• 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!

John 17

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
***Mod: Members, this is not a debate section of the forum, so do not correct others in this section. If you want to correct something, please start a thread in a debate section. This area is for fellowship not for debate and expressing opinions even if they are different. Have fun, and thanks!***
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
OutbackGer said in the Opening Post : John 1 and John 17 together are quite interesting, but with John 17 the one thing I'm interested in hearing from others is the notion God praying to God, and in a sense, God expressing hope in itself. The common answer I find is that, in John 17, Jesus is simply demonstrating how to pray. However, is there a deeper meaning to the prayer, and the act of the prayer itself, given that it is from Jesus?!


Hi OutbackGer :

I think that the early Christian textual interpretation that Jesus is praying to God his Father and that the two are separate beings seems more rational and logical than the later “three in one” interpretation of God “praying to himself”.

Regarding your question as to whether the prayer has a deeper meaning than simply demonstrating “how to pray”, I am sure that it does. While I think that there are multiple principles that one could discuss, I am reminded that Jesus’ prayer to his father in John 17 encapsulates multiple aspects of the relationship with Jesus towards his Father and towards mankind. I think that the early Christians would have recognized the various references and time periods referred to in the prayer as they related to the atonement of mankind (i.e. Jesus’ pre-creation relationship with God the Father and with mankind; the purpose for which God sent Jesus into the world, the decensus of Jesus into hades to retrieve spirits there, and Jesus’ ultimate glory and place with the father as his heir.)

For examples : vs 5 “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.” (NIV) He refers to the early christian doctrine of Jesus being chosen and having been given authority and thus being “sent” by his Father from his heavenly abode, to descend into this world to accomplish specific work and he speaks of the type of “one-ness” that he has with the Father and which, he wants the disciples to also achieve. All of these themes have significant early literature that describe them from the standpoint of early Christian textual interpretation.

The concept of Jesus, as a colleague of the Father, before the creation is woven into the early Judeo-Christian literature. For example, In 1st Enoch (A Jewish document that become syncretic and Christian), Enoch describes the spirits in this pre-creation heaven, and among them he sees the Son of Man who is with the Father. While describing God the Father, Enoch says “ “... At that place, I saw the One who precedes time. And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual whose face was like that of a human being. His countenance was full of grace like that of one among the holy angels. 2 And I asked the one–from among the angels–who was going with me, and who had revealed to me all the secrets regarding the One who was born of human beings, “Who is this, and from where could he be, and for what reason does he go with him who precedes time?. 3 And he answered me and said to me, “This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells. And he will open all the hidden storerooms; for the Lord of the Spirits has chosen him, and he is destined to be victorious before the Lord of the Spirits in eternal uprightness. 4 This Son of Man whom you have seen is the One who would remove the Kings and the mighty ones from their comfortable seats, and the strong ones from their thrones. He shall loosen the reins of the strong and crush the teeth of the sinners. 5 He shall depose the kings from their thrones and kingdoms. For they do not extol and glorify him, and neither do they obey him, the source of their kingship. 1st Enoch 46:1-6;

The spirits in this pre-creation heaven are aware there is more wisdom and knowledge to be had and Enoch eludes to the choosing of Jesus as a Christ, a savior, so as to accomplish the Fathers plan of a tutoring and a salvation for these spirits. Enoch says “…in that place, I saw the fountain of righteousness, which does not become depleted and is surrounded completely by numerous fountains of wisdom. All the thirsty ones drink (of the water) and become filled with wisdom. (Then) their dwelling places become with the holy, righteous, and elect ones. 2 At that hour, that Son of Man was given a name, in the presence of the Lord of the Spirits…...” 1st Enoch 48:1-7

This same occurrence is discussed in Christian literature as well. For example, in The Gospel of Bartholomew CH IV Jesus makes mention of the Father having chosen him for his specific role of Christ/Messiah, saying “Jesus said to him: “Bartholomew, the Father named me Christ, that I might come down on earth and anoint with the oil of life, everyone who came to me. And he called me Jesus, that I might heal every sin of the ignorant and give to men the truth of God. . ....

Another good example is the narrative in the discourse on Abbaton of 387 a.d. The narrative is part of the Christian 40 day literature where Christ is explaining to his disciples what happened at the creation of adam. The Father has created the body of Adam, but has not yet placed his spirit into him and he laments “If I put breath into this [man], he must suffer many pains. (due to the may sins mankind will commit after the fall happens).

