LDS Freedom Forum

Daryl wrote:

Penstress wrote:Ohhh I like this discussion.

I'm curious why you wrote this. Why did you write this?

To make you ask questions. :))

Sariel wrote:

BrentL wrote:According to Joseph Fielding Smith one of the reasons they were removed is:

they are instructions relative to the general subject of faith. They are explanations of this principle but not doctrine.

so, you have to figure this out. according to Joseph Smith, they were the doctrine of the church that he expected to be held accountable to God for. According to Joseph Fielding Smith, they are not. only one can be right.

I'm not surprised to see this was not commented on yet. Instead we have moved on to discuss whether God is a Spirit or not, something we could debate forever and only understand by the Spirit. The above example, however, is easy to understand.

Joseph said they were doctrine. Joseph Fielding Smith said they were not doctrine, and as part of a committee removed them from the standard works.

The only way I could see this explained away by normal arguments why the church changes doctrine is because of continuing revelation. But with something so fundamental as the LoF, this just can't be the case.

The church has distanced itself from doctrine taught by Joseph Smith and other presidents of the church. What's more is: You guys know it. All of us here are members of the church, why not just admit it?

Thanks Sariel. I think you stated it succinctly and powerfully. I'm not sure one can defend the removal of the Lectures on Faith without rejecting the doctrine that Joseph Smith gave the church. The Fifth Lecture, which seems to be the one most questioned, is the one Lecture that was most likely written by Joseph himself, with Joseph editing and helping on several others.

Joseph signed his name in the preface and made this statement.

We do not present this little volume with any other expectation than that we are to be called to answer to every principle advanced,

If anyone questions the content of the Lectures on Faith, they are questioning Joseph and his understanding. Or in other words, they presume to know more than Joseph did on this subject.

OK, LoF.

The part of LoF that keeps ringing in my ears so loudly is at the end of the sixth lecture:

Note. This lecture is so plain, and the facts set forth so self-evident, that it is deemed unnecessary to form a catechism upon it: the student is therefore instructed to commit the whole to memory.

It wasn't good enough to get and apply the principals taught in the lectures? You need to commit a whole lecture to memory? Memorize a whole lecture? Do you think that might have been important to a man who has received the Lord and desperately wanted others to do the same?

So bottom line, no doctrine has changed?

InfoWarrior82 wrote:So bottom line, no doctrine has changed?

I guess that depends on how you see things. Do you believe that there are only two personages in the Godhead and that the Holy Spirit is the mind of God?

I haven't read through the posts on this page, as I suspect that it is the same old argument that has been thrashed around for over a year now here, so forgive me if I'm repeating something someone else has said. In response to the OP though here is some food for thought: If you possess any degree of glory, it is possible to diminish into a lesser degree of glory; even if your previous glory isn't the brightest. ;)

SmallFarm wrote:I haven't read through the posts on this page, as I suspect that it is the same old argument that has been thrashed around for over a year now here, so forgive me if I'm repeating something someone else has said. In response to the OP though here is some food for thought: If you possess any degree of glory, it is possible to diminish into a lesser degree of glory; even if your previous glory isn't the brightest. ;)

Awesome!

Thanks for this insightful reply!

Frederick wrote:

InfoWarrior82 wrote:So bottom line, no doctrine has changed?

I guess that depends on how you see things. Do you believe that there are only two personages in the Godhead and that the Holy Spirit is the mind of God?

Who said that the Holy Ghost is the mind of God?

I would like to say this is not an attack on anyone or the church. repent means to "turn to" not "turn from" and we need to repent. we need to hearken to the words of the Lord as delivered though His servant Joseph. I dont judge or condemn anyone for removing them but I cannot repent and give heed to the words if I do not understand my position.

I guess that kills the hijack. back to your regularly scheduled conversation.

to answer the OP. no, you can only apostatize from truth or grow to it. there are only two masters.

BrentL wrote:I would like to say this is not an attack on anyone or the church. repent means to "turn to" not "turn from" and we need to repent. we need to hearken to the words of the Lord as delivered though His servant Joseph. I dont judge or condemn anyone for removing them but I cannot repent and give heed to the words if I do not understand my position.

I guess that kills the hijack. back to your regularly scheduled conversation.

to answer the OP. no, you can only apostatize from truth or grow to it. there are only two masters.

