Born to be a loser!

Type your paragraph here.

Type your paragraph here.

         “GOD THE ETERNAL FATHER”

Put yourself into the Prophet Joseph Smith’s own shoes.   No one will dispute that the Prophet Joseph received the Books of Moses and Abraham from God. When Joseph completed the Pearl of Great Price, did Joseph know whether Moses was speaking to God the Eternal Father or did Joseph think Moses was speaking to Jesus?  Joseph knew to whom Moses was speaking.   Moses was speaking to God the Eternal Father, to Elohim, to the Lord God, to the Lord God Almighty.  Moses was not talking to the Savior; he was talking to our Father in Heaven. Pretend for a moment that you had never heard of the man-made theory called “Divine Investiture of Authority” and without that knowledge, you then sat down fresh and read the first chapter of Moses.  What would you conclude?  Because the Prophet Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Moses in plain English, in a manner that could not be easily misinterpreted, you would immediately state that Moses was speaking to God the Father, not Jesus Christ.  If the interpretation of the Prophet Joseph was too hard, or if it was too ambiguous, I am certain that Joseph would have immediately set it straight.  Joseph did a good job and it did not get screwed up until man got hold of it and tried to force the conceptual theory of “Divine Investiture of Authority” on the Book of Moses.   Joseph would have corrected any saint who thought that Moses was speaking to Jesus Christ.  None of this misinterpretation was encountered during Joseph’s life.  In fact, there was no problem with the Book of Moses being misinterpreted, until about 1916; so, why then?  There are two doctrines established in the modern day by the LDS Church.  The two are stated below. Related Doctrine:1.   God the Father does not deal directly with man on earth, all things, 100%, must go through the Savior to the Father. 2.   Jesus was the Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament and Moses dealt exclusively with Jehovah, not with God the Father. Because the Book of Moses does not support either of the above two doctrines, it was up to men to invent the explanation of “Divine Investiture of Authority.” “Divine Investiture of Authority” is a vain attempt, by men, to create scriptural support for the two above related doctrines.  Instead, it should be taught that God the Father does deal directly with man on earth, and although Jesus is or may be the Jehovah of the Old Testament, God the Father also spoke directly with Moses, and with many other Old Testament prophets. There is nothing “Divine” about the man-made theory of Divine Investiture of Authority.  It was not received by revelation.  It is not scripture.  It was developed by man to help harmonize the above two doctrines. Divine Investiture of Authority was first printed in 1916, championed by Joseph Fielding Smith, as a Doctrinal Exposition, not a revelation, nor as scripture.   The definition of this man-made theory is the process by which the Father allows the Son or the Holy Ghost to speak in his name, as if the Son or the Holy Ghost were actually, the Father.  Divine Investiture of Authority originally was not referring to the Book of Moses. Messages, Vol., 5, p. 24“So far as the writer of these notes has discovered, no official explanatory notes as to the occasion or circumstances surrounding the issuance of the Exposition have been recorded or published.   B. H. Roberts does not mention its issuance in the Comprehensive History of the Church.   Joseph Fielding Smith, Jr. does not mention its issuance in his biography of his father, President Joseph F. Smith.   The official clerk and recorder for the General Conferences of the Church and secretary to later First Presidencies indicated that he knew of no statement in the minutes of the presiding councils of the Church for 1916 that specifically mentions or elaborates on the issuance of this Exposition.”Divine Investiture of Authority states that Jesus can speak on behalf of God the Father, as if Jesus was God the Father.  This sounds like some explanation right out of the “Dark Ages.”  It is difficult to determine why this explanation ever got a toe-hold in the LDS Church, but it did.  There may be some application for Divine Investiture of Authority that is appropriate, but I have not found one yet.   Remember, Divine Investiture of Authority is just a man-made theory, a theory of man; it is not scripture nor is it revelation.  It certainly is not to be applied to the Book of Moses or to the Book of Abraham. I did a study of all the references, at the bottom of each page in the Book of Moses.  Because of the theory of Divine Investiture of Authority became entrenched in the Church, most of the references to God the Father, in the Book of Moses, mistakenly refer the reader to scriptures about Jesus Christ, instead of God the Father.  Can you believe that?  There were a few correct references, but most of the references were not correct. However, turn over to Chapter 4 of the Book of Moses.  Most Latter-day Saints with a Temple recommend will immediately identify the content of Chapter 4.  There are 32 verses in Chapter 4, and 14 of those verses all have the phase “I, the Lord God,” however, there is not a single scriptural reference at the bottom of each page in Chapter 4 that references the phrase “I, the Lord God;” and not like what is in Chapter 3 or 4.  Can you explain that?  The common references that normally would appear below the scriptures and that should be there in Chapter 4, are conspicuously absent.  Why? We all know that in Chapter 4, without any doubt, that it is God the Father who is speaking to Moses, not Jesus Christ.  Chapter 4 of the Book of Moses does not have any references related to “I, the Lord God,” because, if you conclude that Moses is speaking to God the Father in Chapter 4, you would also have to conclude that Moses was speaking to God the Father throughout the entire Book of Moses and of the book of Abraham.  And you would then have to discard the man-made theory of Divine Investiture of Authority.   If you conclude that Moses was talking to God the Father, then you have the same interpretation for the phase, “I, the Lord God,” as being God the Father, the exact same interpretation as the Prophet Joseph Smith. The man-made theory of Divine Investiture of Authority is a theory without any valid application. It is God the Father addressing Moses throughout all the Book of Moses?   Moses saw God the Father and Moses conversed directly with Him as one man speaks to another.  The Book of Moses is one of the greatest scriptures ever presented to man.  How exciting it is to have this special record of God the Father speaking directly to Moses. Moses 1:3“3.   And God spake unto Moses, saying; Behold, I am the Lord God Almighty, and Endless is my name; for I am without beginning of days or end of years; and is not this endless.”Abraham 3:27“And the Lord (Father in Heaven) said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I.  And another answered and said, Here am I, send me.  And the Lord said: I will send the first.”There are some members of the Church who prefer to believe in the man-made theory of Divine Investiture of Authority, I do not!  So, which is true?  I came to my conclusion from receiving divine revelation from God and I suggest that you put the question to the test, and ask God the Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost will confirm what is true and what is not true. h here.