Announcement

Collapse

LDS - Mormonism Guidelines

Theists only.

Look! It's a bird, no it's a plane, no it's a bicycle built for two!

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the LDS - Mormons. This forum is generally for theists only, and is generaly not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theists may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.

Due to the sensitive nature of the LDS Temple Ceremonies to our LDS posters, we do not allow posting exact text of the temple rituals, articles describing older versions of the ceremony, or links that provide the same information. However discussion of generalities of the ceremony are not off limits. If in doubt, PM the area mod or an Admin


Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

God Was Once a Mortal Sinner????

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    I don't know of anyone other than Jesus who has never sinned on earth so the conclusion is the same: none of you mormons will be gods.
    Partaking of the divine nature and having eternal life and being a "god" does not necessarily mean that we will be the source of salvation on another world. No LDS that I know of is privy to the patterned organization of the eternities.

    I can say this though, when God said, "Let US create man in OUR image and OUR likeness" in Genesis and "man has become as one of US, knowing good and evil", it is very likely that he was talking to other "gods". However, those "gods" are not the source of our salvation.

    -7up

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by seven7up View Post
      Originally posted by BTC
      In conclusion, let me reiterate that the Church does not teach that any member of the Godhead, which is represented as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, has ever sinned. In fact, in the Lectures on Faith, the Prophet Joseph makes it clear that one cannot have "faith unto salvation" if one cannot trust that God is perfect and free from all error and sin.
      Well, one can argue that the atonement did make an individual "perfect and free from all error and sin."
      Then Jeff's comment makes little sense.

      Nevertheless, I agree with Jeff Lindsay's opinion on this matter. All of the teachings on this stem from Joseph Smith, who indicated that God the Father was a Christ.
      And we can never be, meaning we can never be a "God Most High". Do you agree with that implication?

      The implications of this, in my view, are these:

      Jesus Christ will be "God the Father" of a new creation, and those who are exalted here will be the "hosts of heaven" under the reign of our Lord and Savior.
      Then you disagree with the following statements:
      • Each one of you has it within the realm of his possibility to develop a kingdom over which you will preside as its king and god. You will need to develop yourself and grow in ability and power and worthiness, to govern such a world with all of its people." (Spencer Kimball https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrines...-life?lang=eng)

        "We educate ourselves in the secular field and in the spiritual field so that we may one day create worlds, people and govern them." (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, ed. Edward L. Kimball p.386)

        We are in school, the mortal school, to gain the experiences, the training, the joys, and the sufferings that we partake of, that we might be educated in all these things and be prepared, if we are faithful and true to the commandments of the Lord, to become sons and daughters of God, joint heirs with Jesus Christ; and in His presence to go on to a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever, and perhaps through our faithfulness to have the opportunity of building worlds and peopling them." (Joseph F. Smith, “Adam’s Role in Bringing Us Mortality,” https://www.lds.org/ensign/2006/01/a...ality?lang=eng)

        "Only a short time before his death, President Snow visited the Brigham Young University [then Brigham Young Academy], at Provo. President Brimhall escorted the party through one of the buildings; he wanted to reach the assembly room as soon as possible, as the students had already gathered. They were going through one of the kindergarten rooms; President Brimhall had reached the door and was about to open it and go on when President Snow said: 'Wait a moment, President Brimhall, I want to see these children at work; what are they doing?' Brother Brimhall replied that they were making clay spheres. 'That is very interesting,' the President said. 'I want to watch them.' He quietly watched the children for several minutes and then lifted a little girl, perhaps six years of age, and stood her on a table. He then took the clay sphere from her hand, and, turning to Brother Brimhall, said: 'President Brimhall, these children are now at play, making mud worlds, the time will come when some of these boys, through their faithfulness to the gospel, will progress and develop in knowledge, intelligence and power, in future eternities, until they shall be able to go out into space where there is unorganized matter and call together the necessary elements, and through their knowledge of and control over the laws and powers of nature, to organize matter into worlds on which their posterity may dwell, and over which they shall rule as gods.' (https://si.lds.org/bc/seminary/conte...manual_eng.pdf)

      And that's just a sparse few from the list I have.


      Jesus will be the "God of gods", or the "head God" , or the "God above all other gods" in that new creation.
      So, He will no longer direct glory from that creation to HIS Father?

      None of us will be providing salvation in the new creation, but instead Jesus will as the new Father, through another eternally spiritually perfect Firstbegotten and then Only begotten Son, precisely as we have seen in this creation.
      Then you will not procreate in this new creation, because only the Father of that creation peoples it.

      http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/God_the_Father

      All individual human spirits were begotten (not created from nothing or made) by the Father in a premortal state, where they lived and were nurtured by Heavenly Parents. These spirit children of the Father come to earth to receive mortal bodies; there is a literal family relationship among humankind.


      Your theology once again is a complete mess.
      That's what
      - She

      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
      - Stephen R. Donaldson

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by seven7up View Post
        Partaking of the divine nature and having eternal life and being a "god" does not necessarily mean that we will be the source of salvation on another world. No LDS that I know of is privy to the patterned organization of the eternities.

        I can say this though, when God said, "Let US create man in OUR image and OUR likeness" in Genesis and "man has become as one of US, knowing good and evil", it is very likely that he was talking to other "gods". However, those "gods" are not the source of our salvation.

