Theology With Blake Ostler
Blake has authored a number of papers and articles and currently has completed two volumes of his multi-volume set, Exploring Mormon Thought.
Joseph Smith's basic teaching that Mormons are open to receiving all truth; that Mormonism is progressive, looking for development of its beliefs in a variety of ways including thought, pondering and continued revelation, opens the path for the consideration of various aspects and angles beyond the parameters of basic Mormon doctrine.
Joseph Smith opposed the idea of a creed because it sets up stakes beyond which a person is not to think. Instead he encouraged LDS to seek deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Godliness.
We discussed our differences in our interpretations of Joseph Smith's views as found in D&C 121:28-32 and two discourses: 7 April 1844 and 16 June 1844. Blake concludes that Joseph Smith believed that there is one Eternal God of all other gods. I conclude that, by 1844, Joseph Smith believed that there is an infinite patriarchy of Gods - that there is no God who does not have a Father and God.
Topics Raised by Callers and Email
Is not the Articles of Faith a creed, if not why?
What is the status of progressive Mormonism and Mormon neo-orthodoxy?
What about W.W. Phelps hymn "If you could hie to Kolob"?
What is a creed?
By Joseph Smith's declaration that Jesus followed in the footsteps of his Father, does he mean that the Father was the Savior of the world upon which he went through mortality? Blake is trying to harmonize JS's Nauvoo teachings on plurality of gods with his 1835 Book of Abraham council of gods. According to JS's logic if there was a first God, there would have to be a last. What about the Adam God doctrine of Brigham Young?
God does not have a navel.
The Adam God theory is basic gospel truth and those who reject it will be damned.
Does God the Father have a Father?
Who was God the Father's Father when he went through mortality?
Allegation that Joseph Smith believed the Adam God theory.
Talk Show host: Van Hale, LDS Official website: http://www.mormonmiscellaneous.com/ Podcast address: http://www.mormonmisc.podbean.com/ Talk Show Blog: mormonmiscellaneous.com/radioprogramblog This is the 26 August 2007 episode of the Mormon Miscellaneous Worldwide Talk Show, now in its 28th year.
To listen to future Talk Shows live, go to http://www.k-talk.com/ Sunday evenings 5:00 - 7:00 pm MST.
If you have a question or comment, your participation is invited, regardless of your point of view.
Your voice will be heard around the world.
Click to visit my eStore Catalog of Digital Articles related to some of my Podcast Episodes
To make a comment, click on “Comment” below.
Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.
I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that “Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly–hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also” (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler’s take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh’s position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock’s account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times & Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph’s sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.
Pleae put me on your mailing list.