Snigmorder

I have some questions about Jesus.

Recommended Posts

1. Why was Jesus able to satisfy the Law?

1a. What does it mean that the curse of Adam had no bearing on Jesus?

1b. I've heard it said that Jesus has power because his Father was God. This sounds wrong because it suggests that power is genetic. Therefore, I could have power as well if my Father is also God.    

 

2. Why was Christ able to be the Lord Omnipotent in his pre mortality? Was it his level of intelligence? What was it about Jesus that made him able to be the Lord Omnipotent? God gave him power, but why Jesus?

2a. Did Jesus abtain his pre mortal intelligence by moving from grace to grace by his own obedience and devotion to the Father? Is this how he became like unto God?

 

3. D Todd christofferson, in his talk titled "The Resurrection of Jesus Christ," states that Christ exists independent of any other person, he has power of himself to exist. How is this possible? Does this mean that Christ's person has power independent of the father? From whence has this power come? Is it a generation of his body? Is it a gift from the Father that the Father can't take away? 

 

4. Why can we call Christ, God? In both pre and post mortality?

Edited by Snigmorder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Why was Jesus able to satisfy the Law?

He was perfect like the spotless sacrificial lamb and so a worthy sacrifice. He was half Divine and thus had the physical power to stop his torment and destroy his tormentors.

1a. What does it mean that the curse of Adam had no bearing on Jesus?

i did not realize that we believed in the curse of Adam. I thought this was a Catholic concept. Article of faith 2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

1b. I've heard it said that Jesus has power because his Father was God. This sounds wrong because it suggests that power is genetic. Therefore, I could have power as well if my Father is also God.    

You have inherited greatness and virtues from Heaveny Father.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

1. Why was Jesus able to satisfy the Law?

1a. What does it mean that the curse of Adam had no bearing on Jesus?

1b. I've heard it said that Jesus has power because his Father was God. This sounds wrong because it suggests that power is genetic. Therefore, I could have power as well if my Father is also God.    

1. Jesus satisfied the law of Moses in that he kept the requirements of it. No other person could have kept all the statutes except for Jesus. 

1a. Our own imperfections coupled with Adam's transgression cut us off from full and complete communication with God. Jesus, upon entering this world suffered no such separation. Because he was more advanced than us he was not cut off from God as are we. 

1b. I believe there is a mystery here. Jesus is called the first born in the spirit and the only begotten in the flesh. His unique status was earned over time before entering this mortality. The fact that is mortal Father was God is due to his obedience and not simply his genes. 

4 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

2. Why was Christ able to be the Lord Omnipotent in his pre mortality? Was it his level of intelligence? What was it about Jesus that made him able to be the Lord Omnipotent? God gave him power, but why Jesus?

2a. Did Jesus abtain his pre mortal intelligence by moving from grace to grace by his own obedience and devotion to the Father? Is this how he became like unto God?

2. Christ had progressed further than us before this earth life. For that reason he was the Lord. 

2a. Yes Jesus did obtain his pre-mortal intelligence and power through obedience. 

4 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

3. D Todd christofferson, in his talk titled "The Resurrection of Jesus Christ," states that Christ exists independent of any other person, he has power of himself to exist. How is this possible? Does this mean that Christ's person has power independent of the father? From whence has this power come? Is it a generation of his body? Is it a gift from the Father that the Father can't take away? 

3. All beings, including ourselves, are independent in their own sphere. Like Jesus, a portion of who we are is not created, nor indeed can be as Joseph Smith stated in the King Follet discourse. We are free to act. God cannot take it away, only we ourselves through our own disobedience can give it up. 

4 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

4. Why can we call Christ, God? In both pre and post mortality?

4. Because of the glory and stature he obtained before this life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

1. Why was Jesus able to satisfy the Law?

1a. What does it mean that the curse of Adam had no bearing on Jesus?

1b. I've heard it said that Jesus has power because his Father was God. This sounds wrong because it suggests that power is genetic. Therefore, I could have power as well if my Father is also God.   

2. Why was Christ able to be the Lord Omnipotent in his pre mortality? Was it his level of intelligence? What was it about Jesus that made him able to be the Lord Omnipotent? God gave him power, but why Jesus?

2a. Did Jesus abtain his pre mortal intelligence by moving from grace to grace by his own obedience and devotion to the Father? Is this how he became like unto God?

3. D Todd christofferson, in his talk titled "The Resurrection of Jesus Christ," states that Christ exists independent of any other person, he has power of himself to exist. How is this possible? Does this mean that Christ's person has power independent of the father? From whence has this power come? Is it a generation of his body? Is it a gift from the Father that the Father can't take away?

4. Why can we call Christ, God? In both pre and post mortality?

Just to briefly address each question:

1. To satisfy the Law (the capital "L" conveying the Eternal law governing all God's children qualifying for the second estate) refers to singularly meeting the demands of justice (physical and spiritual death) upon all who break it, or meeting these demands by proxy. There are many ways to break the Law: willfully, ignorantly, and by proxy (i.e. the Fall of Adam). There is only one way to receive the benefit of this satisfaction (willfully).