        -7up
        Can you be a superhero instead? What superpowers do you supposedly get as a Mormon god?
        Last edited by Christianbookworm; 10-28-2014, 02:59 PM.
        If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by seven7up View Post
          I did not re-quote many of the comments on the web site. For starters, I have never heard of "McLelland". I don't know who he is or what he does and I am not familiar with any of his work.
          My apologies for spelling his name wrong. But just so you know who he is:

          https://danielomcclellan.wordpress.com/about/
          I received my bachelors degree from Brigham Young University in ancient Near Eastern studies, where I focused on Biblical Hebrew and minored in Classical Greek. I completed a master of studies in Jewish studies at the University of Oxford in July of 2010 and recently completed a master of arts in biblical studies at Trinity Western University just outside of Vancouver, BC. I currently work as a scripture translation supervisor for the LDS Church in Salt Lake City.
          That's what
          - She

          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
          - Stephen R. Donaldson

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            Then Jeff's comment makes little sense.
            It makes sense if there is a difference between Gods by nature and gods by grace, which makes a lot of sense to me. However, there are those who interpret things differently, and say that there is no difference between the two.



            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            And we can never be, meaning we can never be a "God Most High". Do you agree with that implication?
            Yes. My interpretation would hold this as well. Jesus Christ would be the "Most High God" in the next Creation, and nobody else.

            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            Then you disagree with the following statements:
            • Each one of you has it within the realm of his possibility to develop a kingdom over which you will preside as its king and god. You will need to develop yourself and grow in ability and power and worthiness, to govern such a world with all of its people." (Spencer Kimball https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrines...-life?lang=eng)

              "We educate ourselves in the secular field and in the spiritual field so that we may one day create worlds, people and govern them." (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, ed. Edward L. Kimball p.386)

              We are in school, the mortal school, to gain the experiences, the training, the joys, and the sufferings that we partake of, that we might be educated in all these things and be prepared, if we are faithful and true to the commandments of the Lord, to become sons and daughters of God, joint heirs with Jesus Christ; and in His presence to go on to a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever, and perhaps through our faithfulness to have the opportunity of building worlds and peopling them." (Joseph F. Smith, “Adam’s Role in Bringing Us Mortality,” https://www.lds.org/ensign/2006/01/a...ality?lang=eng)

              "Only a short time before his death, President Snow visited the Brigham Young University [then Brigham Young Academy], at Provo. President Brimhall escorted the party through one of the buildings; he wanted to reach the assembly room as soon as possible, as the students had already gathered. They were going through one of the kindergarten rooms; President Brimhall had reached the door and was about to open it and go on when President Snow said: 'Wait a moment, President Brimhall, I want to see these children at work; what are they doing?' Brother Brimhall replied that they were making clay spheres. 'That is very interesting,' the President said. 'I want to watch them.' He quietly watched the children for several minutes and then lifted a little girl, perhaps six years of age, and stood her on a table. He then took the clay sphere from her hand, and, turning to Brother Brimhall, said: 'President Brimhall, these children are now at play, making mud worlds, the time will come when some of these boys, through their faithfulness to the gospel, will progress and develop in knowledge, intelligence and power, in future eternities, until they shall be able to go out into space where there is unorganized matter and call together the necessary elements, and through their knowledge of and control over the laws and powers of nature, to organize matter into worlds on which their posterity may dwell, and over which they shall rule as gods.' (https://si.lds.org/bc/seminary/conte...manual_eng.pdf)

            And that's just a sparse few from the list I have.
            We will be "kings and priests unto God" according to the scripture, but would still be under the authority of the "Most High God". You are assuming that every kingdom and every world would be the same as this one. That is not necessarily true.

            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            So, He will no longer direct glory from that creation to HIS Father?
            Glory would go to Christ, and more glory is added to the Father at the same time. It isn't just one or the other. Posterity works that way.



            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            Then you will not procreate in this new creation, because only the Father of that creation peoples it.
            Yes, the gods who are under the Most High God will procreate. However, Jesus Christ is the Father of all of the gods in a spiritual sense, this began when they were "born again" according to the spirit in mortality. This is the beginning of a new spiritual life, and Jesus Christ is the Father of that spiritual life, and the spirits who result from it. So, He would be the spiritual Father in that very real sense, even though much of the spiritual procreation is done by and through other "gods" who are also heavenly parents.

            http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/God_the_Father

            All individual human spirits were begotten (not created from nothing or made) by the Father in a premortal state, where they lived and were nurtured by Heavenly Parents. These spirit children of the Father come to earth to receive mortal bodies; there is a literal family relationship among humankind.


            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            Your theology once again is a complete mess.
            Keeping in mind that we are well into speculative discussion, and not concrete theology/doctrine, and no LDS really knows how it will work in eternity. Please explain why you think it is a "complete mess".

            -7up
            Last edited by seven7up; 10-28-2014, 03:42 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
              My apologies for spelling his name wrong. But just so you know who he is:

              https://danielomcclellan.wordpress.com/about/
              I received my bachelors degree from Brigham Young University in ancient Near Eastern studies, where I focused on Biblical Hebrew and minored in Classical Greek. I completed a master of studies in Jewish studies at the University of Oxford in July of 2010 and recently completed a master of arts in biblical studies at Trinity Western University just outside of Vancouver, BC. I currently work as a scripture translation supervisor for the LDS Church in Salt Lake City.
              O.K.

