God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 17063
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm
Re: God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
It sounds like D&C 124 was JSJr's concoction to scare the Mormon gaggle into building big edifices to JSJr and to quell dissension in the ranks. 'God will reject you (and your dead) if you do not.'
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1464
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:15 am
Re: God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
If God took the MelP away in 1841, when did he officially reinstate it?
'Church pictures are not always accurate' (The Nehor May 4th 2011)
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9070
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:46 pm
Re: God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
jon wrote:If God took the MelP away in 1841, when did he officially reinstate it?
There is no record that he ever did. In fact, according to D&C he should have rejected the church and its dead for not completing the Nauvoo Temple and Nauvoo House.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1464
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:15 am
Re: God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
What was the date of the original restoration of the Melk. PH?
'Church pictures are not always accurate' (The Nehor May 4th 2011)
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9070
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:46 pm
Re: God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
jon wrote:What was the date of the original restoration of the Melk. PH?
Well, that's kind of a funny thing. We don't got that either. I think there are some speculations, though.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1464
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:15 am
Re: God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
Maybe it's in the drawer in the kitchen along with the documents pertaining to the revelation explaining that blacks shouldn't have it...(Well, not before 1978 anyway).
'Church pictures are not always accurate' (The Nehor May 4th 2011)
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 95
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 2:59 pm
Re: God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
just me wrote:In it we learn that God has taken away the fulness of the priesthood and that the Saints have to do a couple things to earn it back. There are promises made and from the historical record we can see that the Saints did not keep their end of the bargain. We should assume that God did keep his end of the bargain, anything less would cause him to cease to be God.
The Melchizedek Priesthood was already restored but what was lacking was those things which are received through the Priesthood in the temple. Nothing was taken away from those saints of the restored gospel.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9070
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:46 pm
Re: God took the Mel. PH away by January 1841: D&C 124
CSA wrote:just me wrote:In it we learn that God has taken away the fulness of the priesthood and that the Saints have to do a couple things to earn it back. There are promises made and from the historical record we can see that the Saints did not keep their end of the bargain. We should assume that God did keep his end of the bargain, anything less would cause him to cease to be God.
The Melchizedek Priesthood was already restored but what was lacking was those things which are received through the Priesthood in the temple. Nothing was taken away from those saints of the restored gospel.
We still have the problem of the "endowment" being "restored" outside of the temple and polygamist marriages being performed outside of the temple.
So, what exactly was supposed to be "received through the Priesthood in the temple" if not those things?
Also, the Nauvoo Temple and Nauvoo House were still never completed, leading to God's rejection.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~