mikbone

No that is your point. My take is totally different. I can see multiple instances when it would be advantageous for an immortal to convert him/herself back to a mortal for a temporary period to achieve a certain goal, literally. That being said, I don't require you or anyone else to appreciate my conclusions.

I don't think that it was transgression. If so, what does the fruit of the tree of life represent, obedience? And if so, why would He create a barrier (cherubim and a flaming sword) to prevent Adam from partaking obedience? Also why is the transposition of the fruit of ToKoG&E and ToG&E contrasted in Moses, Alma 12 & Alma 42?

I thought this discourse would be different based solely upon the title. For me and my wife (and adult children), we love to read the scriptures in the chapel prior to the session. For some reason revelation seems to come much easier from scripture when it is bound in white leather (perhaps it is the setting). Another thing that we have noticed is occasionally, we will go to the temple with a yes or no type question that we have not received an answer to yet. On a number of instances, upon presenting our desire to attend an ordinance, will be asked if we would like to be the witness couple. Every time this happens, we look at each other and recognize that the answer is a resounding yes, to both questions! And during the endowment revelation comes here or there. In the celestial room we share our discoveries with our loved ones.

PDF version Discourses of Brigham Young P. 76-77

We dont know, right? Are the fruit of the trees in the Garden of Eden literal or allegorical? If they are literal fruit with pharmacological effects. Are you claiming that any God is immune to the effects of the active ingredient? What if the fruit is allegorical, and there is a process or priesthood power that can have the effect of converting immortals <--> mortals? The following quote from Brigham Young might be of interest:

What would happen to God’s immortal body if He partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good & evil? Moses 3:17 & Abraham 5:13 And contrast with Alma 12:26 & Alma 42:5

My home filtering software flags not allow me to open your link. 😒

Read this book with your daughters in their youth Then when you have the talk about dating and boys you can simply explain that boys are mice and kisses are cookies. I just sent my daughter to college and sent her a framed book to hang on the wall.

This week while counseling family, I had a rare epiphany. The three temptations of Christ (found in Matthew 4:1-11) seem pretty superficial at first glance, but with further insight they become quite profound. 1) Command that these stones be made bread. - Christ had just fasted for 40 days. No doubt He was hungry. The superficial temptation is to satisfy our physical carnal desires. But deeper, is the sin of Pride. Satan was tempting Christ to use his creative powers to prove that He was God by transmuting stone to bread. Beware of Pride And Christ's response - Deuteronomy 8:3 2) If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down. - Satan even quotes scripture Psalm 91: 11-12 to bolster his temptation. The superficial temptation is to rely upon others, and once again to prove his godly powers. But as I studied this - and recalled the events in Gethsemane, coupled with hardship that occurs during a normal lifetime. I recognized that Satan was going to a much darker place. He was trying with all his might to cause Despair to enter into the heart of our Lord and Savior. Real despair - the type that leads to concepts of suicide or annihilation. Despair is a tool of the Devil, it is the complete absence of Hope. Both of these temptations are of an emotional nature. There are times in our lives when all seems at loss and no forward progress appears as a possibility. We must recognize that Despair is from the Evil One and fight it with hope. Do Not Despair Christ's response - Deuteronomy 6:16 3) All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. On the surface once again we see the temptation for worldly stuff. But it was at the cost of changing allegiances from God to Satan. As I look deeper though, I perceive a common sin that many of us indulge. We seek Shortcuts, the path of least resistance. God wants all of his children to have - all that He has. But He wants us to obtain these gifts, rewards, property, and increase through the process of overcoming all things. Only when we deserve the rewards should we have them. These sins can be somewhat perceived as a spiritual nature. Christ created the Earth. At age 12 He could have overcome Rome and conquered the entire world. When Peter smote off of the Roman centurion's ear, Christ stated, "Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" A single roman legion is considered 5,000 soldiers. Imagine 5,000 military soldiers invading your hometown. And recognize that a single angel of the Lord killed over 185,000 men in 2 Kings 19:35. Jesus was proclaiming his authority to command a dozen legions of Angels! But He didn't. He bid his time and suffered the will of the Father in all things. How many times do we seek after things that we have not earned. Fornication or adultery, purchasing goods on debt, unjust abuse of power, dishonest dealings with our fellow man to produce lucre we did not earn. God wants us to have everything, but He wants us to earn it, so that we can be a wise steward and use our increase to bless others. There is no heavenly lottery. Christ's response - Deuteronomy 6:13-14 Pride is the root of all sin. Despair is a tool of the Devil, we have no business dwelling with despair. If darkness gathers we must use the light of hope to dispel its effects. In ourselves and others. And we must trust in the Lord to have the patience and work ethic to achieve the gifts and increase that the Lord has in store for us.

