Julie Rowe radio interview may 3rd; She says 'imminent changes coming'

[brianj]

I think you left one out:

Side note: according to Liberal Ideology, all white folks fall into two categories:

1) Admitted Racists.
2) Racists in Denial.

3) Liberals

[iWriteStuff]

I think you left one out:

Side note: according to Liberal Ideology, all white folks fall into two categories:

1) Admitted Racists.
2) Racists in Denial.

3) Liberals

A liberal is, by definition, one who has embraced their "micro-aggressions, implicit bias, and white privilege" and therefore fall into category 1. Hence "White Guilt" followed by acts of penitence and contrition (ie: "Please accept this welfare as a sign of my regret"). Followed by shaming other whites for falling into category 2.

In short, being liberal doesn't free you of racism - it empowers you identify it in every other white devil out there.

This, of course, in opposition to learning how to be blind to race and just love people for who they are rather than what they look like. :-ss

[GrandMasterB]

It is not racist. Do you even know the definition of racist? The early LDS church was unsegregated while most every other church at the time segregated the people based on color. If your premise is that the teachings are racist than you are calling God a racist which implies he hates blacks and that the church hated blacks. They did not. By your reasoning the whole Old Testament is one huge racist book. And this was taught and was the reason why the priesthood was withheld. You could be completely white but if your grandfather was black you could not have the priesthood before 1978. It has nothing to do with race. It has been based in biblical teachings since Cain slew Abel. As an example it is a fact that only the Levites could have the priesthood. It was withheld from all others based on ancesty. Furthermore only the Isralites were God's people. There was no being adopted in back then like it is today, God cursed all others with a promise that one day their children would have the full blessings of the gospel. The temple work fulfills this promise to ALL of God's children. Get over this being racist. There is no evidence of a culture of hatred toward blacks. There were also plenty of early black members who understood this and had assurances from the Holy Spirit that they would eventually receive the promises through the priesthood.

Thankfully, church leaders no longer have these racist views.

Pray tell what racist views would that be?

People are born into "lesser races" because of them being less valiant in the preexistence, and are not worthy to have all of gods blessings.

I would say that is partially true. The problem is you connecting everything to race. Makes me wonder who the real racist here is. Is that all you see is the color of skin? There are plenty of white groups who are considered heathen. I do believe that based on your faithfulness in the preexixtance you earn your lineage. I like many others have been told by the Father that we earned our lineage in the preexixtance. That knowledge was given through patriarchal blessings to many I am sure. The bible clearly afforded blessing to some while denying it to others based on lineage and ancestry. So if it is false doctrine why do patriarch still issue blessings that state the lineage was earned in the preexixtance? Sounds to me like it is not false doctrine at all but there is truth to it. Do I believe all Africans were not faithful in the preexixtance? No. Some of the best Christians are of African decent. Just as the Lamanites at one point became more righteous than the Nephites. Think about it. If you are born in the jungle and live your life not knowing God or Jesus how fast can you progress in this life? Joseph Smith taught that the more knowledge you obtain in this life the better off you will be in the next. We are told not to waste the days of our probation. Well the people living among heathens and isolated in the jungles are at a serious disadvantage. They will have to spend more time in death than they would have in life to progress to the same level. BY taught you can overcome in the flesh 100 times faster than you can in the spirit. Our assignment here in mortality is no random event. It was all planned out from the beginning. It is done in order and that order was no doubt influenced by our actions in the preexixtance.

[GrandMasterB]

I had the unfortunate experience of someone sending me her book, "A Greater Tomorrow" and I simply could not finish it. I really tried to read it with an open mind, but I felt like I was reading a book geared towards 10 year olds. The book is on the Churches spurious materials list and for good reason. I got through about half of the book before I became so disgusted I had to put it down. She had a number of embellishments that simply did not coincide with Church doctrine. Her claims that Noah sent out missionaries; the claim that the temple in Jerusalem was completely destroyed; her claims about the cottage and spirits cooking food for other spirits or resurrected people were simply too much and do not agree with doctrine. I also felt there was a self righteous tone that got on my nerves. No wonder the book is on the spurious materials list.

Does the church actaually have a spurious materials list? I would like to see this list. Can you provide a link or something? Thanks.

[GrandMasterB]

The book is on the Churches spurious materials list and for good reason.