So, if we just all consider ourselves the jackwagons that we really are...
So if we stop going to meetings and congratulation each other for meaningless successes...
So if we repent from unbelief...
So if we stop worshiping idols...
So if we stop with the hero worship...
So if we stop all the judging and back biting...

...We can literally repent from our personal apostasy
...We can rise up
...We can converse with the Lord through the veil
...Our hearts will turn to the fathers who are in heaven
...We can receive the Savior while yet in the flesh
...We can receive the second comforter and learn the mysteries of God

Wow! I think it's worth it to repent of our jackwagon nature and believe!

InfoWarrior82 wrote:

Frederick wrote:

InfoWarrior82 wrote:So bottom line, no doctrine has changed?

I guess that depends on how you see things. Do you believe that there are only two personages in the Godhead and that the Holy Spirit is the mind of God?

Who said that the Holy Ghost is the mind of God?

I guess you are unfamiliar with the scriptures. I have seen this with your statements and misunderstanding in what it means to know God. But for your sake, let me provide the scriptures that show this.

2. There are two personages who constitute the great, matchless, governing, and supreme, power over all things, by whom all things were created and made, that are created and made, whether visible or invisible, whether in heaven, on earth, or in the earth, under the earth, or throughout the immensity of space. They are the Father and the Son.

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,

So, to ask my question, do you believe that there are two personages in the Godhead and that the Holy Spirit is the mind of God?

One of us is not familiar with the scriptures, that's for sure.

D&C 130
22 The aFather has a bbody 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 cSpirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not ddwell in us.

What you were referring to was the Lectures on Faith. Whoever wrote this part (Sydney, Joseph, or someone else) did not have a full understanding at the time. D&C 130 was received (after LOF) from the LORD HIMSELF!

Who do I trust more?

1. The Lord
2. Joseph/Sydney/etc

I pick #1

Personally, I believe that the Holy Ghost is a calling. Held by spirit persons who reside with the Father. They are our "guardian angels". They are "of the mind of the Father" meaning that that they are "of one mind". Just like the Father and the Son are "of one mind". They "return and report". Wow.. as I was saying that.. it just occurred to me that's probably what was meant in the LOF.

InfoWarrior82 wrote:One of us is not familiar with the scriptures, that's for sure.

D&C 130
22 The aFather has a bbody 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 cSpirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not ddwell in us.

What you were referring to was the Lectures on Faith. Whoever wrote this part (Sydney, Joseph, or someone else) did not have a full understanding at the time. D&C 130 was received (after LOF) from the LORD HIMSELF!

Who do I trust more?

1. The Lord
2. Joseph/Sydney/etc

I pick #1

Personally, I believe that the Holy Ghost is a calling. Held by spirit persons who reside with the Father. They are our "guardian angels". They are "of the mind of the Father" meaning that that they are "of one mind". Just like the Father and the Son are "of one mind". They "return and report". Wow.. as I was saying that.. it just occurred to me that's probably what was meant in the LOF.

You need to see this thread, read the points carefully so that we avoid unnecessary repetition.

viewtopic.php?f=31&t=30613" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However, you need to realize that Joseph is the one who actually wrote Lecture Five, and Joseph and Sidney had seen the Father and the Son, as well as all the kingdoms of glory prior to writing this. And you're right, Joseph received section 130, so ask yourself, why did he not remove or change Lecture Five? It is because he knew better. D&C 130 simply does not refer to the Godhead. Is the word Godhead mentioned? If there are two personages in the Godhead, the Holy Ghost referred to in D&C 130 clearly does not refer to the same thing as the Holy Spirit. You will stand condemned if you reject the words of Joseph Smith, or if you presume to know more than he did.

InfoWarrior82 wrote:One of us is not familiar with the scriptures, that's for sure.

D&C 130
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.

What you were referring to was the Lectures on Faith. Whoever wrote this part (Sydney, Joseph, or someone else) did not have a full understanding at the time. D&C 130 was received (after LOF) from the LORD HIMSELF!

Who do I trust more?

1. The Lord
2. Joseph/Sydney/etc

I pick #1

Personally, I believe that the Holy Ghost is a calling. Held by spirit persons who reside with the Father. They are our "guardian angels". They are "of the mind of the Father" meaning that that they are "of one mind". Just like the Father and the Son are "of one mind". They "return and report". Wow.. as I was saying that.. it just occurred to me that's probably what was meant in the LOF.