              Now I know who he is. Other than a website blog, has he written anything significant that I should know about?

              I answered the general concept of those who are open to the possibility that God may have been sinful. What else would you like me to address Bill?

              -7up

              Comment


              • #22
                How is God worthy of being called God and not just god in Mormonism? If he used to just be a human? So he became able to create planets? Big deal. Not the eternal Spirit in Christianity!
                If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
                  Can you be a superhero instead? What superpowers do you supposedly get as a Mormon god?
                  The ability to project images of words into someone's hat?


                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                    It makes sense if there is a difference between Gods by nature and gods by grace, which makes a lot of sense to me. However, there are those who interpret things differently, and say that there is no difference between the two.
                    Not really. Since Elohim is "exalted" according to Joseph Smith, then he is a god by grace, just like we would be. Same with Christ. He is only a god by being exalted by grace by Elohim.




                    Yes. My interpretation would hold this as well. Jesus Christ would be the "Most High God" in the next Creation, and nobody else.
                    And as a result, only He would be able to organize intelligences into spirit children... or are you suggesting that the "host of heaven" organized some of them?


                    We will be "kings and priests unto God" according to the scripture, but would still be under the authority of the "Most High God". You are assuming that every kingdom and every world would be the same as this one. That is not necessarily true.
                    I am saying that Mormon leaders have routinely stated that the "principles" of the Gospel are the same, and that increase is one of them. The leaders I quoted all agree that each of the "worthy males" will organize their own progeny to populate their world that they create.


                    Glory would go to Christ, and more glory is added to the Father at the same time.
                    By ignoring Him? By never mentioning His name or even acknowledging His existence to that creation?

                    It isn't just one or the other. Posterity works that way.
                    How? Silence?



                    Yes, the gods who are under the Most High God will procreate.
                    So, did the gods under Heavenly Father procreate? Or did HE ALONE organize them?

                    However, Jesus Christ is the Father of all of the gods in a spiritual sense, this began when they were "born again" according to the spirit in mortality. This is the beginning of a new spiritual life, and Jesus Christ is the Father of that spiritual life, and the spirits who result from it. So, He would be the spiritual Father in that very real sense, even though much of the spiritual procreation is done by and through other "gods" who are also heavenly parents.
                    This is completely contradictory to Mormon doctrine on how spiritual procreation occurs. "God is not only our Ruler and Creator; He is also our Heavenly Father. All men and women are literally the sons and daughters of God". Procreation, meaning spirit organization, is never attributed to "other gods". You are pulling that out of your hat with zero support from Mormon leadership.

                    http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/God_the_Father

                    All individual human spirits were begotten (not created from nothing or made) by the Father in a premortal state, where they lived and were nurtured by Heavenly Parents. These spirit children of the Father come to earth to receive mortal bodies; there is a literal family relationship among humankind.
                    You skipped the first part:

                    The Father, Elohim, is called the Father because he is the literal father of the spirits of mortals (Heb. 12:9). This paternity is not allegorical


                    So, no, the other "gods" are not heavenly parents. Elohim and Heavenly Mother are it.


                    Keeping in mind that we are well into speculative discussion, and not concrete theology/doctrine, and no LDS really knows how it will work in eternity. Please explain why you think it is a "complete mess".
                    No we aren't. We are using direct quotes from your leaders that explain your doctrine. You've now invented "heavenly surrogates" to try to dodge the mess your theology has created. If God is a reformed sinner, he is a god by grace, not by nature. According to Jeff, he therefore cannot be a god and offer salvation to his offspring since He is not "perfect and free from all error and sin". And He can't be "free from all error and sin" if he sinned.
                    That's what
                    - She

                    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                    - Stephen R. Donaldson

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
                      How is God worthy of being called God and not just god in Mormonism? If he used to just be a human? So he became able to create planets? Big deal. Not the eternal Spirit in Christianity!

                      As I explained on this thread, the teachings of Joseph Smith point to the idea that God the Father was the Christ in a previous creation.

                      So, in order to answer your question, let me ask you a question.

                      How is Jesus Christ worthy of being called "God" in your theology?

                      -7up

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        Not really. Since Elohim is "exalted" according to Joseph Smith, then he is a god by grace, just like we would be. Same with Christ. He is only a god by being exalted by grace by Elohim.
                        The term "exalted" is used in reference to Jesus Christ in the New Testament ... so, as usual, you don't know what you are talking about.

                        For example: "For this reason also, God (the Father) highly exalted Him (Jesus Christ), and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,… (Phil 2:9-10)

                        Clearly being "exalted" by God does not imply that Jesus was sinful. So, you are wrong again Bill.

                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        And as a result, only He would be able to organize intelligences into spirit children... or are you suggesting that the "host of heaven" organized some of them?
                        I am suggesting that the kindgom and world in which we live in this Universe may be different than the kingdom and worlds elsewhere in the Universe. For example, it has been suggested that the Savior chose to work out his mortal sojourn on the most wicked of all worlds (See Moses 7:36). Or, this could be the major battle ground where the most noble and righteous have been placed with the most powerful opposition.