Where can I find this churchwide spurious materials list? I know that Rowe's books were placed on a list exclusively applicable to the Church Education System, and the statement on that list only prohibits CES using Rowe's books in lessons or encouraging students to read her books, but nobody has ever been able to point me to a statement addressed to church members.

If anybody can point out an official statement from the First Presidency, or any general authority, to the general membership of the church in which Rowe's books are called spurious and discouraging church members from reading them, I will delete them from my Kindle as soon as I verify the statement.

Brianj, if you can't figure out why Rowe's books are completely wrong then the church coming out and saying it in the precise words you want is the least of your problems. It is not necessary that the Lord commands us in all things. And we are already told to seek out the best books. Julie's is not even close.

[GrandMasterB]

Where can I find this churchwide spurious materials list? I know that Rowe's books were placed on a list exclusively applicable to the Church Education System, and the statement on that list only prohibits CES using Rowe's books in lessons or encouraging students to read her books, but nobody has ever been able to point me to a statement addressed to church members.

If anybody can point out an official statement from the First Presidency, or any general authority, to the general membership of the church in which Rowe's books are called spurious and discouraging church members from reading them, I will delete them from my Kindle as soon as I verify the statement.

The first presidency said Brigham young taught false doctrine, will you remove his books if any from your kindle too?

Where did the first presidency say that?

President kimball denouncing the Adam god doctrine of Brigham young, that was taught by him in many places and in the temple endowment.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... a?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It to mention blood atonement and the cursed nature of blacks... all doctrines the church now disavowed. Does this mean we toss out Brigham young entirely?

He denounced the theory that was being put forth by some members and taught as doctrine which was "allegedly" based in statements made by General authorities". BY didn't make up any such theory. Though he did make many statements in regards to Adam. It was never taught as church doctrine which is the point. It is just like the theory of the callout doctrine that is "allegedly" based on quotes of prophets and apostles. That too is false and should be rejected as it is not taught in Sunday school.

[GrandMasterB]

I would follow what President Kimball said before I would follow what Brigham Young was "alleged" to have said.

Well this is the beauty of a living prophet, however, you may enjoy reading the lecture given at the veil in the temple endowment during Brigham Young's era. This wasn't an alleged activity, and is well documented. Simply calling it "alleged" by apologetics is harmful dishonesty.

Read the full lecture at the veil here:
http://www.ldsendowment.org/lecture.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A short snip:

Father Adam's oldest son, Jesus the Savior, who is the heir of the family, is Father Adam's first begotten in the spirit world and the only begotten according to the flesh (as it is written), Adam in his divinity having gone back into the spirit world and come in the spirit to Mary, and she conceived.

This was in the endowment for many years, until it was removed by subsequent church leaders who didn't believe it.

Cool. It really isn't that far fetched to understand this. But you will have to pay very close attention to the endowment to figure this out. Adam had a celestial body. Where did it come from? McConkie taught this as did others. Nelson taught Adam and Eve were born at some point. How did they get their "celestial" bodies. They had to have celestial bodies to be in the presence of Elohim or the Gods. I know of only one way we are taught we can have a celestial body. I am sure this is what BY was trying to solve. I am just posing questions her not trying to argue one way or the other. What does it mean to go from exaltation to exaltation? What does it mean to have "eternal lives" (plural). Does anyone here have the answers? I don't. Maybe BY did or at least thought he did?

[zionminded]

I would follow what President Kimball said before I would follow what Brigham Young was "alleged" to have said.

Well this is the beauty of a living prophet, however, you may enjoy reading the lecture given at the veil in the temple endowment during Brigham Young's era. This wasn't an alleged activity, and is well documented. Simply calling it "alleged" by apologetics is harmful dishonesty.

Read the full lecture at the veil here:
http://www.ldsendowment.org/lecture.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A short snip:

Father Adam's oldest son, Jesus the Savior, who is the heir of the family, is Father Adam's first begotten in the spirit world and the only begotten according to the flesh (as it is written), Adam in his divinity having gone back into the spirit world and come in the spirit to Mary, and she conceived.

This was in the endowment for many years, until it was removed by subsequent church leaders who didn't believe it.