Here are you problems. First you take what you personally believe over what is being communicated. You must take what the Lord reveals, and throw out the arm of the flesh.

Second, both of the statements, the LOF and D&C 130, were revealed from the Lord to Joseph Smith, Jr. Prophet of the Restoration and Dispensation head for the dispensation of the fullness of times. He in fact does stand ahead of all of the church presidents after him. So your emphatic from the LORD HIMSELF is a non-starter.

Third, back to the first. Stop relying on what you have been told, and ask the Lord. Understand that Joseph Smith stood in the presence of the Father and the Son. After doing so he wrote the lectures on faith. He was tutored by Christ and angels. God was explained to him firsthand, and he discoursed on it, then wrote down what had been explained to him.

Fourth, they are not exclusive of each other. D&C 130 does not negate a word of the LoF description. The Holy Spirit, which is not a personage as described in D&C 88 is the mind and will of God, and is how the Father and Son are one. It is this same medium which keeps us alive as decribed in Mosiah 3 that gives us the opportunity to be one with Them as well. It is then understanding what the Holy Ghost is, the Holy Ghost that is not the Holy Spirit. We have to see that we may have been flawed in our terms and assumed that the Holy Ghost was a member of the Godhead becuase it was referred to in the same verse as the Father and Son, and has a similar term to to what was described in the Lectures. Is it then church doctrine that angels appear to man, but the Holy Ghost is allowed to posess us in some way? You are saying that it is some personage of spirit that we invite to cohabitate our body? When we sit in a church service and everyone is "feeling the spirit" it is some personage of spirit that is hurrying around the room possessing each one by one and giving them a good feeling?

There is a great truth that is concealed. Seek it out.

To the OP. What was the condition of the ancient jewish faith when Christ was born? What did He do?

Exactly, Info.....and I have listened to many talks that were "exact doctrine"....but they aren't going to be put in the D&C.
(Sorry...should have put quotes so you could refer to the comment by Info that I was talking about....still think he's dead on.)

Daryl wrote:I was pondering the other day, "Is it possible to apostacize from apostasy?" I mean, if a church is in a state of apostasy, is it possible to apostacize from that church? Was Martin Luther really an apostate from an apostate church? Which is worse the apostate church or the person who has been excommunicated for apostasy from the apostate church?

Just some random thoughts floating around the grey matter. But I would appreciate any insights into this hypothetical musing.

The word "apostasy" is "renunciation of a religious or political belief or allegiance"... it's rejecting a type of GROUP THOUGHT.

If the group thought is found to be corrupt, then IMO, one is obligated to follow God, over corruption, even if that means not being so popular.

InfoWarrior82 wrote:One of us is not familiar with the scriptures, that's for sure.

D&C 130
22 The aFather has a bbody 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 cSpirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not ddwell in us.

What you were referring to was the Lectures on Faith. Whoever wrote this part (Sydney, Joseph, or someone else) did not have a full understanding at the time. D&C 130 was received (after LOF) from the LORD HIMSELF!

Who do I trust more?

1. The Lord
2. Joseph/Sydney/etc

I pick #1

Personally, I believe that the Holy Ghost is a calling. Held by spirit persons who reside with the Father. They are our "guardian angels". They are "of the mind of the Father" meaning that that they are "of one mind". Just like the Father and the Son are "of one mind". They "return and report". Wow.. as I was saying that.. it just occurred to me that's probably what was meant in the LOF.

For me,
if I find myself thinking that two messages from God are in conflict, the first thing I do is question my own interpretation/understanding.

The last thing I would do is "pick" one and throw the other out.

InfoWarrior82 wrote:Apostasy is simply no longer following your religion's doctrine.

What InfoWarrior said.

What is interesting, is that the LDS Church only punishes apostasy via disfellowshipment or excommunication. The Wahabbists would simply lop your head off.

samizdat wrote:

InfoWarrior82 wrote:Apostasy is simply no longer following your religion's doctrine.

What InfoWarrior said.

What is interesting, is that the LDS Church only punishes apostasy via disfellowshipment or excommunication. The Wahabbists would simply lop your head off.

So physical death is worse than spiritual death?

Excommunication

The process of excluding a person from the Church and taking away all rights and privileges of membership. Church authorities excommunicate a person from the Church only when he has chosen to live in opposition to the Lord’s commandments and thus has disqualified himself for further membership in the Church.

clarkkent14 wrote:

samizdat wrote:

InfoWarrior82 wrote:Apostasy is simply no longer following your religion's doctrine.

