For LDS only...some tricky questions

[Jane.Doe]

Jane Doe...

Apparently I am going to have to start getting up an hour earlier than I have been. Every day it's the same thing. Truth asks a question and you answer it just before I sign in to RF.

Lol, but your answers are great!
And I'm so early this morning because it's Potty Training Boot Camp day-- wish me luck!

 

[Katzpur]

Lol, but your answers are great!

Thank you! I really like yours, too!

And I'm so early this morning because it's Potty Training Boot Camp day-- wish me luck!

Oh... been there, done that. Have fun. I'm glad it's you and not me.

 

[Katzpur]

I have a few questions!

1) One critical site asks
"If Moroni devoutly practiced the Mormon Gospel, why is he an angel now rather than a God?"

Fairmormon provides a response here: http://en.fairmormon.org/Countercul...hy_is_he_an_angel_now_rather_than_a_God.3F.22

However I am confused on one point. Fairmormon talks about being on the path of progression (Moroni) and somewhere mentions some having already been exalted however I didn't think judgement happened yet? I thought everyone who has passed on is in the Spirit World? Not the degrees of glory/exaltation? or have I misunderstood something?

Jane already gave you a very good answer to this question, but I have something I'd like to add. The very first thing I thought when I read the question "one critical site" asks ("If Moroni devoutly practiced the Mormon Gospel, why is he an angel now rather than a God?") was, "Why assume that he should now be a God?" Okay, let's get the "why is he an angel" part of the question out of the way before we go on to "why isn't he a god?" One of the main role of angels is that of heavenly messengers. We most often think of angels as being "pre-mortal" beings, because in the context of the scriptures, that is undoubtedly the case. But, in the Doctrine and Covenants 129:1, we read that since the resurrection of Christ, some angels have been "resurrected personages, having bodies of flesh and bones." Joseph Smith taught that these angels, having experienced mortality, are further advanced in light and glory than are those who have not yet experienced mortality. This would be the case with Moroni. The fact that he is referred to as an angel merely denotes that he is a heavenly messenger.

So why isn't he a God now, since he "devoutly practiced the Mormon Gospel"? Again, I have to smile when I see how some of these questions are worded. Okay, so I'm being nit-picky, but I don't believe that in the next life, anyone is going to be practicing "the Mormon Gospel." We may believe that the "Mormon" Church is teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ as it was taught anciently, but that doesn't mean it's "the Mormon Gospel." At the end of the day, there is no "Mormon Gospel." There is just the gospel of Jesus Christ. Moroni knew nothing about Mormonism since he lived centuries before Mormonism was even established. But he did know -- and practice -- the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The assumption of the "critical site" is that Mormons believe that when the die, they become a "God." That is not the case. To begin with, there is only one "God" and we will never be Him. We may eventually be like Him (i.e. godly) and therefore be "gods," but when I see the word "God," I would never think of this word (capitalized) referring to me at any point in time. It will always refer to my God, not to me. The more important issue is that nobody -- not Moroni or anybody else -- dies and is instantly even "a god." Eternal progression is all about development. Moroni may well be granted godhood at some point a few quadrillion years in the future. But "devoutly practicing the Mormon Gospel" just means that a person is headed in the right direction. It most definitely does not mean that he dies and *poof* he's a God (or even a god). It will take time and, as C.S. Lewis explained, "will at times be painful."

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Thanks ladies as always!!

I cant remember if I have already asked this (I really must read through the thread again) but if the BoM contains the fulnlness of the gospel, why doesnt it contain things like baptism for the dead and eternal progression etc

 

[Katzpur]

Thanks ladies as always!!

I cant remember if I have already asked this (I really must read through the thread again) but if the BoM contains the fulnlness of the gospel, why doesnt it contain things like baptism for the dead and eternal progression etc

Yea! I beat Jane Doe to the punch this time!