Cool. It really isn't that far fetched to understand this. But you will have to pay very close attention to the endowment to figure this out. Adam had a celestial body. Where did it come from? McConkie taught this as did others. Nelson taught Adam and Eve were born at some point. How did they get their "celestial" bodies. They had to have celestial bodies to be in the presence of Elohim or the Gods. I know of only one way we are taught we can have a celestial body. I am sure this is what BY was trying to solve. I am just posing questions her not trying to argue one way or the other. What does it mean to go from exaltation to exaltation? What does it mean to have "eternal lives" (plural). Does anyone here have the answers? I don't. Maybe BY did or at least thought he did?

They taught Adam is Jesus's Father, and Elohim is Jesus's grandfather? I think that was a Brigham only.

[GrandMasterB]

I would follow what President Kimball said before I would follow what Brigham Young was "alleged" to have said.

Well this is the beauty of a living prophet, however, you may enjoy reading the lecture given at the veil in the temple endowment during Brigham Young's era. This wasn't an alleged activity, and is well documented. Simply calling it "alleged" by apologetics is harmful dishonesty.

Read the full lecture at the veil here:
http://www.ldsendowment.org/lecture.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A short snip:

Father Adam's oldest son, Jesus the Savior, who is the heir of the family, is Father Adam's first begotten in the spirit world and the only begotten according to the flesh (as it is written), Adam in his divinity having gone back into the spirit world and come in the spirit to Mary, and she conceived.

This was in the endowment for many years, until it was removed by subsequent church leaders who didn't believe it.

Cool. It really isn't that far fetched to understand this. But you will have to pay very close attention to the endowment to figure this out. Adam had a celestial body. Where did it come from? McConkie taught this as did others. Nelson taught Adam and Eve were born at some point. How did they get their "celestial" bodies. They had to have celestial bodies to be in the presence of Elohim or the Gods. I know of only one way we are taught we can have a celestial body. I am sure this is what BY was trying to solve. I am just posing questions her not trying to argue one way or the other. What does it mean to go from exaltation to exaltation? What does it mean to have "eternal lives" (plural). Does anyone here have the answers? I don't. Maybe BY did or at least thought he did?

They taught Adam is Jesus's Father, and Elohim is Jesus's grandfather? I think that was a Brigham only.

Elohim is Gods in the plural. So it must be grandparents. Joseph Smith also taught in the King Follet discourse about the council of the Gods and about how our Father got permission from the Elohim to create this world and people it. Also, The name Michael aka Adam means "Who is like God?". Very interesting indeed. There could indeed be something to this. Doesn't really matter to me either way. Though it would be cool to one day be an Adam and Eve if that is the way you continue to progress and go from exaltation to exaltation. If not I am sure there are things we have no idea about when it comes to life among the Elohim. Maybe these are the things Joseph said if he taught there were some members who would accuse him of blasphemy and seek to destroy him. Here are some other interesting facts about Michael; he is the archangel who sounds the trumpet before all the dead rise. Michael was the one who contended against Satan in the War in Heaven and cast him out. He is the one who meets us all at Adam-ondi-Ahman. He is the God of this earth and was made Lord of it by the Elohim. He is the ancient of days. He had a celestial body before falling into the telestial world. According to the bible Adam was placed in the garden and then all the creatures were the brought to the earth and Adam named them. After this Adam then went to sleep and when he awoke he had forgotten everything and his wife brought to him. There are many things about Michael aka Adam that we don't know much about. How did he receive his celestial body for one? Anyone have any good ideas? From what I know about the Gospel the only way to get a celestial body is to earn it through mortality. Maybe BY, wrong or right, was just trying to answer these question the best he could. I think we should all give BY a break as there are many, many unanswered questions regarding eternal lives and the gospel in general. However, all will one day be revealed upon the housetops. Thank goodness for that.

[Matchmaker]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

[zionminded]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

We all were (are) Celestial beings.

[AI2.0]

My responses in blue;

It to mention blood atonement and the cursed nature of blacks... all doctrines the church now disavowed. Does this mean we toss out Brigham young entirely?

And, as I research the church history and race, I see no evidence that the idea black people are cursed as descendants of Cain was ever an official church doctrine. Even statements from church presidents on the subject are contradictory, further demonstrating that this "doctrine" is nothing more than statements of belief.

Have you read the church essay on this topic?
https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the ... d?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The essay clearly states that "None of these explanations is accepted today as the official doctrine of the Church.", but identify them as historical theological errors.

