-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
LDS Christians - Who is your Jesus?
- Thread starter Endless
- Start date
SoyLeche
meh...
I don't know that it is mentioned specifically, but it is alluded to. The reference I am thinking of is in Revelation, when it talks about the war in heaven and Satan being cast out with a third of the host of heaven. This occured after said council.joeboonda said:
The specific mentions of this are in the Pearl of Great Price - a part of the LDS cannon. The chapters are Moses 4 and Abraham 3. You can find the text at www.lds.org
joeboonda
Well-Known Member
Okay, I read Moses 4 and Abraham 3, and they speak of Satan and Jesus and how Satan and his plan are rejected and Jesus said He would do the Fathers will and was accepted. I agree that Satan was cast down, our difference would be, on this, that I believe that Satan was a created angel, the highest angel, and that Jesus was the only-begotten of God, (which you believe He is the only-begotten, too). I look at it like Jesus is and was so much higher than Satan, and their having been spirit brothers or 'intelligences', seems to make him less, to me that is. Of course I only use the Bible as authority, so that would explain the difference a bit. In Abraham 3 it speaks of 2 intelligences and intelligences, the 2 being Jesus and Satan I would imagine from the text. Perhaps this is partly where the idea of Grand Councils comes from. I would be interested in hearing more about this, if you can find any writings on it. Thanks for the information, and have a Happy Easter!
SoyLeche
meh...
Well, we all were at the Grand Council - and we are all spirit siblings of both Jesus and Satan for that matter. I don't see it as lowering Jesus, but instead showing us the potential that we have within us to be like him - perfect. Granted, we can only get there with his help.joeboonda said:
joeboonda
Well-Known Member
Yes, I see what you are saying. I do not believe I was at the Grand Council, as I do not believe I existed even as a spirit sibling or being before I was conceived. But that is just my belief, I believe God created man when He created Adam, and that is when Adam's spirit or soul was created too, and when ours is, when we are conceived. I know it says God 'knew us before we were born', in psalms, but I interperet that as He looked down through time, as He is all knowing and know the end from the beginning, and is why He could make prophesies of the future when no one else's god could. Now as far as being perfect, which I call complete, I believe the Bible says "He has perfected forever those who are being made Holy." In otherwords, when I was saved I was made a new creature, spiritually, and given Christ's righteousness, and my sins remembered no more. So, in that sense I am already perfect, and complete in Him, yet still growing, but growing 'in grace'. Salvation being a free gift we accept on a certain day when we hear the good news, and not a process we work for or a reward we earn. My Bible says it is by believing on, trusting in what Jesus did, and not of works, works being a result. Being still in these fleshly bodies and with a still sinful nature, we are still growing, still sinning, still striving to be more like Him. I believe when we receive our glorified, uncorruptible, immortal, bodies, uncorruptible meaning sinless, we will be like Him fully, though now only in part in our spirit. Its like I believe sorta like you, but different. Not to debate what you believe, just to point out where, in a sense, I differ a bit. I enjoy the discussions, and even if they don't seem like important things to discuss, I think they somehow are, trivial as the differences in our beliefs seem to be. Anyway, just wanted to share that, not to disagree, but to just talk about it a bit. Thanks.
Polaris
Active Member
joeboonda said:
Hi Joe, I think this is an interesting topic and unfortunately there isn't much detail provided in the scriptures concerning this issue. As soyleche mentioned, most of our understanding of pre-mortal life has been due to modern-day revelation. You mentioned the passage in psalms, and there's a similar one in Job: "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee". With the limited detail in these verses your interpretation is a perfectly valid one. There is however a verse in Ecclesiates 12:7 which, in reference to death, states "and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it." What is interesting here is the word return, which implies that our spirits where already once with God.
