Since 1844 the LDS Church has formally taught that God the Father was once a man who attained Godhood by obedience to laws and ordinances. In 1997, the 13 April edition of the San Francisco Chronicle, 18 June edition of television news magazine Newshour, and 4 August issue of TIME Magazine, President Gordon B. Hinckley was ambiguous about the fact that this is a long-standing doctrine of the LDS Church. President Hinckley has said, "I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it I don't know a lot about it, and I don't think others know a lot about it."
In your opinion, why has President Hinckley answered in this way? What are the implications of his dubious responses?
President Hinkley is as you put it ambigous about God being a man because one it definitely isn't doctrine that it is a man and secondly does it matter? I do however believe God is a man and it is implied in the scriptures. Plus isn't he our Heavenly FATHER? -J.G. (LDS)
I THINK THE LDS CHURCH IS TRYING SO HARD TO SEEM LIKE MAINSTREAM CHRISTIAN AND THEY HAVE SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON JUST SUCH ADVERTISING, I THINK IF HE WOULD HAVE ANSWERED HONESTLY, HE WOULD HAVE OPENED UP A PANDORAS BOX, KNOWING MOST PEOPLE ARE BIBLICALLY ILLITERATE (THATS WHY THEY GET CONVERTS) HE IS JUST FOLLOWING HIS CHURCH DOCTRINE OF THE LAST 150 YEARS, LIES AND DECEIT. I FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE THIS SURPRISED ANY ONE. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME COMMENT. -D.R. (non-LDS)
The reason is as crystal clear as the sky is blue or water is wet: GBH [Gordon B. Hinckley] craves that the LDS Church be accepted as Christian by other churches. And this despite the fact that LDS theology is clearly NON-christian. -O.R. (LDS)
There is this accusation that Hinckley is trying to avoid questions about the church. Think of this situation:
If someone were to ask you anything and it came off as an accusation would you want to answer such a close minded individual. They have already made up their mind and are just searching for ammo and not actually looking for an answer. These people cannot be taught. -AMS (LDS)
It seems very clear what Bringham Young meant when he stated in Journal of Discourses 1:50-51 (speaking of Adam) "He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days! about whom holy men have written and spoken- He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do." This seems very clear to me. In the 9th LDS Article of Faith: "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God." Also, page 55 of "Gospel Principles": "In addition to these 4 books of scripture, the inspired words of our living prophets become scripture to us. their words come to us through conferences, church publications, and instructions to local priesthood leaders." If these things are true, then the words of Bringham Young as a President and Living Prophet should be taken as scripture. I believe Mr. Hinkley does not know what his religeon teaches or he has something to hide. If he is not taking the "word of God" to heart, there is no reason for those who claim to be Mormans, or are considering becoming Mormon, to take them seriously either. If Mr. Hinkley is unclear concerning the "doctrines" of his own religion, how is it that he was placed in the leadership of the entire church? As a sidenote, books cited in the back of LDS book "Gospel Principles" (pgs. 383-384) include the Journal of Discourses and Discourses of Bringham Young. In LDS materials, Bringham Young is quoted as gospel, so I will assume it is alright for me to quote them as well. We own the books I have quoted to you from, in case there is any doubt about context. -SB (non-LDS)
i think it is a sad day for the mormon church when the current president does not know the teachings of the church. more so when many prophets and presidents taught a certain doctrine. i quote milton hunter from the council of the seventy, gospel through the ages pg 104: "mormon prophets have CONTINUOSLY taught the sublime truth that god the eternal father was once a mortal man." president j.f.smith, in the improvement era, vol 18 pg 81; the PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH, teachings, pg 345-346; apostle james talmage, Articles of Faith, pg 430; apostle orson pratt, the seer; presdint lorenzo snow, gospel through the ages, pg 104; apostle orson hyde, quorum of the twelve; all taught and believed god was once a man. D. and C.131:6 says it is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance of god, of christ, and of the gospel laws. so then is it safe to assume if mr. hinckley is ignorant of his prophets' teachings he will not be saved? what a thought. i believe mr. hinkley said what he did because other wise it would contradict mormon scripture. in the p.of g. price moses 1:3 god says for i am with out beginging of days or end of years. 1 nephi 11:21 says god is the eternal father. how can god be eterenal yet was once a man? this is a contridiction between mormon scripture and the standered works. mormon doctrine pg 690-691 says any teaching that contridicts the standerd works, no matter who said it, is false. for further talks you can reach me at [email protected] -RB (non-LDS)