The priesthood was denied to all decendants of Cain The priesthood was denied to those who were descendants of Ham and he was a son of Noah, not Cain. You are teaching something that is an offensive, bigoted old sectarian notion which was used to justify slavery by Christians, which some still believe but is not LDS doctrine.or anyone not of the lineage of Abraham.But, those who become the adopted seed of Abraham are not denied the priesthood. If you even had any ancestors with the seed of Cain you could not have the priesthood.Here's that offensive 'seed of Cain' garbage again. We don't know who Cain's descendants are, but some Christian churches have claimed that Blacks are descended from Cain without ANY PROOF and their reason was to justify the slave trade and benefiting from the enslaving of other humans. That was set long ago and is biblical. Where in the bible does it say that Cain's descendants were denied the priesthood? The revelation was given in 1978 and the Lord lifted the requirements for the priesthood being available to anyone even those not of the seed of Abraham. Uh, no. We've been giving those who are 'adopted' into the Family of Abraham the priesthood since the church was restored. Up until 1978 the priesthood was not ever given to the seed of Cain. How would you know? Do you know who are the 'seed of Cain'? NO, you don't. It's not like a DNA test will tell you they are descendants of Cain.The church denied priesthood to those who had African blood and they did so because Brigham Young instituted it. He never claimed this came through revelation either and several times it was reconsidered, but not removed until 1978. It had nothing to do with the color of skin. It had to do with the lineage of Cain who happened to be cursed with black skin.'Cursed with black skin'????? So apparently you don't realized this is offensive and bigoted. And there is no correlation between the lineage of Cain and black skin in the Bible. With that revelation in 1978 the Lord was fulfilling his promise to Abraham that through his seed all the people of the earth would be blessed. That happened during Abraham's lifetime and since. Missionary work is fulfilling this promise.

The God of Abraham throughout the bible denied blessings of the priesthood to certain groups of people. But it is always done with a promise that he will remember them. Just like the Lamanites.

This is true and yes, he's denied groups the priesthood. You will NOT find any support in the modern LDS church with your belief that it is the 'seed of cain' who don't hold the priesthood and that they have black skin. The church is wiser now, they don't try to explain what wasn't explained in the past.

[AI2.0]

Where can I find this churchwide spurious materials list? I know that Rowe's books were placed on a list exclusively applicable to the Church Education System, and the statement on that list only prohibits CES using Rowe's books in lessons or encouraging students to read her books, but nobody has ever been able to point me to a statement addressed to church members.

If anybody can point out an official statement from the First Presidency, or any general authority, to the general membership of the church in which Rowe's books are called spurious and discouraging church members from reading them, I will delete them from my Kindle as soon as I verify the statement.

The first presidency said Brigham young taught false doctrine, will you remove his books if any from your kindle too?

Where did the first presidency say that?

President kimball denouncing the Adam god doctrine of Brigham young, that was taught by him in many places and in the temple endowment.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... a?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It to mention blood atonement and the cursed nature of blacks... all doctrines the church now disavowed. Does this mean we toss out Brigham young entirely?

It's very possible and actually plausible that Brigham Young was teaching false doctrine. And if he was, it supports the belief that the Lord won't let a Prophet lead the church astray. Pres. Young pushed the Adam God theory and even tried to have it added to the temple ceremony, but died soon after, not being able to fully incorporate it(I think it was only taught in the St. George temple). After his death, the other Apostles and prophet removed it. Some other things that he believed, such as certain versions of blood atonement and the cursed nature of blacks, have also fallen away. I've often felt that the Lord was protecting his church. Brigham Young was a prophet of god, but he wasn't infallible and some of his beliefs were NOT in harmony with the gospel. I think it's pretty clear that Brigham Young brought his earlier Christian/nonLDS views of Blacks into the church with him. I can't make excuses for him, other than the fact that most people shared his views-most people were 'racist' and so, I think the Lord 'suffered' the priesthood ban to remain, until the general LDS membership were ready to view all men as brothers, regardless of skin color. I'm proud to say that one of my ancestors, Willard Richards was among the few who was not racist and would have welcomed black members as full, participating members of the church.

[GrandMasterB]

My responses in blue;

And, as I research the church history and race, I see no evidence that the idea black people are cursed as descendants of Cain was ever an official church doctrine. Even statements from church presidents on the subject are contradictory, further demonstrating that this "doctrine" is nothing more than statements of belief.