                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        I am saying that Mormon leaders have routinely stated that the "principles" of the Gospel are the same, and that increase is one of them. The leaders I quoted all agree that each of the "worthy males" will organize their own progeny to populate their world that they create.
                        True. The promise is for each exalted family to have spiritual children, however, we do not know if the world that they populate will be the same as this one. As illustrated above, each world may not have its very own "Christ". That was the point I was trying to get across in a previous post to you. Each kingdom is not necessarily the same as the one that we are familiar with here.

                        7up: Glory would go to Christ, and more glory is added to the Father at the same time.

                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        By ignoring Him? By never mentioning His name or even acknowledging His existence to that creation?
                        His name is the same name given to the Son. They are "one" in that sense. Allow me to provide the quote from Joseph Smith again:

                        "What did Jesus do? Why, I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence. I saw my Father work out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom I shall present it to my Father so that he obtains kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt his glory. And so Jesus treads in his tracks to inherit what God did before."

                        7up: It isn't just one or the other. Posterity works that way.

                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        How? Silence?
                        Let's take it down to a mortal level in order to help illustrate. Let's say that a man named Jared has a family, and he successfully has a career and a family. He has several children. One of his other children becomes equally successful and has a family and successful career as well. Does the family and success of the child take away from the family and success of the Father? Doesn't the Father gain satisfaction through his child and continuing posterity? Is that not glorious?

                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        So, did the gods under Heavenly Father procreate? Or did HE ALONE organize them?
                        On this Earth where Christ provided the sacrifice, we have been taught that we are children of the Most High God, our Heavenly Father. I don't know how it works elsewhere, in other kindgdoms, other worlds, etc.

                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        This is completely contradictory to Mormon doctrine on how spiritual procreation occurs. "God is not only our Ruler and Creator; He is also our Heavenly Father. All men and women are literally the sons and daughters of God". Procreation, meaning spirit organization, is never attributed to "other gods".
                        Well, they aren't really "other gods". In the mind of LDS (and in reality), "God" is a plural noun. Heavenly Mother is included in the concept of "God". Yet we understand that there are "gods" who are "one" with God.

                        7up: keeping in mind that we are well into speculative discussion, and not concrete theology/doctrine, and no LDS really knows how it will work in eternity. ...

                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        No we aren't. We are using direct quotes from your leaders that explain your doctrine. You've now invented "heavenly surrogates" to try to dodge the mess your theology has created.
                        The way the heavens and kingdoms are organized is very speculative. The nature of how exactly spiritual children are created is speculative. How things work on other worlds is speculative. The idea that God could have sinned in his mortal life is speculative.

                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        If God is a reformed sinner, he is a god by grace, not by nature.
                        Correct. IF he were a reformed sinner, THEN He would be a "god by grace". However, the strongest indication is that the Father was a mortal in the same sense that Jesus was a mortal.

                        The idea that he could possibly be a reformed sinner is speculative. The original teaching of Joseph Smith pointed to the Father being a Christ, who had the power of resurrection in Himself, just as Jesus had the power of resurrection in himself. That is why the "reformed sinner" speculative theory is in doubt.

                        Nevertheless, if the power of the atonement is true, would there be any way to tell the difference between a "god by grace" and a "God by nature"?

                        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        According to Jeff, he therefore cannot be a god and offer salvation to his offspring since He is not "perfect and free from all error and sin". And He can't be "free from all error and sin" if he sinned.
                        That is because Jeff is suggesting in his opinion that being "free from all error and sin" MUST include having never sinned in the past, even though in the present that being is perfect, having been cleansed by the blood of the Lamb. But that is not necessarily the case. I agree with Jeff in that I think God the Father was Christ of a previous Universe, because that is how Joseph Smith presented it, but I don't absolutely think that this has to be the case. I have to be open to other possibilities because these questions have not been answered and I am a strong proponent of the power of Christ's atonement. I also have to believe that Jesus wasn't making impossible commands when he said, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matt 5:48)

                        Let me ask you a simple question Bill. In your theology, for those who obtain Eternal Life, are they "free from all error and sin"? Or will they be bound in eternity by sins and past mistakes?

                        -7up
                        Last edited by seven7up; 10-28-2014, 06:25 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                          Despite the fact that the original sermon from Joseph Smith points to God the Father as being a "Christ" on another Earth in eternity past, allow me to expound a little on exactly why LDS will often allow for the possibility of God having sinned in a mortal life.
                          I just offered that for some opinions, but I was wondering how you might resolve these two conflicting ideas from LDS, where following Satan leads to godliness in one statement, but in the next it leads to ungodliness:

                          After Adam and Eve partook of the fruit of “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” God said they had “become as one of us,” suggesting that a process of approaching godliness was already underway.

                          Satan, also called the adversary or the devil, is the enemy of all righteousness and of those who seek to follow God.

                          Also here, when LDS states that the Father is eternal, what does that mean if the Father was once a man produced by another God?

                          God the Eternal Father

                          Also how would you observe this Law if you believed other Gods came before God the Father?

                          Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                            Also how would you observe this Law if you believed other Gods came before God the Father?

                            Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
                            This question has an answer in 3 parts. What you have done here is taken a short phrase and you have taken it entirely out of context. In order to come to the truth, you have to look at the entire Bible. I will walk you through it in 3 parts, so bear with me.

