Jesus is the Son of God

[Gramajane]

Not wanting to bring up controversy,

that might offend some,

but LDS believe ALL human beings are spiritual sons or daughters of God,

and even that Satan (who was cast out of heaven was born spiritually as one of us)

in the KJV Bible we find in Job 1 :6 " Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

[Gramajane]

a bit of time still :)

I just did a quick search and did not find "only son of God" without the "begotten" in it.

sorry for typos as I can't copy and paste on this computer, and must type from looking at my Iphone!

[Windseeker]

ok, I have a few more moments-- I believe Jesus is called "the only *begotton* Son of God?

I do not remember where is says "only son of God" without the begotton, in there?

by the way, I understand the way begotten is used in the bible, indicates physical father of, and not adopted or like father of a nation, (not human)?

They removed it in the New Bible

King James Bible: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

New International Version: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

[Guest gopecon]

We are different from Christ because our parents are both mortal. Jesus' Father was(is) immortal. We are His spirit brothers and sisters - He was just better in every way than the rest of us. As for Adam and Eve, we don't really know how they were created - it was just not in the same way that Jesus was.

[Gramajane]

in KJV 2 Cor 11:3

"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety so you minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ,

4 for if he that cometh preaches another Jesus, whom we have not preached...

To me this is saying that -- understanding Christ is *simple*, even uneducated shepherds understood, and so to me, for later times to take on complicated doctrines that are not the simplicity of a Father and Son relationship, would be corrupted doctrine?

[Gramajane]

in KJV 2 Cor 11:3

"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety so you minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ,

4 for if he that cometh preaches another Jesus, whom we have not preached...

To me this is saying that -- understanding Christ is *simple*, even uneducated shepherds understood, and so to me, for later times to take on complicated doctrines that are not the simplicity of a Father and Son relationship, would be corrupted doctrine?

[Gramajane]

I believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in his only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost.

I believe that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way back to live with God the Father,

that we must have faith in Jesus Christ, and obey his commandments, repent and be baptized as he directed by one having the proper priesthood authority from God, and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands.

Then we must continue to endure in obeying the commandments and repenting again as often as needed as we are not perfect and can NOT make it without Jesus atonement, as he is the Savior!

(Elohim (( sp?)) has, I understand, an ending that means plural in Hebrew, though even the Jews (except messianic?) have problems with that.

So to me,

Jesus Christ organized his church

Men changed it

It has been brought back to earth by an angel as prophesied in

Rev 14:6 "And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to eery nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people."

And why would it need to be brought back, unless it had been lost from the earth as also prophesied in the bible, in *many* places, that there would come a "falling away first" before Jesus return?

[Gramajane]

ok, NOW I really must go. ttul I hope!

[Windseeker]

The Savior Jesus Christ is also called the Firstborn. There is many examples in the Old Testament of God Sacrificing his first born son. One example is the sacrifice of Isaac.

Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect

We believe he is our elder brother. Thus the term Firstborn. Meaning there are others.

He being the only begotten of the Father upon this earth thus he was immortal. He was perfect and without sin and only an immortal could suffer as he did and handle the weight of sin. His death was a voluntary choice for our salvation. Only thru him can we be saved.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Windseeker

[SteveVH]

They removed it in the New Bible

King James Bible: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

New International Version: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Who is "they". These are just different transliterations. I have absolutely no problem with the word "begotten". It means that Christ was not created, as were Adam and Eve. They are not "begotten" of the Father. They were created, just as you and I are. I actually prefer "begotten" to "one and only".

[Windseeker]

Who is "they".

Occupy Wallstreet??...J/K

Whomever created that new version.

Begotten, beget is used allot in the scriptures. It means to be born.

I like this scripture

1John5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

1John5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.

So if we Love the Father we should Love his Children.

[Justice]

He being the only begotten of the Father upon this earth thus he was immortal.

He inherited blood and the ability to die from His mortal mother. He was, in fact, mortal. He bled; He died.

[Justice]

I'd like to see you do a "study" of John 17 in this thread. You can post a verse and offer comentary. Everywhere in John 17 the word "one" appears, I'd like to see you post that scripture and your comments on what it means how Christ used it in His prayer.

This goes for anyone who believes in the Trinity.

[Windseeker]

He inherited blood and the ability to die from His mortal mother. He was, in fact, mortal. He bled; He died.

Yes he was mortal so he could die but he inherited immortality from his Father. I always thought that's what made him different and that he could voluntarily offer up his life and be able to not die when suffering for all our sins until he chose.

I get this from Alma 34.