I just did a complete search of the words Handmaid & Handmaiden in the scriptures. I read it as female loyal servant NOT concubine.

word for word. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Translation/Method#Question:_Was_every_word_of_the_Book_of_Mormon_translation_provided_directly_from_God.3F

I’m game. Probably should start another thread. I have already derailled this one. Originally, I was just trying to put forth the idea that Joseph & Mary’s geneology is only there to legitimize His claim. Really.

Yes, In my prior commentary I was trying to put forth the impersonal creation of children in our society. Wherein you could have 3 people involved in a pregnancy. A women who froze her eggs for the sake of children in the later part of her life, because she couldn't be bothered with the hardship of raising a family during the prime of her life. A man donating his sperm for $$, and a surrogate mother carrying a child as a career (Surrogacy average cost is $90K - 130K)... Dorland's 28th Edition, 1994. My point is that conception can mean implantation. We don't really know the specifics that produced the Virgin birth... I listed John 10:18 because therein Jesus states that He can raise himself. In my mind, implying that He did not require the Father to resurrect him. No other human has the ability to do what Jesus did... Jesus Christ will resurrect us all. See John 11:25

Thanks for the creativity comment. And please know that my thoughts are my own and I am not preaching doctrine. That is never my intent. I have found this site helpful to clarifying my personal beliefs and understanding the perceptions of other Saints. That being said... There has been an underlying current within some of the teachings of the Early authorities that led many to believe that... Heavenly Father and the Virgin Mary had coitus (the Holy Ghost perhaps transfigured Mary) and that union produced the seed that housed the Savior's spirit (Very much like the Zeus + Alkmena = Hercules mythos). This leads to propagating theories that The Virgin Mary was only married to Joseph for time and that she was Sealed to Heavenly Father for Eternity (sounds like a catholic nun belief). These types of ideas continue to be promulgated, for example look at the very popular Da Vinci Code book and Movies... And the idea of the immaculate conception btw - my mother, and many older saints probably agree with the above description of Christ's conception. And it is understandable because during the early Saints lifetime there was no concept of a test tube baby. With the advent of modern science, we can now perceive the possibility of alternate production methods. The modern general authorities have tempered the wording of comments about the nature of Christ's birth to be more in line with the Scriptures, and I think that this is a good thing. We don't know how it happened. But I have issues with the above concept, and based upon my feelings and scriptures like Alma 7:10, I think that Christ's birth was special, but done very differently. And when you recognize that Heavenly Father and the Virgin Mary's physical union is not a requirement; and appreciate the possibility of placement of the seed into Mary. The idea of surrogacy becomes is a possibility. I don't see why it would be improper for Jesus genetic mother to be none other than our Heavenly Mother. The Virgin Mary is the Daughter of Christ, Christ created our first Parents, and when Mary was baptized she became spiritually begotten of Christ as well. If she is a surrogate mother instead of a genetic parent it makes things less messy. As for the title of Firstborn & Only Begotten and the bolded text that you question... Firstborn and Only Begotten Jesus Christ has many titles. He has earned them all. In current church literature, we usually see the above titles written as such, Firstborn in the spirit and Only Begotten in the flesh.[1] Interestingly, neither the terms “Firstborn in the spirit” nor “Only Begotten in the flesh” can be found in a single verse in our entire canon. I assume that these suffixes spirit and flesh were added to give emphasis to a singular meaning of each title. Perhaps we have done ourselves a disservice by doing so. I believe that each term has a grander meaning. Firstborn is a simple term at first glance. It means first born, or eldest among a group of siblings. It was also associated with a birthright gift of a double portion.[2] Take for example Adam - Cain, Abel, Seth Abraham - Ishmael, Isaac Isaac - Esau, Jacob Jacob - Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin In the list above if you had to pick out the firstborn whom would you choose? The eldest or the righteous? Who got the birthright? The answer is obvious. Blessings, power, and authority have never been bestowed upon mankind because of birth order. Spiritual gifts are given to those who have proven themselves. There are occasions when an eldest son rightly deserved the birthright, but in those cases the eldest son was righteous. Jehovah is our eldest brother. When the second spirit child was delivered into premortality - Jehovah was already there. We don’t know how much time expired between the birth of Jehovah and the birth of the second spirit child, it could have been relatively short or unimaginably long. It is my opinion that Jehovah’s spirit VASTLY outdates ours. D&C 93:21-22 And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn; And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn. This Church of the Firstborn is an eternal construct. We learn from D&C 76:51-55 how we can become members of the church of the Firstborn. Perhaps Jehovah was already a member of this church of the Firstborn during our premortality. In the New Testament, the term only begotten was translated from the Greek word monogenēs (μονογενὴς). Monogenes has two primary definitions, “pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship” and “pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind”.[3] When we use the term Only Begotten in the flesh we are limiting the title to a concept of how Jesus’ mortal birth was different from all others. Jesus Christ’s birth was unique, but the title Only Begotten was applied to Jehovah long before He was born as a babe to Mary.[4] It is also interesting that Satan attempted to claim the title Only Begotten during his rant in Moses 1:18-19. I don’t think that Satan was trying to convince Moses that the sire of his body of flesh and blood was Heavenly Father… It is true that Jesus Christ’s birth was unique and that the father of his mortal body is God the Father, but the specifics of how this process occurred has not been revealed. It is a common statement that Christ inherited mortality (the ability to suffer pain and die physically) from Mary, and immortality (the powers of godhood and resurrection) from Elohim. “That Child to be born of Mary was begotten of Elohim, the Eternal Father, not in violation of natural law but in accordance with a higher manifestation thereof; and, the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure through mortal maternity, was of right to be called the “Son of the Highest.” In His nature would be combined the powers of Godhood with the capacity and possibilities of mortality; and this through the ordinary operation of the fundamental law of heredity, declared of God, demonstrated by science, and admitted by philosophy, that living beings shall propagate—after their kind. The Child Jesus was to inherit the physical, mental, and spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers that characterized His parents—one immortal and glorified—God, the other human—woman”[5] Only Begotten Son - … These name-titles all signify that our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the flesh. Each of the words is to be understood literally. Only means only, begotten means begotten, and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers.[6] The above two quotes from very well accepted sources both seem to indicate that Jesus Christ conception was secondary to the physical union of Elohim and Mary… Personally, I do not believe that Elohim should be compared to a galivanting Greek god. I believe that the best representation of the conception of Jesus Christ can be found in the Book of Mormon And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.[7] This scripture indicates that the Holy Ghost actively participated in the conception of Jesus Christ. But in no way, does the above scripture indicate coitus. Mary was a virgin.[8] The term Only Begotten likely has a different meaning. Throughout the scriptures we learn that through ordinances we can become spiritually begotten sons and daughters of Christ.[9] It is my firm belief that Jehovah had made commitments and partook of ordinances in the ‘beginning’. And because of these commitments Jehovah was the only character in our premortal existence that was begotten of Elohim. [1] Rodney Turner, “The Doctrine of the Firstborn and Only Begotten,” in The Pearl of Great Price: Revelations from God, ed. H. Donl Peterson and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1989), 91–118. [2] Deuteronomy 21:17 [3] Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BAGD, 3rd Edition) [4] Moses 1:6, 13, 21, 32, 33; 2:1, 27; 3:18; 4:3; 6:52; 2 Nephi 25:12; Alma 9:26. [5] James A. Talmage, Jesus the Christ, 3rd ed. [1916], p. 81. [6] Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine [7] Alma 7:10 [8] 1 Nephi 11:20, 2 Nephi 17:14 [9] Mosiah 5:7, Moses 6: 64-68, D&C 93:21-22