                            - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PART 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                            The context of that statement is very important, both textual and the historical context. For starters, the phrases of "none beside me" and "there is no other" are examples of Hebrew figurative speech speaking of superiority. For example, Isaiah 47:8-10 depicts the city of Babylon as saying:

                            ["Therefore hear now this, thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me; I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children: For thou hast trusted in thy wickedness: thou hast said, None seeth me. Thy wisdom and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee; and thou hast said in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me."

                            The figure of speech is not meant to be understood, as in this example, that there literally no other cities than Babylon. Obviously there are, because they are being compared to the others. It is meant to be understood that they are saying that they are superior to the other cities.

                            Now back to the context of the verse that you were referring to. Jehovah (who is Jesus Christ) who is the ONLY ONE to whom mankind can look for the forgiveness of their sins. Hence, the phrases "besides me there is no other god" and "besides me there is no Savior" are found in the text.

                            Finally, the text is contrasting the true God, to the false gods/idols of other nations. These false gods/idols were made ("formed") by man out of gold/wood/stone etc. Therefore, Jehovah is telling the people that those gods are not true gods. They are representations of gods that don't even really exist. Making an idol or a statue does not truly form a real god.


                            - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PART 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                            The concept of God being plural is found all over the scriptures. Consider Jesus Christ and his relationship with God the Father. Jesus is FULLY Deity. Jesus is God. Yet, we find in many places in scripture, that Jesus has a God. Jesus says, "I have not ascended to my Father and my God." The imagery in Hebrews chapter 1 shows where Jesus stands "at the right hand of the Father". This is a position which represents the second person in authority. This contradicts the idea of the members of the "Trinity" being "coequal". We read that Jesus is not the same substance as the Father, but instead is a COPY of the Father. There is a difference. In Hebrews 1:3 we read, "[Jesus] is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of [the Father's] person",

                            Later in the chapter, again we see that the Deity of Jesus, himself has a God. So, we have a God of a God.

                            Of the Son, the Father says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”
                            There is the God of Jesus, who chooses and anoints Jesus (who is also God/Deity). But the God of Jesus is the Father. We also see that Jesus says that "the Father is greater than I." This is a contradictory statement, IF the Father and the Son ARE THE SAME BEING, but they are not. As seen in John chapter 17, the "oneness" of God the Father, and God the Son, was NEVER meant to be taken as literal as the most Trinitarians have taken it, as if it were some kind of "metaphysical oneness of substance". In fact, if that metaphysical oneness were reality, then it makes no sense for Jesus to say, "my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

                            - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PART 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                            Back to the first book of the Bible, Genesis.

                            [Gen 3:5] For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

                            In his attempt to convince Eve, the serpent said a lie "ye shall not surely die", but to make it more convincing, he said a truth, which is seen above. We know this is true, because God confirms it. God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. (Gen 3:22)

                            Also, please not the PLURAL being used to refer to God, as he is talking with the other "gods". We see this elsewhere, where we are provided with an image of God standing among a "heavenly assembly", considering that God is the "God of gods and Lord of lords", and He is above the other gods in the assembly, which renders him the title of "the Most High God." (ie higher than the other gods, who are the hosts of heaven).

                            Another kind of example, and as I said earlier on this thread, is where God Himself creates humans, and He gives them the title of "gods". He does this by giving these men authority to act and judge on behalf of God or in the name of God. Jesus himself speaks of this:

                            John 10:30-34 "I and the Father are one.” (see in John 17 on how this "oneness" is not meant to be taken literally.) The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken—

                            Please note that many make the error of thinking that Jesus is referring to Psalm 82:6, which reads, ""God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. ... [God] said, “You are gods, and all of you are children the Most High." However, this is incorrect. Jesus is specifically referring to "the Law" which is refers to the first few books of what we call the Old Testament. We already saw in Genesis, the idea of man becoming "as one of us [the Gods]". But Jesus appears to texts, like Exodus, which call people with authority by the title "elohim", which means "gods". For example, Exodus 22:8-9 where "the master of the house shall be brought unto the gods (elohim), to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour's goods."
                            We also see "And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh." (Exodus 7)

                            So, in Biblical language, God calls "gods" people who are given authority to act in the name of God. These "gods" really do exist. And if mere imperfect mortals can be given the title "gods", then why do you argue against the idea that those who are perfected in Christ can be called "gods"?

                            Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                            I just offered that for some opinions, but I was wondering how you might resolve these two conflicting ideas from LDS, where following Satan leads to godliness in one statement, but in the next it leads to ungodliness:

                            After Adam and Eve partook of the fruit of “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” God said they had “become as one of us,” suggesting that a process of approaching godliness was already underway.
                            The verse being referred to here is Genesis 3:22 - Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil;

                            While Adam and Eve became as gods in the sense that they now knew of good and evil, they were still far from godliness in many other ways. However, this was a necessary step.

                            As long as Adam and Eve were innocent/ignorant concerning good and evil, Satan had no way to gain power over them. They would have remained in the garden with God forever in an unchanging state. The Fall gave Lucifer an opportunity tempt Adam and Eve to sin, but it also gave them an opportunity to follow God and be righteous by making free will choices to do good rather than evil. The Fall HAD to happen in order for there to be any kind of progression. These videos I created discuss the Fall in a very candid way and with much more detail.

                            13 Ex Materia - Entering Mortality
                            13b Entering Mortality - Supplement: the Fall
                            13c Entering Mortality - Beyond Genesis


                            Satan, also called the adversary or the devil, is the enemy of all righteousness and of those who seek to follow God.