There is additional evidence of a pre-mortal life from a different angle. Do you believe that Jesus Christ existed before he was born? If so, would it not make sense that we did also since we are also "children of God. And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ" (Romans 8:16-17). What are your thoughts?
joeboonda said:
Our beliefs definitely have similarities. We believe that salvation over death is a free gift and that we will all be resurrected as you describe. Also we believe that without the merits of Christ we could have no hope of salvation independent of our works. However we do interpret the teachings of James literally that "faith, if it hath not works is dead" and we believe that we'll be judged according to both our faith and our works.
joeboonda said:
I also enjoy the discussions and I agree that even the most trivial of differences is important and worth discussing.
Geoffthe3rd
Member
Just wondering if i have this right, do LDS believe Satan and Jesus are brothers?
Let me see if I can clarify this. We believe that Jesus was the "Only Begotten Son" of God. We are all Gods offspring (see Acts 17:28), but unlike Jesus Christ, none of us were begotten sons or daughters of God. The rest of us (i.e. you, me, George Bush, the Pope, Jay Leno, Lucifer, etc.) were, however, created beings. God is the Father of our spirits (see Hebrews 12:9), but we are physically begotten by our own parents. We don't believe that Jesus and Satan/Lucifer were ever on the same level. Lucifer was not with the Father in the beginning like Jesus was. He was not the Creator of our universe like Jesus was. He was simply an egotistical, rebellious, malevolent spirit who sought to thwart God's plan and to exalt himself to God's level in the process.joeboonda said:
Well, well, well. Look who just showed up! I do believe it's my Catholic friend who bailed out of our one-on-one discussion a few weeks ago without so much as a goodbye. How should I take that? 
Funny you should ask that question. I just answered it in the preceding post. If it needs further clarification, please don't hesitate to ask.Geoffthe3rd said:
Even though we're going somewhat off topic here, I hope we will be allowed to continue since this is the first really civil conversation I can recall having with you. I've got to say that I find it truly refreshing!joeboonda said:
I just want to add one more scripture reference that may help you to understand our belief in our Pre-existent Life with God, our Father in Heaven.
Let's look at John 9:1-3 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
I would like to ask you, as you examine these three verses, not to concern yourself too awfully much with the second part of Jesus' answer (i.e. that the man was blind so that God's works could be manifest in him), but to the question that was asked and the first part of Jesus' response to that question. First of all, note that the scripture specifically states that the man was born blind. There had never been a time in his life when he had been able to see. But Jesus' disciples, assuming (incorrectly) that the man's blindless must be punishment for a sin, wondered whose sin it was. Had the man's parents sinned? Or had the man sinned himself? Now, if the man had been born blind, but Christ's disciples had even considered the possibility that his blindness had been a punishment for his own sins, when might they have thought he committed this sin? It must have been prior to his birth. That is the only time that someone who had been born blind could have sinned. Secondly, notice the first part of Jesus' answer ("Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents.") Jesus did not raise the obvious question ("He was born blind. How could he have sinned?"). He simply explained that the man was not being punished for a sin at all. The Bible does not explicitly teach that we lived (in spirit form) with God prior to our coming to earth. But for those whose minds are open to the possibility, there are a lot of clues (such as this example and those that Polaris has already mentioned) that Jesus did, in fact, teach this. It is highly unlikely that the disciples would have even thought to ask their question otherwise.
joeboonda
Well-Known Member
Hi, thanks for the explanations and verses about believing we were spirit beings before we were born. Our spirit returning to God, or the blind man idea, I understand what you are trying to say, it is just still to vague a concept, like grasping for straws, I guess, for me. I understand you hold Jesus high, and Satan low, I still believe Satan is an angel (fallen), a created being, and not a spirit brother of Jesus. But I won't quibble over it. I am glad you see I am not so uncivil as you have perceived me to be in the past. I really don't mind discussing these things, even if we do believe slightly differently on them. Have a great Easter.
Mike,joeboonda said:
I think that to say we "hold Jesus high and Satan low" is entirely accurate, but I don't think it even begins to convey the degree to which this is true. Jesus represents absolute perfection of all that is good -- perfect love, perfect mercy, perfect knowledge, perfect understanding, etc. etc. Satan is as opposite as it is possible to be. He has not one single solitary redeeming quality. He is totally depraved and is the epitome of evil.
