Could God the Father have been a horse thief?

[_Harold Lee]

I still fail to see the reason God must be a homo sapien though.

We are created in His image. He was once a mortal man. Etc. The requirement is virtually doctrinal in the absence of other information.

Could we not just have a form or shape that is somewhat similar, but not share the same species with God the Father? I believe this more accurately fits how evolution of intelligent life would happen on another planet after all. I seriously doubt that any other planet would share exactly the same evolutionary track and bio diversity that this planet does.

In the "Star Trekian hypothesis", this could be true. But there may or may not be sufficient reason to broaden what it means to be created in His image in such a fashion. Certainly evolution could be a reason. But there are not sufficient details on the creation to bring evolution into doctrinal status. The doctrine merely puts up no road blocks to the notion that evolution could have been the process used.

Two problems with the Star Trek hypothesis- one Jesus was supposedly pure homo Sapiens and not part Chewbacca, and if you recall the very Mormon established teaching that God's seed literally impregnated Mary, that would mean God would need to be human. Or Jesus would be part human part Spock or whatever you may think falls under the in his image umbrella.

Two never ever use Star Trek as an explanation for Mormonism. Ever. Wish that was just that one time but apparently transdmensional portals linking Peru and New York is the new missing link in the Cumorah discussion. This is not good.

Bottom line though is Mormon doctrine doesn't give you the Star Trek flexibility.

[_Tobin]

Two problems with the Star Trek hypothesis- one Jesus was supposedly pure homo Sapiens and not part Chewbacca, and if you recall the very Mormon established teaching that God's seed literally impregnated Mary, that would mean God would need to be human. Or Jesus would be part human part Spock or whatever you may think falls under the in his image umbrella.

Umm, no. That was Brigham Young's view. There is nothing revealed in the scriptures along those lines, so the formation of the son of God did not require that. In fact, if God is a hyper-intelligent and advanced being, placing such a requirement on God would be laughable. I'm sure he has much more advanced means to engineer life.

Two never ever use Star Trek as an explanation for Mormonism. Ever. Wish that was just that one time but apparently transdmensional portals linking Peru and New York is the new missing link in the Cumorah discussion. This is not good.

Bottom line though is Mormon doctrine doesn't give you the Star Trek flexibility.

It isn't a Star Trek view. It is a very plausible view given that intelligent life evolved on this planet that it has also done so on other worlds. And given the pace of our technological advancement over the past hundred years, civilizations millions or billions of years more advanced would in fact seem like gods to us and possess abilities we would consider miraculous. This is an very reasonable way to view God and completely consistent with Mormonism.

[_Sethbag]

If God is black and he cursed black skin in mormondom is that an act of selfhate? And does that mean Brigham Young hated god?

It does explain why the best football players are made in his image.

What's worse, when black Elohim mixed his seed with white(ish) Mary, was the penalty for this death on the spot?

[_Harold Lee]

If God is black and he cursed black skin in mormondom is that an act of selfhate? And does that mean Brigham Young hated god?

It does explain why the best football players are made in his image.

What's worse, when black Elohim mixed his seed with white(ish) Mary, was the penalty for this death on the spot?

Oh that's the worst part of it. He would have been kicked out of BYU.

[Guest]

Two never ever use Star Trek as an explanation for Mormonism. Ever. Wish that was just that one time but apparently transdmensional portals linking Peru and New York is the new missing link in the Cumorah discussion. This is not good.

Bottom line though is Mormon doctrine doesn't give you the Star Trek flexibility.

It isn't a Star Trek view. It is a very plausible view given that intelligent life evolved on this planet that it has also done so on other worlds. And given the pace of our technological advancement over the past hundred years, civilizations millions or billions of years more advanced would in fact seem like gods to us and possess abilities we would consider miraculous. This is an very reasonable way to view God and completely consistent with Mormonism.

This is exactly Star Trek.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradi ... nal_Series)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Watches_the_Watchers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_ ... ntier#Plot

[_Harold Lee]

It's becoming clear that if the active posters actually expressed in church 1/10 the beliefs they post here, they'd probably not be active right now.

[_bcspace]

His skin could be black today. However, if certain descriptions of Jesus are accurate and we know he has his father's DNA, then I find it unlikely for that to be true.

So it is possible that Heavenly Grandfather cursed the first murderer on the planet where Elohim lived out his mortality with black skin, and Elohim was descended from that cursed lineage?

Yep.

If dark skin is a curse, why does it stay with people when they are resurrected?

I wasn't aware that dark skin was the curse in the priesthood ban case. It's certainly isn't doctrine.

[_bcspace]

In the "Star Trekian hypothesis", this could be true. But there may or may not be sufficient reason to broaden what it means to be created in His image in such a fashion. Certainly evolution could be a reason. But there are not sufficient details on the creation to bring evolution into doctrinal status. The doctrine merely puts up no road blocks to the notion that evolution could have been the process used.

Two problems with the Star Trek hypothesis- one Jesus was supposedly pure homo Sapiens and not part Chewbacca, and if you recall the very Mormon established teaching that God's seed literally impregnated Mary, that would mean God would need to be human. Or Jesus would be part human part Spock or whatever you may think falls under the in his image umbrella.

That is essentially what I said earlier in the context of God being black is unlikely. For the same reason it is just as unlikely for the universe(s) of God's children to be "Star Trekian"; populated with eligible humanoids.

Two never ever use Star Trek as an explanation for Mormonism. Ever. Wish that was just that one time but apparently transdmensional portals linking Peru and New York is the new missing link in the Cumorah discussion. This is not good.

LOL!

Bottom line though is Mormon doctrine doesn't give you the Star Trek flexibility.

I think Star Trek doctrine gives the idea that Mormon doctrine could be flexible.

[_bcspace]

It's becoming clear that if the active posters actually expressed in church 1/10 the beliefs they post here, they'd probably not be active right now.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of a belief or musing I've expressed here that I haven't expressed in Church, either over the pulpit or in a class discussion, including but not limited to: Evolution, local Flood, a "Star Trekian" hypothesis of creation, and Mormon Democrats are apostates of the highest magnitude, traitors to God and country.

This is exactly Star Trek.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradi ... nal_Series)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Watches_the_Watchers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_ ... ntier#Plot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chase_%28Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation%29

[_Darth J]

If dark skin is a curse, why does it stay with people when they are resurrected?

I wasn't aware that dark skin was the curse in the priesthood ban case. It's certainly isn't doctrine.

http://www.angelfire.com/mo2/blackmormon/FP.html

August 17, 1949

The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: "Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to."

President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: "The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have."

The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.