                            Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                            Also here, when LDS states that the Father is eternal, what does that mean if the Father was once a man produced by another God?
                            God the Eternal Father

                            As a start to answer this question, let me ask you a question. Do you believe that you have "Eternal Life" through Jesus Christ?


                            -7up

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                              This question has an answer in 3 parts. What you have done here is taken a short phrase and you have taken it entirely out of context. In order to come to the truth, you have to look at the entire Bible. I will walk you through it in 3 parts, so bear with me.

                              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PART 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                              The context of that statement is very important, both textual and the historical context. For starters, the phrases of "none beside me" and "there is no other" are examples of Hebrew figurative speech speaking of superiority. For example, Isaiah 47:8-10 depicts the city of Babylon as saying:

                              ["Therefore hear now this, thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me; I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children: For thou hast trusted in thy wickedness: thou hast said, None seeth me. Thy wisdom and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee; and thou hast said in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me."

                              The figure of speech is not meant to be understood, as in this example, that there literally no other cities than Babylon. Obviously there are, because they are being compared to the others. It is meant to be understood that they are saying that they are superior to the other cities.

                              Now back to the context of the verse that you were referring to. Jehovah (who is Jesus Christ) who is the ONLY ONE to whom mankind can look for the forgiveness of their sins. Hence, the phrases "besides me there is no other god" and "besides me there is no Savior" are found in the text.

                              Finally, the text is contrasting the true God, to the false gods/idols of other nations. These false gods/idols were made ("formed") by man out of gold/wood/stone etc. Therefore, Jehovah is telling the people that those gods are not true gods. They are representations of gods that don't even really exist. Making an idol or a statue does not truly form a real god.
                              (All links here are going to be from LDS or BYU sources)

                              I accept that the Word/Son of God speaks for the Father, thus being Jehovah as speaking to Israel:

                              Where I have a problem is the notion that God the Father has a God the Father, which even seems to contradict this:

                              I don't see that "have no other gods before me" refers only to idols or statues since it goes on to address that specifically in Exodus 20, but rather to any concept of a God higher than God the Father. And really, even if someone wanted to say the Bible implies lesser gods existed as you go on to talk about, nothing in the Bible indicates that God the Father has a God the Father.

                              Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PART 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                              The concept of God being plural is found all over the scriptures. Consider Jesus Christ and his relationship with God the Father. Jesus is FULLY Deity. Jesus is God. Yet, we find in many places in scripture, that Jesus has a God. Jesus says, "I have not ascended to my Father and my God." The imagery in Hebrews chapter 1 shows where Jesus stands "at the right hand of the Father". This is a position which represents the second person in authority. This contradicts the idea of the members of the "Trinity" being "coequal". We read that Jesus is not the same substance as the Father, but instead is a COPY of the Father. There is a difference. In Hebrews 1:3 we read, "[Jesus] is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of [the Father's] person",

                              Later in the chapter, again we see that the Deity of Jesus, himself has a God. So, we have a God of a God.

                              Of the Son, the Father says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”
                              There is the God of Jesus, who chooses and anoints Jesus (who is also God/Deity). But the God of Jesus is the Father. We also see that Jesus says that "the Father is greater than I." This is a contradictory statement, IF the Father and the Son ARE THE SAME BEING, but they are not. As seen in John chapter 17, the "oneness" of God the Father, and God the Son, was NEVER meant to be taken as literal as the most Trinitarians have taken it, as if it were some kind of "metaphysical oneness of substance". In fact, if that metaphysical oneness were reality, then it makes no sense for Jesus to say, "my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"
                              Jesus was also human and as such, all humans have God as God. It doesn't really support that God has a God.

                              Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PART 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                              Back to the first book of the Bible, Genesis.

                              [Gen 3:5] For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

                              In his attempt to convince Eve, the serpent said a lie "ye shall not surely die", but to make it more convincing, he said a truth, which is seen above. We know this is true, because God confirms it. God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. (Gen 3:22)
                              Having one aspect to be like God does not a God make. If I gave you a gun and said you'll be as a policeman, you might be like a cop in that one sense of having a gun, but if you go waiving it around without proper authority and a badge, you're gonna get in trouble. So none of that supports the idea that men are going to be real Gods someday.

                              Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                              Also, please not the PLURAL being used to refer to God, as he is talking with the other "gods". We see this elsewhere, where we are provided with an image of God standing among a "heavenly assembly", considering that God is the "God of gods and Lord of lords", and He is above the other gods in the assembly, which renders him the title of "the Most High God." (ie higher than the other gods, who are the hosts of heaven).

