Is the church distancing itself--from itself?

[_Infymus]

God is the father of all. ALL. EVERYONE. Satan included.

In other words, folks, yes, Jesus and Lucifer are brothers ... despite the LDS spokesperson's best efforts not to admit it.

So if the Church finds this position to be unappealing, and decides to change it, how much do you want to bet that Charity will come in here about how correct they were to do so?

Is this going to turn into another one of those things that Nehor and Jason will argue about? I was taught Jesus and Lucifer were brothers. Jesus was the FIRST born, Lucifer came afterwards.

Personally this goes back to the whole POS crap. I think Lucifer had a great plan, but Jesus and Dad didn't like it thus causing the war themselves. Jesus likes prisons to house those who don't want to "obey". I'd better quit now on this otherwise I'll get attacked again about how I just don't get it...

I don't now that we teach that.

[_malkie]

Satan is the opposite, not begotten.

Wait, what's the opposite of begotten? Not begotten? Because if Jesus is the only begotten, then all of us are not begotten (the opposite of begotten), too. So we're all like Satan. Except not. Somehow.

Unbegotten? Misbegotten? Beputten?

Any linguists here?

Or does it just mean that God didn't have to "temporarily marry a human" and have sex with her in order to have her conceive Satan? (Sorry, don't have the reference rightnow, but I believe that this was another of BY's teachings - probably spoken only as a man.)

[_Doctor Steuss]

From my limited intellect and readings, monogenes is better translated as “unique” or some such synonym.

[_ozemc]

Satan is the opposite, not begotten.

Wait, what's the opposite of begotten? Not begotten? Because if Jesus is the only begotten, then all of us are not begotten (the opposite of begotten), too. So we're all like Satan. Except not. Somehow.

Unbegotten? Misbegotten? Beputten?

Any linguists here?

Or does it just mean that God didn't have to "temporarily marry a human" and have sex with her in order to have her conceive Satan? (Sorry, don't have the reference rightnow, but I believe that this was another of BY's teachings - probably spoken only as a man.)

Well, I did find some antonyms for beget:

From : http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?r=20&q=beget

Destroy
Extinguish
Kill
Eradicate
Erase
Stop
Halt
Ruin

[_charity]

It isn't just that it's a fundamental principle of Mormonism. It's that the fraternal relationship is emphasized, as noted even in the Primary lesson above.

It is the father relationship that is a fundamental principle. You are trying to make the tail wag the dog.

Chapter 3 of Gospel Principle is not a primary lesson. It is the lesson taught to investigators and new members. That lesson is about the plan of salvation. Satan is not the object of the lesson. But critics see what they want to see.

charity wrote:
Satan is the opposite, not begotten.


Wait, what's the opposite of begotten? Not begotten? Because if Jesus is the only begotten, then all of us are not begotten (the opposite of begotten), too. So we're all like Satan. Except not. Somehow.

Oh, Blixa, don't be coy with us.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:
charity wrote:
God is the father of all. ALL. EVERYONE. Satan included.

In other words, folks, yes, Jesus and Lucifer are brothers ... despite the LDS spokesperson's best efforts not to admit it.


So if the Church finds this position to be unappealing, and decides to change it, how much do you want to bet that Charity will come in here about how correct they were to do so?

Is this going to turn into another one of those things that Nehor and Jason will argue about? I was taught Jesus and Lucifer were brothers. Jesus was the FIRST born, Lucifer came afterwards.

Personally this goes back to the whole POS crap. I think Lucifer had a great plan, but Jesus and Dad didn't like it thus causing the war themselves. Jesus likes prisons to house those who don't want to "obey". I'd better quit now on this otherwise I'll get attacked again about how I just don't get it...

You don't have to say more. We know you just don't get it.

The Church will not change this position. It isn't "unappealing." It is very sad that someone who was as great as Lucifer had been, should fall so low.

Lucifer had a great plan? It would have meant you were a robot. You could not make any choices. So, infy, you didn't like the Church and you left. If you hadn't liked Satan's church you would not have been allowed to leave. You really would have preferred that?

[_Sethbag]

The problem is that there's really no reason that the LDS should be ashamed of this doctrine. It's the EVs who have a problem with it, because they don't get the LDS concept of spirit children of God. If God actually exists, and every one of us was his spiritual offspring, including Satan, then it makes perfect sense that Jesus and Satan are brothers. Just like Seth and The Dude and Runtu and Satan are also brothers. We're all spirit brothers and sisters of each, and of Jesus, and of Satan, too, if LDS teachings are correct.