1a. It think the curse of Adam did have bearing on Jesus in that He could physically die and could be tempted. Do you have a reference that it didn't?

1b. We too have power because our Father is God. he has more power (even "all") by virtue of His intelligence and use of agency.

2. See 1b.

2a. I believe this is the case, to the extent a pre-mortal being can progress. Jesus became part of the Godhead (the Divine Attribute) consisting at the minimum of a Council of Gods: the Father, who has a body and the Holy Spirit, who does not.

3. The talk says:

“Christ’s Resurrection shows that His existence is independent and everlasting. “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.” In this context, "existence" refers to the resurrected and not any other state. While we rely on him for our resurrection, He has that power within Himself, given Him of the Father.

“The Savior is not dependent on food or water or oxygen or any other substance or power or person for life. Both as Jehovah and Messiah, He is the great I Am, the self-existing God. He simply is and ever will be.” In this context, "life" is also the resurrected state.

He is the First-fruit, and became such independently; we can become like Him but only through His merits and works.

4. Because He achieved Godhood in each estate by becoming one with the Father to the requisite degree to be one with Him in carrying out His work and glory, the idea being to offer every opportunity to bring the rest of us along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

I did not realize that we believed in the curse of Adam.

I didn't know that was a term the Catholics used. By the curse of Adam, I'm referring to the state of being cut off from God both spiritually and temporally, because of the fall. I don't know if the church uses the term, or the scriptures.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

1. Why was Jesus able to satisfy the Law?

This sort of question is so nebulous as to be impossible to answer. "Why"? Because he was sinless. Because he was diligent. Because he was the Son. Because he was greater than all the rest. And really, how do any of those answer the question?

Not trying to play semantic games. I honestly believe the question is not a useful one.

9 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

1a. What does it mean that the curse of Adam had no bearing on Jesus?

It doesn't mean anything. This idea, insofar as it exists at all, is the Mormon equivalent of the Catholic doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception. We do not believe that Catholic doctrine, because we disbelieve the foundations of its very existence -- that all men and women, except Mary, are born under the mortal stain of Adam's sin.

9 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

1b. I've heard it said that Jesus has power because his Father was God. This sounds wrong because it suggests that power is genetic. Therefore, I could have power as well if my Father is also God.

Ah, yes, the old "Jesus as demigod" trope. Jesus was like Achilles, or Hercules, or Mister Spock -- half mortal human, half something superior. The half-something-superior part gives him superhuman abilities in some way, allowing him to transcend his humanity.

This is a very popular Mormon heresy. But make no mistake, it is very much a heresy. Jesus was a man, just like we are men. He was subject to like passions, to like temptations, and IMO to like weaknesses of the flesh. Jesus' Secret Sauce wasn't his parentage. It was that he was the greatest of all, God made flesh. Jesus won through because of his own virtue, not because of the magical armor of protection, Special Sword + a billion, and genetic inheritance he received at birth.

Your Father is God. That makes you potentially very special. But Jesus is far greater. That's the point.

9 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

2. Why was Christ able to be the Lord Omnipotent in his pre mortality? Was it his level of intelligence? What was it about Jesus that made him able to be the Lord Omnipotent? God gave him power, but why Jesus?

I don't know. It is more than simply that the premortal Jesus earned a higher position than us. This is an area where AFAIK we don't have specific revelation. People tend to fill in the holes with speculation and logical-seeming extensions. I believe the real answer is that we don't know.

9 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

2a. Did Jesus abtain his pre mortal intelligence by moving from grace to grace by his own obedience and devotion to the Father? Is this how he became like unto God?

This much seems indisputable.

9 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

3. D Todd christofferson, in his talk titled "The Resurrection of Jesus Christ," states that Christ exists independent of any other person, he has power of himself to exist. How is this possible? Does this mean that Christ's person has power independent of the father? From whence has this power come? Is it a generation of his body? Is it a gift from the Father that the Father can't take away?

I do not know exactly what Elder Christofferson meant. I don't know what it could mean that someone "exists independently of any other person". I do not see how the Son could have power and existence independent of the Father, except in the sense that each of us is an eternal, self-existent being. So again, I don't know.

9 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

4. Why can we call Christ, God? In both pre and post mortality?

Because he is God. Because he fulfills the definition of the word "God". Because there is one God, and that God is the Father, and the Son has received of the fulness of the Father and his is agent in every respect. That's my best take on it.

Edited by Vort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vort said:

I do not know exactly what Elder Christofferson meant. I don't know what it could mean that someone "exists independently of any other person". I do not see how the Son could have power and existence independent of the Father, except in the sense that each of us is an eternal, self-existent being. So again, I don't know.

Here's the exact quote. I think I might have misrepresented it.

Christ’s Resurrection shows that His existence is independent and everlasting. “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.”17Jesus said:

“Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.

