Was anyone else ever told that because God is just noted as Flesh and Bone, his divine body doesnt actually have any blood?

I was told this once at church. That resurrected beings don't have any blood in their bodies. Just some fleshy meat and bones...

Which raises all sorts of biological questions about their bodies... you know, since blood is a little more than a good idea if you want to sustain life...

Guess I'll find out when I die, huh?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2014 11:43PM by nonsequiter.

I heard this a LOT.
I was told that the reason there was no blood was because it prevented God from having any disease. No blood, no illness that could kill you.

Oh yeah! That part was thrown in there too. That even Adam and Eve did not have blood themselves until Eve went and opened up Pandora's box...errr, ate the apple I mean.

And with blood came death into the world.

Which is stupid, since blood is sustaining to life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2014 11:52PM by nonsequiter.

This is what you get when you have goat herders and conmen making up your religion for you.

tig Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is what you get when you have goat herders
> and conmen making up your religion for you.


Well you bought it didn't you?

Hahahahaha

Wait, I bought it too.

Can I get my money back?

Unfortunately I did...for all to many years.

Flesh and bone only? Sounds like a vampire. Maybe mormon twilight author copied it when dreaming up edward cullen.

Yeah, its hard to imagine how god has so many spirit children. Having intercourse with all his wives requires blood to power his boner. Elohim had sex with mary, so maybe he took celestial viagra. Man, cant wait for heaven.

No, No. God does not need blood. Resurrected bodies have permanent erections - see facsimile #2 in the BOA.

I think that is the "bone"

Maybe God sparkles too! That would be cool.

I'm glad you brought this up!

Here are the major doctrinal points I was taught concerning the nature of God:

1) Heavenly Father (Elohim) and Jesus Christ (Jehovah) are separate beings.

2) Heavenly Father has a body of flesh and bone (it's just gloried and superpower'd)

3) Heavenly Father was once mortal like we are, and we can become as god is. ("As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become...")

4) When we become like God, we will be able to have spiritual offspring, create worlds, etc, etc -- That we would literally be to other mortals what Elohim is to us.


Okay, when I was TBM, that made perfect sense to me... I even imagined that this dovetailed nicely with what we know from science about universal expansion.


BUT... Now the church seems to be backtracking (de-emphasizing) some of these points... specifically the idea that "God was once a man" (..."I don't know that we teach that." - Hinckley).


CAUTION... throw "God was once a man" out and things fall apart pretty quickly.

IF God WASN'T ever mortal, where'd he get his body?
IF God WASN'T ever mortal, then on grounds can we claim that WE will become like him?


...Ugh, so glad I don't have to rationalize this anymore.

Old timers will doubtless remember when TSSC was proud of
its differences with Christianity. Everyone else had it wrong,
you see.

But yes today TSSC is backtracking and de-emphasizing them.
These are points that even a casual observer will notice
are well outside anything ever recognized as Christian.
When TSSC pretending it's just another Christian denomination,
these kind of points are a bit of a problem :)

You're right, I used to be proud of it. I was really into science fiction too.

I really don't think the Mormon doctrine of God is all that strange compared to everything else about the church. Hinckley should have said, "I don't know that we perform ceremonies in our temples. I haven't heard much about that lately."

upThink Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BUT... Now the church seems to be backtracking
> (de-emphasizing) some of these points...
> specifically the idea that "God was once a man"
> (..."I don't know that we teach that." -
> Hinckley).


What Hinckley spouted was a bald-faced lie, however. How about this excerpt from the Church-published "Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Lorenzo Snow"?

"Through a continual course of progression our Heavenly Father
has received exaltation and glory and he points us out the same
path and, inasmuch as he is clothed with power, authority and
glory, he says, 'walk ye up and come in possession of the same
glory and happiness that I possess.'"

Or, you could try Joseph Smith himself:

"God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man,
and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret."

Again, from a teaching manual published by the Church and taught in Sunday School classes across the world.

Not sure how I ever thought it made sense to me back then....I was always taught they had light flowing through their veins instead of blood.

I'm pretty sure there is a BY quote that goes along these lines. I'll try to dig it up. Either that or it may just be a morphed interpretation of some of Joseph Fielding Smiths teachings.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 01:01AM by natefish.

I heard that perfected beings had a clear fluid instead of blood.

Flesh and boner? WTF!

The boner is implied, of course.

Or should I say applied?

I dont know, late night dumb jokes...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 02:29AM by nonsequiter.

Glad you got a chuckle!

I heard that for the first time recently. Just cracked me up that they were taking it literally.

Flesh and bone in the bible don't mean anything different than flesh and blood; it just means a physical person as opposed to a spirit. So I thought it was very funny that someone went and
made a doctrine out of it.

This is the silliest religion I've ever been involved with. It'd be funny if so many people weren't hurt by it.

