First Presidency Proclamations

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_malkie
_Emeritus
Posts: 2663
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:03 pm

Re: First Presidency Proclamations

Post by _malkie »

beefcalf wrote:
Sethbag wrote:I always remember the 1845 proclamation as the one which pretty much leads off with "The great Eloheem Jehova has been pleased..." showing that the current description of Elohim as the father of us all, and Jehova as the one who became Jesus, was not shared by the Prophets, Seers, and Revelators of the Restoration, but was sorted out later on by the lesser successors to the mantle.


What kind of crazy talk is this?

There is no confusion. In 1820, God the Father, and His Son Jesus Christ, appeared before Joseph Smith in their true physical forms and, for the first time in over 1,800 years, dispelled all confusion concerning the Godhead. From that time forth, true believers have clearly understood the true nature of God, the Father, His Son, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit.

Those pesky verses in the 1830 Book of Mormon, the JST Luke verses, the early versions of the First Vision story, the Lectures on Faith, and, yes, the 1845 Proclamation, were simply put out there to separate the wheat from the chaff. The fact that you were confused and bewildered by these references is a clear indicator of your descent into grievous sin and prideful intellectualism and your willingness to embrace the natural man.

God's ways are not our ways, you see...

Can you remind me what it was about that appearance that demonstrated conclusively that the beings were physical in nature? I seem to have forgotten.
NOMinal member

Maksutov: "... if you give someone else the means to always push your buttons, you're lost."
_beefcalf
_Emeritus
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:40 pm

Re: First Presidency Proclamations

Post by _beefcalf »

malkie wrote:Can you remind me what it was about that appearance that demonstrated conclusively that the beings were physical in nature? I seem to have forgotten.


um... they look physical?


Image
eschew obfuscation

"I'll let you believers in on a little secret: not only is the LDS church not really true, it's obviously not true." -Sethbag
_ludwigm
_Emeritus
Posts: 10158
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:07 am

Re: First Presidency Proclamations

Post by _ludwigm »

beefcalf wrote:
malkie wrote:Can you remind me what it was about that appearance that demonstrated conclusively that the beings were physical in nature? I seem to have forgotten.


um... they look physical?


Image


Are they father and son?

Or twins from a single ovum instead?

OK, this is the freedom of the artist... And the freedom of the competent Committee which maintains the use of the painting.
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco
- To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei
Post Reply