You may be confusing "the gospel" with "the Plan of Salvation." The Book of Mormon does contain the fulness of the gospel, but it does not address certain specifics of the Plan of Salvation. "The gospel" is the good news concerning Christ's atoning sacrifice and its role in sanctifying us. It plays a huge part in the Plan of Salvation, but is not synonymous with it. The Plan of Salvation is more comprehensive.

 

[Katzpur]

2) Another site mentions Elohim being God and Jehovah being Jesus as a problem.

He summarises:-

"My point is that the name of God (elohim) is Jehovah (LORD), and that the LORD is stating that he alone is God. In other words, Jehovah is stating that he alone is elohim. Therefore, the Mormon idea that God the Father is called "elohim" and that the son is called "Jehovah" is erroneous.

In actuality, the name of God is Jehovah, and the Mormons are incorrect.

Remember, in Hebrew text LORD equals Jehovah. God equals elohim.

• "Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him" (Deut. 4:35).
• "That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else" (1 Kings 8:60).
• "Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves;" (Psalm 100:3).
• "And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God" (Zech. 13:9)."

I can't find an answer on Fairmormon about this? (It's my go to place!)

Hey! I have some time on my hands and just thought I'd throw my two cents worth in on this topic, too, especially since you couldn't find an answer on FAIR's site. (IMO, you couldn't find a much better go-to site, although Jeff Lindsay's site is a pretty close second.

Mormons believe that the individual known as Jesus Christ in the New Testament is the same individual as the individual known as Jehovah in the Old Testament. In other words, in Exodus 3:14, which reads, "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you," Jehovah was speaking. And in John 8:58, when we read, "Jesus said unto them, Verily,verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am," the speaker is clearly Jesus Christ. So we believe that the pre-mortal Jesus was known as Jehovah to the people of the Old Testament, was born to Mary and became known as Jesus. There are literally dozens of verses in the Old Testament that speak of Jehovah saying or doing or being something that match up to almost the exact words in the New Testament which speak of Jesus Christ as saying or doing or being exactly those same things. I can list a bunch of them out for you if you'd like. Unfortunately, the information I have is in a book and not online, so I'll wait until I hear back from you before I start typing.

 

[Jane.Doe]

Yea! I beat Jane Doe to the punch this time!

You may be confusing "the gospel" with "the Plan of Salvation." The Book of Mormon does contain the fulness of the gospel, but it does not address certain specifics of the Plan of Salvation. "The gospel" is the good news concerning Christ's atoning sacrifice and its role in sanctifying us. It plays a huge part in the Plan of Salvation, but is not synonymous with it. The Plan of Salvation is more comprehensive.

I'd actually phrase this differently. The "Gospel" is the Good News: the Good News that Christ has been sacrificed for our sins and has be resurrected. The Book of Mormon's purpose is to bring men unto Christ and it contains the fullness of the Good News in that regard.

The Book of Mormon does not contain everything about God: not all His ways, not all His teachings, and not all His mysteries. The text of the Book of Mormon says several times that "and these marvelous things that could not be written" (I'm paraphrasing, obviously). Things like baptisms for the dead are specific one way God works His wonders. The specifics of this way are far less important than the big picture of "Christ offers all men salvation".

 

[Jane.Doe]

Oh... been there, done that. Have fun. I'm glad it's you and not me.

We survived! It wasn't even completely traumatizing! Not that I want to repeat the process....

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Hey! I have some time on my hands and just thought I'd throw my two cents worth in on this topic, too, especially since you couldn't find an answer on FAIR's site. (IMO, you couldn't find a much better go-to site, although Jeff Lindsay's site is a pretty close second.

