MG, your link lists commonly observed differences but makes little observation about the value of the differences. I will suggest a possible view:huckelberry wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 8:36 pmGee MG you are fully capable of explaining yourself at length. Here? Is the subject not worth your time?
Hoping to encourage you. After all, there are less important matters taking up space.
I think LDS thinking leaves it very unclear how Jesus is divine. If he is first brother he may be selected to be a representative, bring a message, but not be divine. I think this weakens faith in the atonement.
Another angle on this question is how the Holy Ghost is God if being divine is result of process of living in body. The HG can reach inside each one of us because he is spirit. This sure sounds like God the father or Jesus cannot. They sound remote. Perhaps the HG is the one true God and the father and Jesus are delegated representatives.
MG, I think the Richard Bushman thread opens with a statement highlighting LDS new contributing doctrine more clearly than the EV link you linked. Bushman has done some clear thinking preserving Joseph Smith's teaching. It is striking in a way. My mind finds it disturbing. I could wonder who or what were these intelligences who discovered how to be God. Where did the order principals making this possible come from? The idea of eternal intelligences floating about in chaos is disturbing, like some nightmare. How can intelligence exist in chaos?
Perhaps these puzzles are a result of trying to avoid an eternal god.
MG, I would be inclined to think the best LDS contribution is the community of people. Perhaps some of the peculiar ideas help hold the group together. Perhaps believing the group matters helps hold it together.