Have you read the church essay on this topic?
https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the ... d?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The essay clearly states that "None of these explanations is accepted today as the official doctrine of the Church.", but identify them as historical theological errors.

The priesthood was denied to all decendants of Cain The priesthood was denied to those who were descendants of Ham and he was a son of Noah, not Cain. You are teaching something that is an offensive, bigoted old sectarian notion which was used to justify slavery by Christians, which some still believe but is not LDS doctrine.or anyone not of the lineage of Abraham.But, those who become the adopted seed of Abraham are not denied the priesthood. If you even had any ancestors with the seed of Cain you could not have the priesthood.Here's that offensive 'seed of Cain' garbage again. We don't know who Cain's descendants are, but some Christian churches have claimed that Blacks are descended from Cain without ANY PROOF and their reason was to justify the slave trade and benefiting from the enslaving of other humans. That was set long ago and is biblical. Where in the bible does it say that Cain's descendants were denied the priesthood? The revelation was given in 1978 and the Lord lifted the requirements for the priesthood being available to anyone even those not of the seed of Abraham. Uh, no. We've been giving those who are 'adopted' into the Family of Abraham the priesthood since the church was restored. Up until 1978 the priesthood was not ever given to the seed of Cain. How would you know? Do you know who are the 'seed of Cain'? NO, you don't. It's not like a DNA test will tell you they are descendants of Cain.The church denied priesthood to those who had African blood and they did so because Brigham Young instituted it. He never claimed this came through revelation either and several times it was reconsidered, but not removed until 1978. It had nothing to do with the color of skin. It had to do with the lineage of Cain who happened to be cursed with black skin.'Cursed with black skin'????? So apparently you don't realized this is offensive and bigoted. And there is no correlation between the lineage of Cain and black skin in the Bible. With that revelation in 1978 the Lord was fulfilling his promise to Abraham that through his seed all the people of the earth would be blessed. That happened during Abraham's lifetime and since. Missionary work is fulfilling this promise.

The God of Abraham throughout the bible denied blessings of the priesthood to certain groups of people. But it is always done with a promise that he will remember them. Just like the Lamanites.

This is true and yes, he's denied groups the priesthood. You will NOT find any support in the modern LDS church with your belief that it is the 'seed of cain' who don't hold the priesthood and that they have black skin. The church is wiser now, they don't try to explain what wasn't explained in the past.

It is doctrine and scripture that the children of Cain were cursed with black skin. Moses 7:22. Are you now saying that Joseph Smith was also starting to teach false docrine and was killed shortly thereafter?

22 And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.

Hmmm racial segregation?

So there you go. The racist Book of Moses as translated by Joseph Smith according to your logic.

Let's try having some Faith for once in God that he knows what he is doing and that BY was not killed by the Lord. That is ridiculous. I don't find any teaching out of harmony with the gospel or scriptures. It is not contradictory but is merely expounding on things that are NOT explained anywhere in scripture. Isn't that what prophets are called to do? To revel hidden things and other knowledge that has been lost. Isn't that what Joseph Smith indeed did?

[GrandMasterB]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

There have been many who have taught this, Appstles and Prophets. Common sense would tell me that in order for flesh to be in the presence of God which Adam at one point was he had to have a Celestial body. We know this because the rules governing the 3 degrees of glory. Those in the terrestrial world will never again be in the presence of the Father but may have Christ visit them. When in the garden Adam could not die. It wasn't until he partook to the fruit that a change came over his body. BY taught this and so do modern prophets and apostles. Also Adam was born. The rib and dust story is only symbolic. McConkie taught this as well as Nelson. Doesn't look like they don't teach things anymore that were first but forward by BY.

Have you ever wondered why we haven't received more scriptures yet? BY teaches anything new and look what people do. They freak out. I am not ashamed of our past. I will not speak ill of the Lords anointed i.e. BY. People call him racist and bonkers. I am shocked and saddened to hear this coming from fellow LDS members. BY was not racist in the least. He was following the prompting a of the spirit for reasons that aren't clear to anyone other that BY and the Lord. We are to have faith that the Lord's purposes are just and right.

