DiscussMormonism.com

Why or why not?

CFR's?
OCP's?

There is no way to alter the specific belief in a corporeal father without causing serious issues with the 1838 first vision, which is canonized scripture.

ref: Joseph Smith History, first vision

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.

I disagree with the prevailing Mormon view that he was a mortal human being at one time. There is no reason to believe that life on another planet evolved the same as it did here. He is humanoid in appearance however. And a savior of his generations like Christ is for us.

There's nothing in the text of Joseph Smith that compells a corporal God the Father.

D&C 130 is a little tougher to get around, but hey, 132 is not longer about plural marriage and Indians are no longer Lamanites.

But if OCD sticks with a corporal God the Father, where did he get his body? He might not have once been man. I don't know that we believe that, we don't emphasise it. It's more of a couplet. And King Follette isn't an OCP.

So if section 130 is all we have, he has a corporeal body but we don't know why?

I disagree with the prevailing Mormon view that he was a mortal human being at one time.

It's not just a view, it's official doctrine.

There is no reason to believe that life on another planet evolved the same as it did here.

If directed by a God, then yes there is, at least in the sense of homo sapiens.

He is humanoid in appearance however.

However, I can also go with an expanded definition of the "image of God" and accept a Star Trek-like universe full of humanoids all considered to be in God's image. See the Star Trek TNG Episode: "The Chase"

And a savior of his generations like Christ is for us.

That is not doctrine.

bcspace wrote:

Tobin wrote:I disagree with the prevailing Mormon view that he was a mortal human being at one time.

It's not just a view, it's official doctrine.

CFR to OCP

lulu wrote:There's nothing in the text of Joseph Smith that compells a corporal God the Father.

D&C 130 is a little tougher to get around, but hey, 132 is not longer about plural marriage and Indians are no longer Lamanites.

But if OCD sticks with a corporal God the Father, where did he get his body? He might not have once been man. I don't know that we believe that, we don't emphasise it. It's more of a couplet. And King Follette isn't an OCP.

So if section 130 is all we have, he has a corporeal body but we don't know why?

Sure we do. It is part of the plan of salvation. God the Father was just like Christ. He came into his world, suffered, and saved his generations. This happens over and over again throughout the universe. There is nothing special about Earth that this only occurred here once and never again. In due time, Christ, who is also God, will organize another world and a savior come down will save those generations. This will never end.

Tobin wrote:

lulu wrote:There's nothing in the text of Joseph Smith that compells a corporal God the Father.

D&C 130 is a little tougher to get around, but hey, 132 is not longer about plural marriage and Indians are no longer Lamanites.

But if OCD sticks with a corporal God the Father, where did he get his body? He might not have once been man. I don't know that we believe that, we don't emphasise it. It's more of a couplet. And King Follette isn't an OCP.

So if section 130 is all we have, he has a corporeal body but we don't know why?

Sure we do. It is part of the plan of salvation. God the Father was just like Christ. He came into his world, suffered, and saved his generations. This happens over and over again throughout the universe. There is nothing special about Earth that this only occurred here once and never again. In due time, Christ, who is also God, will organize another world and a savior come down will save those generations. This will never end.

CFR

Tobin wrote:

lulu wrote:There's nothing in the text of Joseph Smith that compells a corporal God the Father.

D&C 130 is a little tougher to get around, but hey, 132 is not longer about plural marriage and Indians are no longer Lamanites.

But if OCD sticks with a corporal God the Father, where did he get his body? He might not have once been man. I don't know that we believe that, we don't emphasise it. It's more of a couplet. And King Follette isn't an OCP.

So if section 130 is all we have, he has a corporeal body but we don't know why?

Sure we do. It is part of the plan of salvation. God the Father was just like Christ. He came into his world, suffered, and saved his generations. This happens over and over again throughout the universe. There is nothing special about Earth that this only occurred here once and never again. In due time, Christ, who is also God, will organize another world and a savior come down will save those generations. This will never end.

lulu wrote:CFR

D&C 35:1 Listen to the voice of the Lord your God, even Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, whose course is one eternal round, the same today as yesterday, and forever.

He states this many times in the D&C and Book of Mormon. And if you paid attention to the plan of salvation, it teachs we will become Celestial beings forming spirit children. Those spirit children will in turn have physical bodies on a new world some day - just as Celestial beings formed our spirits so that we could come here.

It's not just a view, it's official doctrine.

CFR

Joseph Smith taught: “It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God. … He was once a man like us; … God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 345–46).
http://www.LDS.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-47-exaltation?lang=eng