Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
michael douglas wrote:
--DAVEH: Michael.....I appreciate your serious questions above, however, I do not have complete answers for all your questions, and I do not wish to give you partial answers here. I think discussing it in TT would only incur the wrath of other TTers who would attempt to derail any serious discussion.jt: I understand what you are saying but not the point of all of it. Why accuse God? This is just the way it is and if there is more to it that we should know he will reveal this also - in his time. But then I've been doing a little research, and have read that your Church believes that there was some kind of a council of gods in heaven and that Lucifer and Jesus (who are supposedly spirit brothers) both presented their plans. Lucifer's plan was to force men to worship godMichael D: No wonder LDS can't stand public evangelism...
and Jesus' plan was to show them how to worship god. Lucifer's plan was rejected, and Jesus' plan was accepted. (Pearl of Great Price, Book of Moses 4:103) Is the above what you believe DaveH?
DAVEH: Yes.Michael D: Dave H, What a thing!!! LDS maintains that this 'council of the gods' has resulted in the present scenario that allows man to be tested and subsequently be able to attain godhood. This leads me to a couple serious questions. According to LDS:
i) Which council led to the scenario where God the Father had to come through His 'testing' as a man before He could 'become' omnipotent God.
ii) Which 'gods' were involved in that council?
iii) What councils determined the multitude of different scenarios where all of the preceding generations of gods went through their testing and qualified to be 'omnipotent gods'
iv) Who were on those councils?
jt: This is interesting. Do you think that Lucifer's plan would have been the better one?DAVEH: No, not at all. The Lord's plan of "salvation" was infinitely better than the Adversary's plan. (I could explain why, but some in TT would accuse me of preaching Mormonism, or even worse!) To me, the plan of salvation as enveloped in the gospel has a grand an noble purpose that requires all the steps we've/I've discussed (in TT since I've been posting), starting with Adam & Eve transgressing......which I believe was a fundamental step in that plan. Without the 'fall', there could be no 'salvation' (as I would think of it....which is distinctly different from the Protestant definition). Hence, the Lord's work would not be able to progress. BTW......I realize my above explanation might seem convoluted and difficult to follow.....sorry 'bout that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain Five email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