You are generous. So a surrogate mother cannot conceive? How about when a woman freezes her eggs and then uses a sperm donor, and that union in a test tube creates an embryo, and then that embryo is inserted into a surrogate. If the embryo implants within the surrogate's womb we have conception and pregnancy, no? And I bet this exact case has happened multiple times within the past year in the good 'ole USA. Yuck! And yes men only assist in fertilization (thank goodness) phew. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Jesus_Christ/Conception Is a pretty good site discussing this principle. From Dorland's Medical Dictionary (I had to wipe the dust off of the book /cringe) Conception - The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst in the endometrium, the formation of a visible zygote. Alma 7:10 is great. And every single word was translated by Joseph Smith. There is no questioning the source. I love the phrases, being a virgin, precious and chosen vessel, and overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost. 1 Ne 11:19 is probably also significant. Yeah, I pointed out the Lazarus resurrection because He had been dead 4 days! All the other incidents appear to be bringing back someone from the dead, a resuscitation. But Lazarus was a resurrection. Also John 10:18 is like a nail in the coffin lid. What do you mean by: "His life was preserved by another mechanism than His sinlessness until it became possible for Him to commit sin and exercise His power over life and death by virtue of His sinlessness." I agree that His sinlessness allowed him the opportunity to perform the Atonement. But probably the actions during the Atonement, travel to paradise and back, as well as the self-resurrection required some pretty hard core abilities, knowledge, understanding, willpower, and most of all love for both us and the Father. I stand all amazed.