                              Another kind of example, and as I said earlier on this thread, is where God Himself creates humans, and He gives them the title of "gods". He does this by giving these men authority to act and judge on behalf of God or in the name of God. Jesus himself speaks of this:

                              John 10:30-34 "I and the Father are one.” (see in John 17 on how this "oneness" is not meant to be taken literally.) The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken—

                              Please note that many make the error of thinking that Jesus is referring to Psalm 82:6, which reads, ""God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. ... [God] said, “You are gods, and all of you are children the Most High." However, this is incorrect. Jesus is specifically referring to "the Law" which is refers to the first few books of what we call the Old Testament. We already saw in Genesis, the idea of man becoming "as one of us [the Gods]". But Jesus appears to texts, like Exodus, which call people with authority by the title "elohim", which means "gods". For example, Exodus 22:8-9 where "the master of the house shall be brought unto the gods (elohim), to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour's goods."
                              We also see "And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh." (Exodus 7)

                              So, in Biblical language, God calls "gods" people who are given authority to act in the name of God. These "gods" really do exist. And if mere imperfect mortals can be given the title "gods", then why do you argue against the idea that those who are perfected in Christ can be called "gods"?
                              I go with the position that elohim in Genesis are angels since we see that God uses them on His behalf to interact with creation, from the angels in Sodom to Gabriel announcing Jesus to Mary. Where men are concerned, same idea. God can be seen as the one God, or as a force, which may include men and angels too. For example:
                              The London police force was created in 1829 by an act introduced in Parliament by the home secretary, Sir Robert Peel (hence the nicknames “bobbies” and “peelers” for policemen). -Encyclopedia Britannica

                              So we have Sir Bob here, along with his force of bobs. The cops aren't knights or prime ministers like he was, nevertheless they act with his powers of authority and are thus identified by his name. Same deal with God and gods: being gods doesn't saying anything about being Gods.

                              You kind of address that point in another post, though we may disagree that angels and men aren't Gods, and I've not run across any LDS sources yet that say "God" is intended to be plural:

                              Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                              Well, they aren't really "other gods". In the mind of LDS (and in reality), "God" is a plural noun. Heavenly Mother is included in the concept of "God". Yet we understand that there are "gods" who are "one" with God.
                              Who do you consider the Heavenly Mother to be, Brigham Young used to teach that Adam and Eve were Heavenly Father/Mother.

                              Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                              God the Eternal Father

                              As a start to answer this question, let me ask you a question. Do you believe that you have "Eternal Life" through Jesus Christ?

                              -7up
                              I skipped the additional section about Adam and Eve since I pretty much replied already but at some point I'll watch the videos, thanks.

                              I believe humans receiving salvation have eternal life forward, but to say God the Father is eternal usually means He has always existed as God the Father, not was once a man exalted to be God the Father at some point:

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                (All links here are going to be from LDS or BYU sources)

                                I accept that the Word/Son of God speaks for the Father, thus being Jehovah as speaking to Israel:
                                Yes. Jehovah was also known as "the Angel of the Lord's presence". Jesus Christ is an "Angel", but is an utterly unique angel, because He is perfect (Deity) as compared to the other angels who are not. (See Hebrews chapter 1).

                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                Where I have a problem is the notion that God the Father has a God the Father, which even seems to contradict this:
                                Jesus Christ is God. Yet Jesus Christ, who is fully Deity, has a Father who is the God of Jesus. God has a God. This is what the text reveals, and I accept it. Now, Paul addresses some of your concerns in 1 Corinthians, "For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, indeed there are many gods and many lords, 6yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him."

                                Different kinds of "gods" are being referred to here.

                                1) "So called gods"
                                Perhaps referring to those which are not real and do not really exist, except as idols or statues or in the mind of men), but he does say "whether in heaven or on Earth" , I don't think that there are false idols in Heaven, so Paul may be referring to actual gods (ie hosts of heaven) who actually reside in Heaven. ...

                                2) [COLOR="#800000"]"indeed there are many gods
                                Paul says that other gods indeed do exist) and many lords"

                                3)"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; AND one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him."

                                The Hebrew idiom I referred to earlier, "no Gods before me" literally reads in Hebrew "no gods before my face". Again, this places the priority and supremacy of God the Father, as Paul says "for us" (even though there are indeed many gods and many lords). AND one Lord, Jesus Christ. The AND denotes that the Father and the Son are not the same Being.

                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                I don't see that "have no other gods before me" refers only to idols or statues since it goes on to address that specifically in Exodus 20, but rather to any concept of a God higher than God the Father.
                                Wait a second, you are saying that having no other gods besides me MUST BE some kind of blanket statement BECAUSE the immediate concept refers to something specific. Quite frankly, that is a terrible way to interpret any text. Especially when other verses in the Bible directly contradict such a blanket statement.

                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                And really, even if someone wanted to say the Bible implies lesser gods existed as you go on to talk about, nothing in the Bible indicates that God the Father has a God the Father.
                                To be honest with you, there is nothing in LDS scripture that discusses this concept either. The idea is somewhat speculative, because the canonical texts deal with this Universe, with our Father , and with our Christ/Savior. These other concepts are rather esoteric and have not much to do with our worship, our salvation, etc. LDS tend to be open to the idea, but we cannot say much about it, because we don't know much about it.


                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                Jesus was also human and as such, all humans have God as God. It doesn't really support that God has a God.
                                Jesus had a God before he entered to mortality. He submitted to the Father's will before entering mortality. Jesus was "sent" by the Father to do the Father's will. According to the Biblical text, this is more than just a temporary mortal set up. The very concept of being "at the right hand" of the King means that he is second in command. Again, they are not the same Being.

                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                Having one aspect to be like God does not a God make. ....
                                I totally agree. This was just one step. Having dominion is another step: let them have dominion: Gen. 1:26 / madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands: Ps. 8:6 . Becoming Holy and Perfected is another step: be holy: for I am holy: Lev. 19:2 . ( 1 Pet. 1:16 ) / Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father: Matt. 5:48 Becoming an heir in the kingdom of God is another step: heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ: Rom. 8:17 .