What InfoWarrior said.

What is interesting, is that the LDS Church only punishes apostasy via disfellowshipment or excommunication. The Wahabbists would simply lop your head off.

So physical death is worse than spiritual death?

Excommunication

The process of excluding a person from the Church and taking away all rights and privileges of membership. Church authorities excommunicate a person from the Church only when he has chosen to live in opposition to the Lord’s commandments and thus has disqualified himself for further membership in the Church.

Do not procrastinate the day of your repentance comes to mind. No more work can be performed once dead. You're still alive if you are excommunicated! Hallelujah!

But meddle not with any man for his religion, for no man is authorized to take away life in consequence of religion. All laws and government ought to tolerate and permit every man to enjoy his religion, whether right or wrong. There is no law in the heart of God that would allow anyone to interfere with the rights of man. Every man has a right to be a false prophet, as well as a true prophet.

~~Joseph Smith

Are you sure you guys are talking about the same religion Joseph Smith established? Cuz what you're saying is a pretty far cry from what he was saying.

Ruth wrote:

But meddle not with any man for his religion, for no man is authorized to take away life in consequence of religion. All laws and government ought to tolerate and permit every man to enjoy his religion, whether right or wrong. There is no law in the heart of God that would allow anyone to interfere with the rights of man. Every man has a right to be a false prophet, as well as a true prophet.

~~Joseph Smith

Are you sure you guys are talking about the same religion Joseph Smith established? Cuz what you're saying is a pretty far cry from what he was saying.

Hmm.. he's not saying moral relativism is correct. Just saying that we all should be free to choose the wrong religion if we want to. No one is disputing free agency here.

IW82,

It seems like we were discussing the Godhead. A few people made some great comments to which you have yet to respond. Have you taken the time to read through the thread I linked?

Frederick wrote:IW82,

It seems like we were discussing the Godhead. A few people made some great comments to which you have yet to respond. Have you taken the time to read through the thread I linked?

I've read it and I disagree with it. I've actually posted earlier what I think about this:

Infowarrior82 wrote:Personally, I believe that the Holy Ghost is a calling. Held by spirit persons who reside with the Father. They are our "guardian angels". They are "of the mind of the Father" meaning that that they are "of one mind". Just like the Father and the Son are "of one mind". They "return and report". Wow.. as I was saying that.. it just occurred to me that's probably what was meant in the LOF.

I'll expound a bit more. We know that satan has his minions hanging around us all day long whispering sweet nothings into our (spiritual) ears. The same thing is true on the other side of the coin. Heavenly Father has his 2/3 righteous spirit children hanging around us and enticing us to choose the right, prompting us... even times yelling at us with warnings. There is a literal battle raging for our souls in the unseeable spirit world. The Holy Spirit, and the Holy Ghost are one and the same. When we are baptized with fire and receive the Holy Ghost, we have spirit guardian angels commissioned to us throughout our lives so long as we are not behaving in a manner that invites them to leave.

InfoWarrior82 wrote:

Frederick wrote:IW82,

It seems like we were discussing the Godhead. A few people made some great comments to which you have yet to respond. Have you taken the time to read through the thread I linked?

I've read it and I disagree with it. I've actually posted earlier what I think about this:

Infowarrior82 wrote:Personally, I believe that the Holy Ghost is a calling. Held by spirit persons who reside with the Father. They are our "guardian angels". They are "of the mind of the Father" meaning that that they are "of one mind". Just like the Father and the Son are "of one mind". They "return and report". Wow.. as I was saying that.. it just occurred to me that's probably what was meant in the LOF.

I'll expound a bit more. We know that satan has his minions hanging around us all day long whispering sweet nothings into our (spiritual) ears. The same thing is true on the other side of the coin. Heavenly Father has his 2/3 righteous spirit children hanging around us and enticing us to choose the right, prompting us... even times yelling at us with warnings. There is a literal battle raging for our souls in the unseeable spirit world. The Holy Spirit, and the Holy Ghost are one and the same. When we are baptized with fire and receive the Holy Ghost, we have spirit guardian angels commissioned to us throughout our lives so long as we are not behaving in a manner that invites them to leave.

So you're saying Joseph Smith was wrong when he wrote the fifth Lecture. You're also saying you think you have a better idea than he did on the nature of the Godhead.