Mormons believe that the individual known as Jesus Christ in the New Testament is the same individual as the individual known as Jehovah in the Old Testament. In other words, in Exodus 3:14, which reads, "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you," Jehovah was speaking. And in John 8:58, when we read, "Jesus said unto them, Verily,verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am," the speaker is clearly Jesus Christ. So we believe that the pre-mortal Jesus was known as Jehovah to the people of the Old Testament, was born to Mary and became known as Jesus. There are literally dozens of verses in the Old Testament that speak of Jehovah saying or doing or being something that match up to almost the exact words in the New Testament which speak of Jesus Christ as saying or doing or being exactly those same things. I can list a bunch of them out for you if you'd like. Unfortunately, the information I have is in a book and not online, so I'll wait until I hear back from you before I start typing.

Only if you have the time Katz!

 

[Truth_Faith13]

We survived! It wasn't even completely traumatizing! Not that I want to repeat the process....

Youll have to give me some tips! I really should consider it for my 20month old

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Do LDS believe Jesus was created?

Jane, on the other site you said that Jesus was uncreated but on mormon.org it reads "Like us, Jesus was created in the image of God, the Father, and They both have perfected bodies of flesh and bone."

 

[Jane.Doe]

Do LDS believe Jesus was created?

No, though you will commonly hear non-LDS say we do, either because they innocently misunderstand or to deliberately done to twist LDS teachings.

Jane, on the other site you said that Jesus was uncreated but on mormon.org it reads "Like us, Jesus was created in the image of God, the Father, and They both have perfected bodies of flesh and bone."

Different levels of creation. We are all the Father's children. We all preexisted this Earth's creation. After the Earth's creation, God created us all physical bodies, flawed versions of the Father's own. At Christ's resurrection, He was made a Perfected body, like the Father's own. At the resurrection, we will likewise receive Perfected bodies.

 

[Katzpur]

Do LDS believe Jesus was created?

To be perfectly honest, this is a question most LDS have never even thought about since it's one that is generally asked by non-members in a debate setting. Please believe me, I am NOT suggesting that YOU are trying to back Jane and me up against a wall by asking this question. I'm merely stating that unless an LDS person frequents forums such as this one, he/she has probably never heard it posed before. We don't even typically speak of Jesus being either "created" or "uncreated" -- at least not in those terms.

I've thought long and hard about how to respond to this question (not this time around, but in years past when it has been raised) and I think I've figured out how to best explain. The answer is 'yes' and 'no.' The question generally arises because mainstream Christianity teaches the following:

From the Athanasian Creed (6th century A.D.): "Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Spirit uncreate... "

From the Westminster Confession (1646 A.D.): "The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son."

Genesis begins with an account of the creation of our Earth. It starts out with the words, "In the beginning." The gospel according to John also begins with the words "In the beginning." As do all Christians, we believe that God existed before the creation of our Earth. (Unlike other Christians, we believe that He was likely creating other worlds -- worlds without number -- at that time.) We know that the Word (i.e. Jesus Christ) also existed "in the beginning, that He was "with God" and that He also "was God." The Bible, however, says nothing about anything that happened before the beginning, "before the clock started ticking," so to speak. We believe that all fathers precede their offspring, and that our Father in Heaven was no exception. Consequently, it would be only logical to believe that at some time "before the beginning," before the events which are described in Genesis began to unfold, before the Creation ever took place, our Father in Heaven spiritually begot (i.e. created) Jehovah, who would become "His Only Begotten Son." By the time the Bible starts ("In the beginning"), all three members of the Godhead already existed. For this reason, you might say they are "eternal." From our perspective, they certainly are, because they preceded our creation and the creation of our universe.

 

[Katzpur]

We survived! It wasn't even completely traumatizing! Not that I want to repeat the process....

Ha! You say that as if "the process" is complete. Get back to me in a month or two. Or three.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

To be perfectly honest, this is a question most LDS have never even thought about since it's one that is generally asked by non-members in a debate setting. Please believe me, I am NOT suggesting that YOU are trying to back Jane and me up against a wall by asking this question. I'm merely stating that unless an LDS person frequents forums such as this one, he/she has probably never heard it posed before. We don't even typically speak of Jesus being either "created" or "uncreated" -- at least not in those terms.