[Spaced_Out]

It's very possible and actually plausible that Brigham Young was teaching false doctrine. And if he was, it supports the belief that the Lord won't let a Prophet lead the church astray. Pres. Young pushed the Adam God theory and even tried to have it added to the temple ceremony, but died soon after, not being able to fully incorporate it(I think it was only taught in the St. George temple). After his death, the other Apostles and prophet removed it. Some other things that he believed, such as certain versions of blood atonement and the cursed nature of blacks, have also fallen away. I've often felt that the Lord was protecting his church. Brigham Young was a prophet of god, but he wasn't infallible and some of his beliefs were NOT in harmony with the gospel. I think it's pretty clear that Brigham Young brought his earlier Christian/nonLDS views of Blacks into the church with him. I can't make excuses for him, other than the fact that most people shared his views-most people were 'racist' and so, I think the Lord 'suffered' the priesthood ban to remain, until the general LDS membership were ready to view all men as brothers, regardless of skin color. I'm proud to say that one of my ancestors, Willard Richards was among the few who was not racist and would have welcomed black members as full, participating members of the church.

Jesus only preached to the Jews - the command to preach to all the world only came after his Crucifixion. I have no problem with being politically incorrect and bigoted.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1991/01/of-t ... l?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; There are many quotes from BY in the article as well.

“The Lamanite is a chosen child of God, but he is not the only chosen one. There are many other good people including the Anglos, the French, the German, and the English, who are also of Ephraim and Manasseh. They, with the Lamanites, are also chosen people, and they are a remnant of Jacob. The Lamanite is not wholly and exclusively the remnant of Jacob which the Book of Mormon talks about. We are all of Israel! We are of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and Joseph through Ephraim and Manasseh. We are all of us remnants of Jacob.” (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1982, pp. 600–601.)

President Joseph Fielding Smith made it clear that a majority of the members of the Church today are descendants of Israel and thus of Abraham:

“The Lord said he would scatter Israel among the Gentile nations, and by doing so he would bless the Gentile nations with the blood of Abraham. Today we are preaching the gospel in the world and we are gathering out, according to the revelations given to Isaiah, Jeremiah, and other prophets, the scattered sheep of the House of Israel. These scattered sheep are coming forth mixed with Gentile blood from their Gentile forefathers. Under all the circumstances it is very possible that the majority, almost without exception, of those who come into the Church in this dispensation have the blood of two or more of the tribes of Israel as well as the blood of the Gentiles.” (Answers to Gospel Questions, 5 vols., Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1957–66, 3:63.)

On another occasion President Joseph Fielding Smith emphatically stated: “The great majority of those who become members of the Church are literal descendants of Abraham through Ephraim, son of Joseph.” (Improvement Era, Oct. 1923, p. 1149.)

[setyourselffree]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

There have been many who have taught this, Appstles and Prophets. Common sense would tell me that in order for flesh to be in the presence of God which Adam at one point was he had to have a Celestial body. We know this because the rules governing the 3 degrees of glory. Those in the terrestrial world will never again be in the presence of the Father but may have Christ visit them. When in the garden Adam could not die. It wasn't until he partook to the fruit that a change came over his body. BY taught this and so do modern prophets and apostles. Also Adam was born. The rib and dust story is only symbolic. McConkie taught this as well as Nelson. Doesn't look like they don't teach things anymore that were first but forward by BY.

Have you ever wondered why we haven't received more scriptures yet? BY teaches anything new and look what people do. They freak out. I am not ashamed of our past. I will not speak ill of the Lords anointed i.e. BY. People call him racist and bonkers. I am shocked and saddened to hear this coming from fellow LDS members. BY was not racist in the least. He was following the prompting a of the spirit for reasons that aren't clear to anyone other that BY and the Lord. We are to have faith that the Lord's purposes are just and right.

So are saying Satan had a Celestial body also? Because he was also in the garden of Eden and was in the presence of the father.

[Spaced_Out]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

There have been many who have taught this, Appstles and Prophets. Common sense would tell me that in order for flesh to be in the presence of God which Adam at one point was he had to have a Celestial body. We know this because the rules governing the 3 degrees of glory. Those in the terrestrial world will never again be in the presence of the Father but may have Christ visit them. When in the garden Adam could not die. It wasn't until he partook to the fruit that a change came over his body. BY taught this and so do modern prophets and apostles. Also Adam was born. The rib and dust story is only symbolic. McConkie taught this as well as Nelson. Doesn't look like they don't teach things anymore that were first but forward by BY.