And there's nothing obviously nonsensical or alarming about that idea, other than it's probably not really true.

It's the EVs whose theology makes that seem like such a bad thing. Like, "OMG Marminz thing Jesus and Satan are brothers! OMG that's so evil!"

Theologically, Mormons don't need to give a flying damn whether EVs have a problem with this doctrine or not. It's only when you're trying to pander to these very same ignorant EVs to get their vote for President that it becomes a problem.

I personally don't find the spiritual brother thing in Mormonism any wierder than the things the EVs make up. Far from it, as at least Mormonism's belief on this is a mirror of the way things really are down here on earth, ie: families and children of parents, whereas the EVs have what? Adam really was made from a lump of dirt 6000 years ago by a snap of some amorphous, funky 3-in-1 God thing? How is that any better than the notion of God actually being the literal father of our spirits? I kinda like the Mormon belief in God as our literal dad. You know, Sky Daddy.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

It is the father relationship that is a fundamental principle.

I think you meant to say that the father relationship is the principal principle (to borrow from the erstwhile wording in the Book of Mormon Intro). ;)

[_Blixa]

charity wrote:
Satan is the opposite, not begotten.


Wait, what's the opposite of begotten? Not begotten? Because if Jesus is the only begotten, then all of us are not begotten (the opposite of begotten), too. So we're all like Satan. Except not. Somehow.

Oh, Blixa, don't be coy with us.

I'm not being coy, Queen Victoria. I'm curious about how Satan-as-opposite-to-Christ has to do with his not being begotten.

[_the road to hana]

It isn't just that it's a fundamental principle of Mormonism. It's that the fraternal relationship is emphasized, as noted even in the Primary lesson above.

It is the father relationship that is a fundamental principle.

"Father relationship" to whom? Who is the Father? I think that's what you're missing, Charity. Non-LDS Christians see Jesus Christ as the Creator of this world, and have a father-child relationship with him as well as with God the Father.

Chapter 3 of Gospel Principle is not a primary lesson. It is the lesson taught to investigators and new members. That lesson is about the plan of salvation. Satan is not the object of the lesson. But critics see what they want to see.

I think if you'll look at the thread a little more closely you'll realize the Primary lesson is posted further down. It is not posted in the same post as the citation from Chapter 3 of Gospel Principles.

The Church will not change this position. It isn't "unappealing." It is very sad that someone who was as great as Lucifer had been, should fall so low.

Sounds like a great soundbite for the Huckabee campaign to use. Could you enlighten the American public what Lucifer did that was "so great?"

[_ozemc]

It isn't just that it's a fundamental principle of Mormonism. It's that the fraternal relationship is emphasized, as noted even in the Primary lesson above.

It is the father relationship that is a fundamental principle. You are trying to make the tail wag the dog.

Chapter 3 of Gospel Principle is not a primary lesson. It is the lesson taught to investigators and new members. That lesson is about the plan of salvation. Satan is not the object of the lesson. But critics see what they want to see.

From LDS.org:

Premortal Life

Before we were born on the earth, we lived in the presence of our Heavenly Father as one of His spirit children. In this premortal existence, we attended a council with Heavenly Father's other spirit children. At that council, Heavenly Father presented His great plan of happiness (see Abraham 3:22–26).

In harmony with the plan of happiness, the premortal Jesus Christ, the Firstborn Son of the Father in the spirit, covenanted to be the Savior (see Moses 4:2; Abraham 3:27). Those who followed Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ were permitted to come to the earth to experience mortality and progress toward eternal life. Lucifer, another spirit son of God, rebelled against the plan and "sought to destroy the agency of man" (Moses 4:3). He became Satan, and he and his followers were cast out of heaven and denied the privileges of receiving a physical body and experiencing mortality (see Moses 4:4; Abraham 3:27–28).

Throughout our premortal lives, we developed our identity and increased our spiritual capabilities. Blessed with the gift of agency, we made important decisions, such as the decision to follow Heavenly Father's plan. These decisions affected our life then and now. We grew in intelligence and learned to love the truth, and we prepared to come to the earth, where we could continue to progress.

Seems to me like we were all the same, and yes, Jesus was Lucifer's brother, as am I.