I've thought long and hard about how to respond to this question (not this time around, but in years past when it has been raised) and I think I've figured out how to best explain. The answer is 'yes' and 'no.' The question generally arises because mainstream Christianity teaches the following:

From the Athanasian Creed (6th century A.D.): "Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Spirit uncreate... "

From the Westminster Confession (1646 A.D.): "The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son."

Genesis begins with an account of the creation of our Earth. It starts out with the words, "In the beginning." The gospel according to John also begins with the words "In the beginning." As do all Christians, we believe that God existed before the creation of our Earth. (Unlike other Christians, we believe that He was likely creating other worlds -- worlds without number -- at that time.) We know that the Word (i.e. Jesus Christ) also existed "in the beginning, that He was "with God" and that He also "was God." The Bible, however, says nothing about anything that happened before the beginning, "before the clock started ticking," so to speak. We believe that all fathers precede their offspring, and that our Father in Heaven was no exception. Consequently, it would be only logical to believe that at some time "before the beginning," before the events which are described in Genesis began to unfold, before the Creation ever took place, our Father in Heaven spiritually begot (i.e. created) Jehovah, who would become "His Only Begotten Son." By the time the Bible starts ("In the beginning"), all three members of the Godhead already existed. For this reason, you might say they are "eternal." From our perspective, they certainly are, because they preceded our creation and the creation of our universe.

Is this similar to the multiverse/universe idea you were talking about a few thread pages back?

Ive actually never heard the question asked, I only ask because Jane mentioned LDS agreed with an uncreated Jesus but in the back of my mind fairmormon had mentioned him being created and then I read the above quote on mormon.org

 

[Jane.Doe]

Ive actually never heard the question asked, I only ask because Jane mentioned LDS agreed with an uncreated Jesus but in the back of my mind fairmormon had mentioned him being created and then I read the above quote on mormon.org

Most commonly non-LDS debater will phrase the question of the framework that Christ was/is not immortal. This is not true. They will also phrase it in the framework of trying to deny His divinity, which is also not true.

Thorough discussion of the topic gets into different scheme of creation, creeds, Biblical interpretations nature of man, etc. It's quite lengthy, and vast majority of causal people don't want to go there. Obviously you are not casual.

 

[Katzpur]

Is this similar to the multiverse/universe idea you were talking about a few thread pages back?

Yes it is. Whether Jesus is "created" or not really depends upon your perspective. From God's perspective, there was a time when His Son did not exist, but from our perspective, He has always existed. It's really a kind of non-issue in our theology.

Perhaps I should add that we believe we are all "eternal" in some regard, since God "created" our spirits out of highly refined matter that was co-eternal with Him (i.e. "truth and light" or "intelligences"). In that respect, Jesus Christ was also "eternal." His Father, however, did created His spirit.

 

[Katzpur]

Hey, we're all three online right now! Hi!!!!

 

[Jane.Doe]

Youll have to give me some tips! I really should consider it for my 20month old

Sure. DD has GI issues, so I’ve done a ridiculous amount of research into this. We've tried two ways: the long and slow painful route, and the quick and brutal route.

The long and slow route involved husband and I spending 10 months encourage/bribing/rewarding her for going on the potty. It’s been long, and while she learned to go potty. But she found nothing wrong with going in her pull-ups: they were very absorbent so she was dry, and she’d rather keep playing than go potty.

So yesterday was start of the brutal way. We bought big girl panties, put tarp over an entire room, and am loaded her up on liquids. We have an old-school kitchen timer that when it rings every 30 minutes we have to then, if not before (the timer is the bad guy, not me). Being in panties, there are major consequences for not going in the potty, including the brutal clean-up shower. So suddenly she’s telling me when she has to go and acknowledging that.

 

[Jane.Doe]

Hey, we're all three online right now! Hi!!!!

I enjoy this group