Have you ever wondered why we haven't received more scriptures yet? BY teaches anything new and look what people do. They freak out. I am not ashamed of our past. I will not speak ill of the Lords anointed i.e. BY. People call him racist and bonkers. I am shocked and saddened to hear this coming from fellow LDS members. BY was not racist in the least. He was following the prompting a of the spirit for reasons that aren't clear to anyone other that BY and the Lord. We are to have faith that the Lord's purposes are just and right.

So are saying Satan had a Celestial body also? Because he was also in the garden of Eden and was in the presence of the father.

Yip my understanding was they were in a terrestrial state in the garden. Celestial bodies are perfect and cant be be changed!!!. During the millennium the earth will again be a terrestrial state and all persons inheriting the celestial and terrestrial will be on the earth with Jesus.

[DesertWonderer]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

We all were (are) Celestial beings.

Ridiculous. Please provide a reference for this.

[brianj]

Elohim is Gods in the plural. So it must be grandparents. Joseph Smith also taught in the King Follet discourse about the council of the Gods and about how our Father got permission from the Elohim to create this world and people it.

Must they be grandparents? In a recent general conference we were told of the importance of family councils. In the early days of this restored church it was taught that polygamy is the celestial order of marriage. Putting those two concepts together, I believe the council Smith referred to was a family council and unanimous parental approval was required before proceeding with the plan for us.

Also, The name Michael aka Adam means "Who is like God?". Very interesting indeed. There could indeed be something to this. Doesn't really matter to me either way.

Doesn't matter? You seem to love a good debate as much as I do!

He had a celestial body before falling into the telestial world. According to the bible Adam was placed in the garden and then all the creatures were the brought to the earth and Adam named them.

I see nothing in the canon of LDS scripture to support your contention that Adam had a celestial body. And, according to the Bible, Genesis 1, living creatures were introduced during the sixth day as described in verses 24 and 25. The introduction of man is a subsequent act.
I suspect you are referring to genesis 2:19, but I do not see any support for your belief that the creation of animals as described in that verse happened after Adam was introduced to the garden.

Maybe BY, wrong or right, was just trying to answer these question the best he could. I think we should all give BY a break as there are many, many unanswered questions regarding eternal lives and the gospel in general. However, all will one day be revealed upon the housetops. Thank goodness for that.

On this we agree. And until that great day we can entertain ourselves by arguing minutiae.

[AI2.0]

My responses in blue:




It is doctrine and scripture that the children of Cain were cursed with black skin. Moses 7:22.Sorry, you can't use the pearl of great price, it's not the bible. I said the bible. The christian churches who justifed slavery with your same argument used the bible. Find it in there. I believe some have misinterpreted the reference in the Pear of great price, because they were already under an incorrect belief. Are you now saying that Joseph Smith was also starting to teach false docrine and was killed shortly thereafter? No, you suggested that. Do YOU think he was teaching false doctrine? I only mentioned Brigham Young and YES, I think he was teaching false doctrine. I think he heard something but he was wrong in his interprestion. Orson Pratt argued with him constantly over this and Orson had heard the same things from Joseph, so somebody got it wrong, and I think it was pres. Young.

22 And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them. I think it's talking about the Canaanite 'seed', NOT the 'seed of Cain'. The canaanites were the seed of Ham and they had moved in and taken over the inherited lands of Shem. They could have been 'dark skinned, or it could be that Joseph mistranslated because he THOUGHT it was talking about Cain, as he was also taught those christian dogmas about a curse of cain you have shared.

Hmmm racial segregation?

So there you go. The racist Book of Moses as translated by Joseph Smith according to your logic.

Let's try having some Faith for once in God that he knows what he is doing and that BY was not killed by the Lord. Is that how you see it? Then you must think Joseph and Hyrum will 'killed by the Lord'. I personally have always been taught that they 'needed to seal their testimonies with their blood', but I wouldn't equate that with being killed by him. I simply think he knows what needs to be done and there is an appointed time of death for all of us. That is ridiculous. I don't find any teaching out of harmony with the gospel or scriptures. It is not contradictory but is merely expounding on things that are NOT explained anywhere in scripture. Isn't that what prophets are called to do? To revel hidden things and other knowledge that has been lost. Isn't that what Joseph Smith indeed did?

Just a word of caution. Your beliefs about a 'curse of cain' and 'curse of black skin' is extremely outdated and offensive. It is not conducive to teaching the gospel or missionary work in a worldwide church and I'm looking forward to when this kind of thinking is rejected by LDS church members and not shared or encouraged.