I'm not saying that President Nelson thinks Mary was a surrogate. That I pulled from Alma 7:10. And the word conception can have many meanings. Where does conception fall out with the terms ovulation, egg transport, fertilization, embryo development, implantation, pregnancy? "An immortal being not subject to death" also has wide interpretation. We are all immortal beings. I am subject to death, I will die; but I will be resurrected just like everyone else. Jesus Christ Died. But Christ is the only one that could overcome death without assistance. I think the keys of the resurrection were given to Jesus long before his birth. He raised Lazarus 4 days after his burial... Some may believe that Jesus ability to resist sin was due to his divine protection. I think that Jehovah had been previously conditioned against sin and rebellion. From John 20:17 we know that Jesus was able to self-resurrect before he ascended to the Father. John 2:19 is also interesting. Spencer W. Kimball talks about the keys of the resurrection in his talk Our Great Potential Your understanding of the title "Only Begotten" is totally reasonable. I just appreciate it as something different.

Just to clarify. I agree with President Nelson I greatly dislike quotes like the following: Go look up "Only Begotten in the Flesh" in the scriptures - you will not find it. Jehovah was the "Only Begotten" prior to his mortal ministry... I agree with President Nelson. Mary and her womb - placenta nourished the savior. And if you know anything about embryology you know that the mother and child's blood do not mix. It is an extremely beautiful arrangement. Without Mary, Jesus could not have performed his mortal ministry. It is obvious that Jesus obtained the power over death from Heavenly Father. That power came from priesthood keys though, not genetics. IMHO

Fully mortal IMHO.

I don’t have the power to become immortal. But... If I was lucky enought to find the Garden of Eden and could wreastle with and beat a Cherubim with a flaming sword, I might could find a way... Unlikely But then that would fusterate the plan of salvation. Guess I won’t go on that expedition.

I wasn’t specifing percentages to quibble with you. I am taking umbrage with a doctrine that had been taught many decades ago which continues to be propagated (without any scripture references to back up the premise btw). And I don’t think Jesus Christ’s body was significantly different than any other mortal. But I know that his intelligence and spirit were light years ahead of us... His power to atone likely did not come from a special body. But originated instead from his intellect, will, and spiritual prowess; as well as prior experiences and commitments... Your last question is excellent and you are absolutely correct. Resurrected Celestial parents produce spirit children (the specifics of which, are totally unknown to us mortals). Anyway, just for arguements sake let us assume that my premise is correct (that Jesus’s true parentage is our Heavenly Parents). One way to solve the delimma would be to give Elohim (plural) the ability to change their bodies from Immortal to mortal at will - and back again. I can think of a way to accomplish this goal without much difficulty, and there is abundant scripture to bolster this proposal. If this scenario is correct, it fixes many problems... There are other sticking points, but I assume that Elohim has many powers and solutions that we are totally unaware of...

He was 100% divine and 100% mortal. Not 50/50. The 50/50 concept is an easy conclusion to jump to, especially when we have the Greek mythology background to draw upon. But I don’t think Elohim was a galavanting Greek god and Jesus Christ is not a hero like Hercules. I think it is much more reasonable that Jesus Christ’s parentage was Heavenly Father and Mother and that the royal seed was placed by the Holy Ghost into the Virgin Mary. Because Mary was mortal her blood nurtured the holy seed thus Christ was mortal. Christ was able die because He was mortal. He was able to resurrect because he possessed the priesthood keys to do so.

What was your take on the rich young ruler? This is mine: The young man was full of $#!+ He had had not kept the commandments from his youth. He kept the commandments to his own satisfaction... That is why the Lord had to remind him to keep the commandments and then had to list them... The Lord knew he would not follow. Clemson is destroying Alabama

Where Justice, Love, and Mercy Meet - Holland April 2015 In our increasingly secular society, it is as uncommon as it is unfashionable to speak of Adam and Eve or the Garden of Eden or of a “fortunate fall” into mortality. Nevertheless, the simple truth is that we cannot fully comprehend the Atonement and Resurrection of Christ and we will not adequately appreciate the unique purpose of His birth or His death--in other words, there is no way to truly celebrate Christmas or Easter--without understanding that there was an actual Adam and Eve who fell from an actual Eden, with all the consequences that fall carried with it. I do not know the details of what happened on this planet before that, but I do know these two were created under the divine hand of God, that for a time they lived alone in a paradisiacal setting where there was neither human death nor future family, and that through a sequence of choices they transgressed a commandment of God which required that they leave their garden setting but which allowed them to have children before facing physical death.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/book-of-remembrance?lang=eng I would rather have the Book of Remembrance then the record from the lost tribes... Maybe Nelson has a copy