I'm pretty sure, but I'm far from being a scholor..just your run of the mill RM. Pretty sure well have blood in the next life, but I think it might be all glowy and sparkley.

[SteveVH]

I'd like to see you do a "study" of John 17 in this thread. You can post a verse and offer comentary. Everywhere in John 17 the word "one" appears, I'd like to see you post that scripture and your comments on what it means how Christ used it in His prayer.

This goes for anyone who believes in the Trinity.

Well, I don't have time to do a "study" of John 17 at the moment, but I will be happy to look through it and then comment later. I'm not sure that is necessary, however. I certainly believe that we will become one with God by sharing in the life of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We believe that we are the Body of Christ, as Paul spoke of. This is the central message, in Catholicism, of the Eucharist. We become "one" with Christ, which means that we also become one with the Father and the Holy Spirit. You cannot become more "one" than that. This "oneness" will be most fully realized when we are united with God and all the saints in heaven. It does not mean that we become equal to God. It means that we share in his divinity.

[SteveVH]

He inherited blood and the ability to die from His mortal mother. He was, in fact, mortal. He bled; He died.

You are correct in that Jesus was mortal, but he was also divine. He had the power to raise himself from the dead. "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." (John 2:19)

[Seminarysnoozer]

Why do you think that Jesus is called the only Son of God? Are we not also called sons and daughters of God? How then can Jesus be the only Son of God?

Because, like we have stated before, we believe He is the Only Begotten in the flesh. This view requires the prerequisite understanding of the dual nature of our being, the spirit and the flesh as two entities. Jesus is the Only Begotten Son, not the only son. If we separate the word Begotten from that statement and not realize that we are talking about the flesh then I can see where you are coming from. But that is in reference to the flesh. Our flesh is of the Fall of Adam, Jesus has the Only Begotten flesh allowing Him to be the Savior.

In other words the genealogy of the spirit and the flesh are and can be different, they come from different sources. This is why I tried to explain before that your argument about "man" (the combined body and spirit) not being divine is true if you include the genealogy of the body. So your only argument would have to be that the spirit of man is not divine to make any convincing statement to a Latter Day Saint. There is no place in the Bible that I am aware of, that says the spirit of man was created. It was delivered via metaphorically breathing it into the body but that doesn't say anything about its creation or birth.

[Seminarysnoozer]

You are correct in that Jesus was mortal, but he was also divine. He had the power to raise himself from the dead. "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." (John 2:19)

Just like all of us, a mortal body and a divine spirit. How is that different from anyone?

The "temple" in that verse is in reference to His body, not His spirit. Or, do you think His spirit was destroyed also? See .. you already believe there is a difference between spirit and body. If the body can be destroyed without destroying the spirit, those two things are separate.

[Gramajane]

Job done :) I have a little time again :)

I do not believe that we will have what we consider as human blood when we are resurrected,

but that is just because Jesus said "a spirit hath not flesh and BONE as ye see me have"

[volgadon]

ok, I have a few more moments-- I believe Jesus is called "the only *begotton* Son of God?

I do not remember where is says "only son of God" without the begotton, in there?

by the way, I understand the way begotten is used in the bible, indicates physical father of, and not adopted or like father of a nation, (not human)?

Monogenes was usually used to indicate a favoured or unique status, rather than literally "begotten" or only one in existence.

[Gramajane]

What does the word "monogenes" mean ?

[volgadon]

What does the word "monogenes" mean ?

That is the Greek word translated by "only begotten."

[Justice]

Yes he was mortal so he could die but he inherited immortality from his Father. I always thought that's what made him different and that he could voluntarily offer up his life and be able to not die when suffering for all our sins until he chose.

I think what confused me at first is that you can't be both mortal and immortal at the same time. I think the technical way to say it is that He inherited the ability not to die from His Father, even though He inherited blood and mortality from his mortal mother. That might sound like a technicality, but being "immortal" is not necessarily the same thing as having the ability to not die. If you are immortal you do not need the ability to not die, by nature of being immortal means you have a physical body but it cannot be "separated" from your spirit, or your body cannot die.

I believe mortal and immortal are opposites and you cannot be both at the same time. Being mortal you have blood flowing through your veins, being immortal you do not. I have read it termed that an immortal body is "quickened by spirit not by blood," but no one really know exactly what it means.

...other than that a resurrected and glorified body does not have blood.

I believe Christ was not "immortal" until He somehow miraculously "shed His blood" as part of the atonement, and therefore reversed the effects of the fall in His own body. His shedding of blood was not simply "bleeding" as we do, and it is never worded that way. "Shedding" is to "put of" or "remove," like a snake sheds it's skin. To me it's one of the beauties of the atonement and how the "technical" part of it falls perfectly in line with what happened in the Garden of Eden. Adam fell and became mortal, meaning he "gained" blood, or the reverse of "shedding" blood.