Jesus relates to the disciples “And I said unto My Father, "Put breath into him; I will be an advocate for him." And My Father said unto Me, "If I put breath into him, My beloved son, Thou wilt be obliged to go down into the world, and to suffer many pains for him before Thou shalt have redeemed him, and made him to come back to primal state." And I said unto My Father, "Put breath into him; I will be his advocate, and I will go down into the world, and will fulfill Thy command."


References to this specific textual tradition repeat themselves in other literature. For example when some angels point out the evils man will do when created, they complain : “Lord of the Universe, did not the primeval ones give you good advice when they said, Do not create man!’ The Holy One, blessed be he, replied, ‘I have made and will sustain him; I will carry and deliver him.’ 3rd Enoch 4:6-7

These early Christian histories describe why the texts speak of Jesus as the one the Father spoke to in saying “Let US make man according to our image.”

And furthermore, my brothers: if the Lord submitted to suffer for our souls, even though he is Lord of the whole world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, “Let us make man according to our image and likeness…The Epistle of Barnabas 5:5;

For the Scripture speaks about us when he says to the Son: “Let us make man according to our image and likeness, …These things he said to the Son...". The Epistle of Barnabas 6:12;

Thus, in early Christian literature, it is Jesus who voluntarily offers, is chosen as the lamb slain “before the foundation of the world” He is given authority of the Father to do this specific work, and is sent to accomplish the wondrous plan of salvation for mankind under the direction of the Father. “He, before either earth or starry heaven, was sovereign Word, with the Father and Holy Spirit. Sibylline Oracles book 7 vs 68-73


OutbackGer, While I think that the early Christian teachings and interpretations are more logical and rational and more understandable than the many later Christian theories and interpretations, I wish you good luck in your own spiritual journey and in coming up with your own models as to what is happening in this life.


See you


Clear
δρτςνεω
 
Last edited:

OutbackGer

No apologies for typ0s!
Hi Clear

Thanks very much for sharing your research, and it was interesting to learn how there is more material in Mormon scriptures to fill in some of the blanks (especially pre-creation). I also wasn't aware that Enoch was canonical to LDS.
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hi Clear

Thanks very much for sharing your research, and it was interesting to learn how there is more material in Mormon scriptures to fill in some of the blanks (especially pre-creation). I also wasn't aware that Enoch was canonical to LDS
.


Hi OutbackGer ;

I simply wanted to correct an assumption in your prior comment.

Jewish Enoch of 300 B.C. and the greek enochs are not "canonical" to LDS. I suspect most of the LDS are unaware of this early literature, the themes of the various early Judeo-Christian literature such as 1 Enoch and others, simply parallel and confirm specific LDS doctrines in important ways. While the writers of the New Testament obviously quoted from 1 Enoch (e.g. Jude), the LDS do not include it in their canon. Since I am a historian of these eras and their literature, I am familiar with them and am comfortable using them to demonstrate what early writers of these eras believed and taught.

The various Judeo-Christian Canons differ geographically and chronologically. For example, While Enoch and Banabas and Jubilees are in the modern eastern Christian Canon of 2018 (i.e. ethiopian canon), western Christian movements do not typically use them. Similarly, the historical time-frame also affects which canon one uses. For example, the 4th Century New Testament Codex Sinaiticus (one of 5 major uncials) includes Hermas, and barnabas while our modern western texts do not include them.

As a historian, I am VERY, very interested in what the early Christians believed in and described in their literature, as a member of restorational theology (i.e. a theology that seeks to adopt and re-instate early Christian worldviews, rather than the later interpretations and later theories and christian worldviews) I think that the early Judeo-Christian beliefs, worldviews and descriptions are often more logical and rational and more sensible than later Christian theories and models.

The reason that I, as an LDS can use the early documents and the early textual descriptions is that they parallel my own beliefs. I do not think the non restorationists are able to use the early major themes much simply because the modern Christian theologies have evolved so much that the early data is often uncomfortable to many of the modern Christian movements.

I hope this explanation makes sense.

Good luck in your own spiritual journey. See you OutbackGer.

Clear
δρσιτωω
 
Last edited:
Top