If one believes in multiple gods but only worships one of them, I believe they must be polytheistic.

The term to describe the situation is ‘pantheon’, and just as the Norse believed in the literal existence of Thor, Loki, and the rest of the Norse pantheon, it was generally only one of those gods that was worshiped. Based mostly on one’s intents or personal choice.

The same system of a pantheon of gods worshiped by a polytheistic people would be the Hindu. Although they are distinguished from the LDS in that they can change which one they would like to worship at any time – similar to the Norse.

The mere fact that one may not worship multiple gods does not preclude one from being a polytheist; simply believing in multiple gods is action enough.

Mormon Doctrine 1975 – Mother in Heaven – Joesph F Smith – “all men and women … are literally the sons and daughters of Deity.” Formal pronouncement of the Church – “Mortal persons … will live eternally in the family unit and have spirit children.”

See D&C 132:19-32.

Before the age of test tube babies & clones (1970’s) it was widely suggested that spirit children were created in a manner similar to the natural way. This has also been dropped from current teachings. Being pg with billions of children was offense to some women.

Are you referring to the saying “As man is God once was, as God is, man may become”? This saying was taught quite often during the 1970’s. There was speculation that God the father was a prophet or perhaps a Jesus on another world to a different God and he was so worthy that he progressed to becoming a God himself and our God. It was widely taught that a man could become a God and have planets where men would worshipped him as their God. This philosophy has not been preached for several years.

For example, if someone believed in multiple gods but that only one God was to be worshipped (God the Father), would that mean they are not polytheistic.

Remember the definition you gave was “the worship of or belief in more than one god.”

Does the use of “or” in the definition allow me to choose which criteria I want for defining polytheistic?

What do you think?

born of a union of God with his “wife”

I agree with Kim in that I’ve never heard it taught either. I did ask about it one time, and was told that we (the church) don’t know the method used when God created our spirits.

the Son was his earthly human representation

This is something I have never quite understood. If Jesus was God’s manifestation in human form, then did God not exist in heaven during the 30 years of Jesus’s life. In addition, does this mean Jesus was really praying to himself when he prayed?

I never did quite understand something more troubling: that mormons believe Jesus and the Devil are brothers…

Mormons believe that all who lived pre-mortally were spiritual siblings.

…born of a union of God with his “wife”, that our current God is actually a person that died in the past and was good enough to be given his own planet

If this is indeed believed by the majority of Mormons, it certainly isn’t taught publicly. I have never once heard taught by any Mormon in the 26 years I’ve been in the Church, for example, that God had sex with anyone in heaven.

Sure we teach that God created spirits to inhabit mortal bodies, and those spirits live(d) in heaven prior to coming to earth. We do not know, however, what method(s) he used to create those spirits.

John 10:34-35 is merely talking about how the leaders at the time had a double standard, saying he was blaspheming claiming to be the Son of God whereas they didn’t care that the patriarchs who wrote the old testament were claiming to be given the words of God, yet they follow that as gospel.

LASTLY – The Trinity (Father Son Holy Spirit) can be viewed as one in the sense that the Father created all, the Son was his earthly human representation that died for our sins and the Holy Spirit is the current manifestation and witness of God’s presense with us. I never did quite understand something more troubling: that mormons believe Jesus and the Devil are brothers, born of a union of God with his “wife”, that our current God is actually a person that died in the past and was good enough to be given his own planet….and so on and so on

As for your Isaiah 14:12-15, your point is well taken. It looks as though Lucifer is condemned for trying to be “like the most High”.

I should clarify what I meant by that.

It could be argued that the problem is either that God doesn’t want Lucifer to be like him (ie. aspiring to godhood is wicked) or that God just didn’t approve of his method. The latter is the argument LDS traditions would dictate. Either is valid, in my opinion.

The scriptures can not be taken out of context or all kinds of misconceptions will occur.

I concur.

Not very God like behavior if He was actually referring to these people as “Gods in embryo”.

Perhaps not, but maybe that was the point. “Don’t stone me because I say I’m a god, we’re all gods, remember?”

The context of Psalm 82:2 shows us that these gods were judging unjustly and accepting “the persons of the wicked.” These men were evil and certainly not candidates for Godhood according to L.D.S. theology!

LDS theology teaches that we are all candidates for Godhood. Your point is taken, but I don’t think it holds up given the fact that according to the LDS view that even though they are gods they are in the process of being chastised for their wickedness. The very next verse says “ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.”

Now having said that, I’ll admit I don’t really understand the context of Psalms 82. The language is a little too metaphorical for me and I don’t get all the symbolism.

Anyway, thank-you for clarifying this. I think I now understand how other christians (non-mormon Christians) interpret those particular scriptures.

As for the Mormon take on the doctrine of “eternal progression”, it comes primarily from the King Follet discourse given by Joseph Smith. Theoretically, this speech “clarifies” any doctrines taught in any other scripture. (That was of course until Hinckley said he doesn’t know that this doctrine is openly taught or emphasized). What can you do?

As for your Isaiah 14:12-15, your point is well taken. It looks as though Lucifer is condemned for trying to be “like the most High”.