Here are some words from Bruce R. McConkie:

He has revealed to us the basic verities which enable us to understand the true doctrine of creation. This doctrine is that the Lord Jesus Christ is both the Creator and the Redeemer of this earth and all that on it is, save only man. It is that the Lord God himself, the Father of us all, came down and created man, male and female, in his own image and likeness. It is that the earth and all else were created in a paradisiacal state so there could be a fall. It is that the Great Creator became the Redeemer so he could ransom men from the effects of the Fall, thereby bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. It is that the Creation, the Fall, and the Atonement are the three pillars of eternity. It is that all who accept him as both the Creator and the Redeemer have power to become joint-heirs with him and thereby inherit all that his Father hath.

Christ and the Creation - Liahona Sept. 1983 - liahona

And for some inspiried reading, and, in my opinion, the greatest talk ever given at General Conference in the modern era, read the last talk Elder McConkie ever gave in Conference before he passed:

The Purifying Power of Gethsemane - Liahona Apr. 2011 - liahona

Here is an excerpt:

I am one of His witnesses, and in a coming day I shall feel the nail marks in His hands and in His feet and shall wet His feet with my tears.

But I shall not know any better then than I know now that He is God’s Almighty Son, that He is our Savior and Redeemer, and that salvation comes in and through His atoning blood and in no other way.

Edited October 15, 2011 by Justice

[SteveVH]

The Savior Jesus Christ is also called the Firstborn. There is many examples in the Old Testament of God Sacrificing his first born son. One example is the sacrifice of Isaac.

Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect

We believe he is our elder brother. Thus the term Firstborn. Meaning there are others.

Again, one must understand what these terms meant to the author of the text and those to which it was directed at that time and in that place, language and culture. The term "first-born" meant the child that opened the womb. Under Mosaic law, it was the "first-born" son that was to be sanctified (see Ex 34:20). Does this then mean that the parents had to wait until a second son was born before they could call the their first the "first-born"? Of course not. The first male child of a marriage was termed the "first-born" even if they had no subsequent children. There is a funerary inscription that was discovered in Egypt that illustrates this principal very well. I'll try to find the reference again if anyone doubts it. It refers to a woman who died during the birth of her "first-born". I think it is clear that she had no other children.

He being the only begotten of the Father upon this earth thus he was immortal. He was perfect and without sin and only an immortal could suffer as he did and handle the weight of sin. His death was a voluntary choice for our salvation. Only thru him can we be saved.

While I agree with most of your statement, from my point of view there are several problems with part of it. It seems that you are saying that Christ's suffering was somehow mitigated by his being divine and that you are equating divinity with immortality. Certainly immortality is part of divinity, but is is also a part of humanity. Our souls are immortal but we are not God. Our souls will live forever in one place or the other; either with God in heaven, or without God in hell, or as you prefer, the outer-darkness (the second death). As far as his death being a voluntary choice and that through him only can we be saved I agree 100%.

The other problem is this. Jesus was the "only begotten" before he came to earth. He is the "only begotten" from eternity, not just on this earth, but also in heaven.

[SteveVH]

I think what confused me at first is that you can't be both mortal and immortal at the same time. I think the technical way to say it is that He inherited the ability not to die from His Father, even though He inherited blood and mortality from his mortal mother. That might sound like a technicality, but being "immortal" is not necessarily the same thing as having the ability to not die. If you are immortal you do not need the ability to not die, by nature of being immortal means you have a physical body but it cannot be "separated" from your spirit, or your body cannot die.

I believe mortal and immortal are opposites and you cannot be both at the same time. Being mortal you have blood flowing through your veins, being immortal you do not. I have read it termed that an immortal body is "quickened by spirit not by blood," but no one really know exactly what it means.

...other than that a resurrected and glorified body does not have blood.

You last statement caught my eye and so I am just asking for clarification. As always, please correct me if I have misunderstood, but I am under the impression that you believe that Adam and Eve did not have blood until after the fall as blood was necessary in order to procreate. If that is not true then the rest of my point doesn't hold water and we can stop right here. If I am right in my understanding, then how do you believe you will procreate for eternity if a glorified body does not have blood?

Keep in mind, I am not saying that a glorified body does have blood and I've never understood why anyone would believe that Adam and Eve did not have blood from day one. But this is my understanding of your beliefs and there seems to be a conflict, at least in my mind.

Thanks.