NO blood no vessels, no kidneys to clean it up, no oxygen, hence no lungs. We're gping to be a skinny bunch up there! The absurdity is endles: No sweat, no pores; we're also going to be real shiny. No need for makeup for sure!

I heard he has "spirit" instead of blood. That's why his offspring are sprit children and not physical beings.

If he is perfect and immortal then he doesn't have to eat like
we lowly mortals down here. So, what's his viscera for? What
does his liver do if there's no blood for it to filter the bad
stuff out of? If he's perfect there's no bad stuff anyway.
What is his rectum and anus for? As far as that goes what is
his whole digestive tract for? If he is immortal then he is not
dependent on respiration to sustain life. Then what are his
lungs for? If he moves on "priesthood power" what are his
muscles and tendons for?

The whole idea of God having a body is another of those things
that sounds kinda nifty in the 1800s as long as you don't think
about it too much, but falls apart under closer scrutiny.

If you believe in the Bible, it says that God is a spirit and those that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (John 4:24)

It also says that God is not a man that he should lie. (Numbers 23:19)

Let me guess -- that's the part of the scriptures that we believe were translated wrong

(sorry, that's the pat answer every single time when LDS theology contradicts the Bible).

anymoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you believe in the Bible, it says that God is a
> spirit and those that worship him must worship him
> in spirit and in truth. (John 4:24)
>
> It also says that God is not a man that he should
> lie. (Numbers 23:19)

The bible says that whether one "believes" in it or not.
I don't (believe in it).
However, it also says "god" has eyes, fingers, a backside, a body (to wrestle with), a face, and many other physical things. In other words, it contradicts itself. Once you know the history of the stories in it, it's easy to understand why it contradicts itself: early concepts of Yahweh were that he was a minor thunder god in the Canaanite Pantheon, and was some sort of "man" but smarter and magical, living in the sky. Later on, the Hebrews (when they started to self-identify apart from the Canaanites) took him as their own tribal god, one of many gods but simply the one that was most interested in their little group. After they won a few battles in Yahweh's name, they declared Yahweh the most powerful of all the gods (but still just one of many). It wasn't until well after the Babylonian captivity that they started to say Yahweh was the ONLY god -- and even then he was still some kind of super-human. It took another 500-600 years for them to start calling Yahweh "spirit," and that largely originated with the breakaway Jewish sect of christians. Like all other claims about Yahweh or "god," there is of course no evidence to show any of it "true."

By the way, notice how the mormon teachings (which they're beginning to back away from) all incorporate ignorant, proven-false notions about "blood" being the "magic" substance of life? All of which science has dispensed with? Oops.

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> By the way, notice how the mormon teachings (which
> they're beginning to back away from) all
> incorporate ignorant, proven-false notions about
> "blood" being the "magic" substance of life? All
> of which science has dispensed with? Oops.

What do you mean? The Bible says in the blood is the life (paraphrase, idr exact words). And a person won't be alive without their blood ....

I didn't know mormons think that blood is magic, but what are you trying to say? Excuse my ignorance :D

I don't know that we teach any of that.

Not eat? We don't get to eat in the hereafter? NO!

Christ, after the resurrection, ate and drank according to the Bible. I was a member to TSCC for many years before I heard the absurdity of no blood in the Garden of Eden and no death.

In my vision of heaven, we get to enjoy eating and wearing colorful clothing and having fun. We can even tell jokes and enjoy loud laughter.

The LDS scriptures used to contain the "Lectures on Faith."
They were removed sometime around 1921. They contained the
following:

"2. There are two personages who constitute the great
matchless, governing and supreme power over all things--by whom
all things were created and made, that are created and made,
whether visible or invisible: whether in heaven, on earth, or
in the earth, under the earth, or throughout the immensity of
space--They are the Father and the Son: The Father being a
personage of spirit, glory and power: possessing all perfection
and fulness: The Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a
personage of tabernacle, made, or fashioned like unto man, or
being in the form and likeness of man, or, rather, man was
formed after his likeness, and in his image;-- he is also the
express image and likeness of the personage of the Father:
possessing all the fulness of the Father, or, the same fulness
with the Fathe[r]; being begotten of him, and was ordained from
before the foundation of the world to be a propitiation for the
sins of all those who should believe in his name, and is called
the Son because of the flesh--and descended in suffering below
that which man can suffer, or, in other words, suffered greater
sufferings, and was exposed to more powerful contradictions
than any man can be. "
--Lectures on Faith, D&C 1835 edition.

Now TBMs will say, It doesn't say God DOESN'T have a body. But
when you are DESCRIBING two things and you give different
descriptions to them both the only reason for that is to show
DIFFERENCES between them.

Note also that the Son "is called the Son because of the
flesh" This makes no sense if God the Father also is a being
of flesh and bone.

I have vague memories about being told this in SS, probably 55 years ago...didn't care then...still don't.

Ron Burr

Blood is produced by the bones. Spiritual fluid is a product of the boneheads.