                                Jesus is the image of God the Father, and we are to be made into the same image, "changed into the same image from glory to glory" 2 Cor. 3:18 Having received authority in the kingdom of God is another step: "him that overcometh will … sit with me in my throne even as I sit in my Father's throne" Rev. 3:21 . Becoming like Jesus is another step: "when he shall appear, we shall be like him" 1 Jn. 3:2 . And according to Joseph Smith, there are steps that continue into eternity:

                                "When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; and so it is with the principles of the gospel--you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil before you will have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave." (HC 6:306-307)

                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                I go with the position that elohim in Genesis are angels since we see that God uses them on His behalf to interact with creation, ...
                                I don't disagree with that, because in LDS theology, angels and men are the same kind of being.

                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                You kind of address that point in another post, though we may disagree that angels and men aren't Gods, and I've not run across any LDS sources yet that say "God" is intended to be plural:
                                Joseph Smith goes into it quite a bit:

                                "I will preach on the plurality of Gods. ...when I have preached on the subject of the Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods. It has been preached by the Elders for fifteen years. I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods.... "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father." The Apostles have discovered that there were Gods above, for Paul says God was the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. My object was to preach the scriptures, and preach the doctrine they contain, there being a God above, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. ... John was one of the men, and apostles declare they were made kings and priests unto God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. It reads just so in the Revelation. Hence, the doctrine of a plurality of Gods is as prominent in the Bible as any other doctrine. ... Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many. I want to set it forth in a plain and simple manner; but to us there is but one God—that is pertaining to us; and he is in all and through all. But if Joseph Smith says there are Gods many and Lords many, they cry, "Away with him! Crucify him! crucify him!"
                                Mankind verily say that the scriptures are with them. Search the scriptures, for they testify of things that these apostates would gravely pronounce blasphemy. Paul, if Joseph Smith is a blasphemer. you are. I say there are Gods many and Lords many, but to us only one, and we are to be in subjection to that one, and no man can limit the bounds or the eternal existence of eternal time. Hath he beheld the eternal world, and is he authorized to say that there is only one God? ... Some say I do not interpret the scripture the same as they do. They say it means the heathen's gods. Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many; and that makes a plurality of Gods.... I have a witness of the Holy Ghost, and a testimony that Paul had no allusion to the heathen gods in the text. I will show from the Hebrew Bible that I am correct, and the first word shows a plurality of Gods;... Eloheim is from the word Eloi, God, in the singular number; and by adding the word heim, it renders it Gods. ... "If the Hebrew language compels us to render all words ending in heim in the plural, why not render the first Eloheim plural?" ... In the very beginning the Bible shows there is a plurality of Gods beyond the power of refutation. It is a great subject I am dwelling on. The word Eloheim ought to be in the plural all the way through—Gods. ..
                                Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God! ... "Father, I pray not for the world, but I pray for them which thou hast given me." "Holy Father, keep through Thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we are." All are to be crammed into one God, according to sectarianism.... I want to read the text to you myself—"I am agreed with the Father and the Father is agreed with me, and we are agreed as one." ... (HoC, Vol. 6, p. 473)


                                Let's look at the early Church Father, Origen's explanation for comparison on the “oneness” of the Father and the Son:
                                225 AD Origen "In what follows, some may imagine that he says something plausible against us. "If," says he, "these people worshipped one God alone, and no other, they would perhaps have some valid argument against the worship of others. But they pay excessive reverence to one who has but lately appeared among men, and they think it no offence against God if they worship also His servant." To this we reply, that if Celsus had known that saying," I and My Father are one," and the words used in prayer by the Son of God, "As Thou and I are one, he would not have supposed that we worship any other besides Him who is the Supreme God. "For," says He, "My Father is in Me, and I in Him."

                                In contrast to the mythological gods and godesses each having their own agendas, Origen explains that the Father and Son are “one”, just like is said in what we now know as the New Testament. So, in what sense are they “one”? Origen himself recognized the context and meaning of they being “one”. He goes on to explain it:

                                "For," says He, "My Father is in Me, and I in Him." And if any should from these words be afraid of our going over to the side of those who deny that the Father and the Son are two persons, let him weigh that passage, "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul," that he may understand the meaning of the saying, "I and My Father are one."

                                What example did Origen give for the kind of oneness that the Father and Son have? He quotes, “the multitued of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul”. This was before the Nicean Creed.

                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                Who do you consider the Heavenly Mother to be, Brigham Young used to teach that Adam and Eve were Heavenly Father/Mother.
                                The LDS scriptures are quite clear that before mortality, Adam was known as Michael the archangel. This is clearly a distinct person from God the Father. Many believe that Brigham was saying that Adam was to be delegated as and priest/king over this world. I take the clearly written LDS scripture over the confused interpretations of what Brigham Young may or may not have meant in some of his explanations.

                                Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                                I believe humans receiving salvation have eternal life forward,...
                                Let's stop here a second. How can your life be "Eternal" if you are a being who was supposedly created Ex Nihilo (i.e. "out of nothing") just a short time ago?

                                -7up
                                Last edited by seven7up; 10-30-2014, 04:48 AM. Reason: to shorten JS quote

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X