is my understanding and I'm not interested in providing canon to support it as it really doesn't affect anyone's salvation but does help me know who I am a my relationship with deity (all of them).
"We surely can find scriptures from Joseph that say the father and the son are spirits and also that they have bodies." No, we can't. That's my whole point. JS's scriptures says God is a spirit. Section 130, where he has a body, is from BY. That's the problem.

The holy spirit teachings are another reason we can know 130 is false. The scriptures teach that the holy spirit is Christ's own spirit and Lectures on Faith teach that it is not a personage and that it is the mind of God.
I thought 130 was written by Joseph Smith?

Totally off topic tho, btw, lol

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4831

Re: Commandments, Chastity, and Higher Law

Post by Shawn Henry »

Magus wrote: October 8th, 2023, 9:11 am I thought 130 was written by Joseph Smith?

Totally off topic tho, btw, lol
If memory serves, it was a teaching written by two different scribes who claim Joseph taught it. The two scribes didn't even agree.

Either way, Joseph did not claim it as a revelation. He purposefully omitted it from the 1844 canon.

Post Reply