[zionminded]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

We all were (are) Celestial beings.

Ridiculous. Please provide a reference for this.

jesus

[DesertWonderer]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

We all were (are) Celestial beings.

Ridiculous. Please provide a reference for this.

jesus

He told you this?

[GrandMasterB]

My responses in blue:




It is doctrine and scripture that the children of Cain were cursed with black skin. Moses 7:22.Sorry, you can't use the pearl of great price, it's not the bible. I said the bible. The christian churches who justifed slavery with your same argument used the bible. Find it in there. I believe some have misinterpreted the reference in the Pear of great price, because they were already under an incorrect belief. Are you now saying that Joseph Smith was also starting to teach false docrine and was killed shortly thereafter? No, you suggested that. Do YOU think he was teaching false doctrine? I only mentioned Brigham Young and YES, I think he was teaching false doctrine. I think he heard something but he was wrong in his interprestion. Orson Pratt argued with him constantly over this and Orson had heard the same things from Joseph, so somebody got it wrong, and I think it was pres. Young.

22 And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them. I think it's talking about the Canaanite 'seed', NOT the 'seed of Cain'. The canaanites were the seed of Ham and they had moved in and taken over the inherited lands of Shem. They could have been 'dark skinned, or it could be that Joseph mistranslated because he THOUGHT it was talking about Cain, as he was also taught those christian dogmas about a curse of cain you have shared.

Hmmm racial segregation?

So there you go. The racist Book of Moses as translated by Joseph Smith according to your logic.

Let's try having some Faith for once in God that he knows what he is doing and that BY was not killed by the Lord. Is that how you see it? Then you must think Joseph and Hyrum will 'killed by the Lord'. I personally have always been taught that they 'needed to seal their testimonies with their blood', but I wouldn't equate that with being killed by him. I simply think he knows what needs to be done and there is an appointed time of death for all of us. That is ridiculous. I don't find any teaching out of harmony with the gospel or scriptures. It is not contradictory but is merely expounding on things that are NOT explained anywhere in scripture. Isn't that what prophets are called to do? To revel hidden things and other knowledge that has been lost. Isn't that what Joseph Smith indeed did?

Just a word of caution. Your beliefs about a 'curse of cain' and 'curse of black skin' is extremely outdated and offensive. It is not conducive to teaching the gospel or missionary work in a worldwide church and I'm looking forward to when this kind of thinking is rejected by LDS church members and not shared or encouraged.

The pearl of great price contains the portion of the bible that was taken away by man. It is the corrected Books of Moses. Ham was cursed for some sin against his Father. He carried the same mark as Cain as is also explained in the scriptures. You may be offended but it is the truth none the less. You obviously have some white guilt and need a safe space in the LDS church were you will never be exposed to offensive teachings. Your arguments are offensive to me and your ill speaking of the Lords anointed is troubling but you are entitled to your opinion.
L

[GrandMasterB]

I thought the Garden of Eden was a Terrestrial world and that Adam was a Terrestrial being. Could someone please tell me where the info is written that he was a Celestial being? Thanks.

There have been many who have taught this, Appstles and Prophets. Common sense would tell me that in order for flesh to be in the presence of God which Adam at one point was he had to have a Celestial body. We know this because the rules governing the 3 degrees of glory. Those in the terrestrial world will never again be in the presence of the Father but may have Christ visit them. When in the garden Adam could not die. It wasn't until he partook to the fruit that a change came over his body. BY taught this and so do modern prophets and apostles. Also Adam was born. The rib and dust story is only symbolic. McConkie taught this as well as Nelson. Doesn't look like they don't teach things anymore that were first but forward by BY.

Have you ever wondered why we haven't received more scriptures yet? BY teaches anything new and look what people do. They freak out. I am not ashamed of our past. I will not speak ill of the Lords anointed i.e. BY. People call him racist and bonkers. I am shocked and saddened to hear this coming from fellow LDS members. BY was not racist in the least. He was following the prompting a of the spirit for reasons that aren't clear to anyone other that BY and the Lord. We are to have faith that the Lord's purposes are just and right.

So are saying Satan had a Celestial body also? Because he was also in the garden of Eden and was in the presence of the father.

For one Satan doesn't have a body of flesh. Also, before the fall Adam and Eve didn't have blood flowing through their veins but the spirit only.