I think that the problem in understanding may center more over the use of the word "angel." We, too believe that he was a fallen angel, but to us, angels are nothing more than humans in varying states of progression. Obviously, angels don't need to be good, because Satan (i.e. Lucifer in the pro-mortal existence) was an angel and was evil. The archangel, Michael, was good. As Revelation describes what happened in the war between Michael and his angels and Lucifer and his angels, the third who chose to follow Lucifer were cast out of Heaven and eternally lost the right to be known as God's sons and daughters. The two-thirds who sided with Michael were ultimately born into this world. We believe that all of us (that would include you as well as me) chose to follow Michael and were therefore privileged to experience mortalily.
I appreciate what does appear to be a less judgmental approach to discussing these things than I have seen in the past. As long as we can continue to "disagree without being disagreeable," I would like to continue this conversation.
Happy Easter to you, too, Mike.
Endless said:
A very transparent attempt to trap someone into a doctrinal corner that you have devised through your warped perspectives of our doctrine. The funny thing is that you have to keep asking the same question over and oer again until you ge the answer that will catalyze your whole assault. the problem is, the answer your looking for only comes from anti-Mormons, not from real doctrine.
Would you like to hear real doctrine from the earliest Christians? All the early church fathers believed that Jesus Christ (as a spirit) is the one referred to everytime someone "saw God" in the Old Testament. As neo-Platonic thought started to assimilate iself into Christianity it greatly influenced the concept of the Godhead. Christianity had to come up with all these metaphysical terms to keep their faith in the ring with philosophy, otherwise it would have been dismissed as childish and uninformed. From Anslin: "A really scientific theology which would present the Christian God as abstract being in the manner common to orthodox metaphysics was a crying need if the (Christian) religion was to have standing The pronouncements at Nicaea and Chalcedon show the finished product. I am working on a dissertation regarding the evolution of early church doctrine in conjunction with evolving philosophical thought. The early Fathers also believed in a pre-existence. Origen talked a lot about it, but Augustine and Thomas Aquinas had to lather Christianity up with the stench of pagan philosophy before it would pass muster, and those ideas were some of the first to go. Martin Luther said Aristotle makes theology possible because he deluded the church with his Greek mask. Salvation for the dead? Taught by ALL the early Church fathers, but later dismissed. Read Peter, Clement, Tertullian, Iraneaus, Origen and any other guy you can get your hads on from pre-Nicean times. Idea that god has a body? Originally believed by entire body of the church, but dismissed by "university men" that were schooled in Platonic theology. Clementine Homilies admit that original doctrine was that God was corporeal. Origen denounces that interpretation of the scriptures, despite the fact that the whole church believed it and despite the fact that he admits that the incorporeality of God is nowhere in the scriptures, but is so substantiated by philosophy that it has to be true. Felix says Plato got it right in saying god is incorporeal. Tertullian also says that the first doctrine must be the true doctrine. It's a shame that so many doctrines apparently were overlooked when investigating "priority in time" as he calls it. the Creeds are a marriage of Christianity and Plato and nothing more.
Wanna hear Mormon doctrine now? Almost every instance of God talking to man in the OT is referring to the pre-mortal Jesus. Any other questions?
Take it easy, Dan. Endless and I have been having a very civil conversation in the one-on-one debates. He has been entirely respectful of my beliefs and has made a genuine effort to understand them. Wheneve he has stated his perception of what we believe, it has been pretty darned close to the mark. So, just for once, why don't you just not assume that everybody's out to get us. Granted, a few people are, but I don't think Endless is one of them and I see no reason to get so defensive.
I apologize if there's a historical context that makes my statements too harsh. I've only read what I see here, and it has all the trappings of someone looking to try out a new doctrinal trap they've figured out. If that's not the case endless is more than welcome to correct me.