“No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.”18

The Savior is not dependent on food or water or oxygen or any other substance or power or person for life. Both as Jehovah and Messiah, He is the great I Am, the self-existing God.19 He simply is and ever will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

1. Why was Jesus able to satisfy the Law?

1a. What does it mean that the curse of Adam had no bearing on Jesus?

1b. I've heard it said that Jesus has power because his Father was God. This sounds wrong because it suggests that power is genetic. Therefore, I could have power as well if my Father is also God.    

 

1. Because he was both the law giver and the law proctor.

1a. The curse of Adam is the curse of man.  The title of "Adam" is symbolic of all mankind.  The curse was death and it was death that had no bearing on Jesus - rather he and he alone has power over death.

1b.  Because the Father of Jesus was G-d, Jesus was given power over death. 

Quote

2. Why was Christ able to be the Lord Omnipotent in his pre mortality? Was it his level of intelligence? What was it about Jesus that made him able to be the Lord Omnipotent? God gave him power, but why Jesus?

2a. Did Jesus abtain his pre mortal intelligence by moving from grace to grace by his own obedience and devotion to the Father? Is this how he became like unto God?

2. Because he progressed that far before the foundations of the earth were laid.  What was involved in order for him to obtain such has not been revealed.  Never-the-less, I believe that his livel of intelligence (light of truth) played into it.

2a. The Father gives unto his children commandments and covenants through his grace.  Therefore, it is because of grace that Jesus (as we all) were able to receive of the covenants and commandments.  I believe we are to understand that Jesus was the most obedient to the covenants and commandments.  This is not to say he never had difficulty but that he was able to overcome any difficulties and obtain a higher level of obedience than anyone else.

Quote

3. D Todd christofferson, in his talk titled "The Resurrection of Jesus Christ," states that Christ exists independent of any other person, he has power of himself to exist. How is this possible? Does this mean that Christ's person has power independent of the father? From whence has this power come? Is it a generation of his body? Is it a gift from the Father that the Father can't take away? 

Jesus did not need anyone else to be exalted.  He took upon himself the role of Messiah as a sacrifice and gift to us that we also could be exalted like him and the Father.

Quote

4. Why can we call Christ, God? In both pre and post mortality?

Because it was a title and position given him by the Father.  If one understands kingdoms, then they understand that the supreme Suzerain can give such titles to a subordinate governor (sometimes called a vassal) in any part of his realm.  We do not know the extent of the Father’s kingdom but we do know that Jesus is our “Mediator” and “Advocate” with the Father.  Mediator and advocate are both terms used to designate a subordinate governor for associated subjects with the supreme Suzerain of a Kingdom.  It is also important to note that with the Fall of Adam that mankind became exiles to the divine kingdom of heaven and are under Jesus in a lesser exile kingdom until we can be restored to full citizenship in the kingdom of the Father.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Vort

“Ah, yes, the old "Jesus as demigod" trope. Jesus was like Achilles, or Hercules, or Mister Spock -- half mortal human, half something superior. The half-something-superior part gives him superhuman abilities in some way, allowing him to transcend his humanity.

This is a very popular Mormon heresy. But make no mistake, it is very much a heresy. Jesus was a man, just like we are men. He was subject to like passions, to like temptations, and IMO to like weaknesses of the flesh. Jesus' Secret Sauce wasn't his parentage. It was that he was the greatest of all, God made flesh. Jesus won through because of his own virtue, not because of the magical armor of protection, Special Sword + a billion, and genetic inheritance he received at birth.”

I think Jesus was half a god. Remember him performing miracles? How could he calm seas, smite fig trees or raise the dead without being partially divine? Did Jesus have the ability to get down off the cross, if he wished to? Surely, this speaks to divinity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Vort

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/what-mormons-believe-about-jesus-christ

  • We believe Jesus is the Son of God the Father and as such inherited powers of godhood and divinity from His Father, including immortality, the capacity to live forever. While He walked the dusty road of Palestine as a man, He possessed the powers of a God and ministered as one having authority, including power over the elements and even power over life and death.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

I think Jesus was half a god. Remember him performing miracles? How could he calm seas, smite fig trees or raise the dead without being partially divine? Did Jesus have the ability to get down off the cross, if he wished to? Surely, this speaks to divinity?

Jesus was not "half" a god. He was, and is God. The Son of God. The Almighty. The great Jehovah. I AM. He was fully God. He was also fully mortal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Vort said:

 The half-something-superior part gives him superhuman abilities in some way, allowing him to transcend his humanity.

This is a very popular Mormon heresy. But make no mistake, it is very much a heresy. Jesus was a man, just like we are men. He was subject to like passions, to like temptations, and IMO to like weaknesses of the flesh. Jesus' Secret Sauce wasn't his parentage. It was that he was the greatest of all, God made flesh. Jesus won through because of his own virtue, not because of the magical armor of protection, Special Sword + a billion, and genetic inheritance he received at birth.

I suppose then James E. Talmage was a heretic then:

Invite a student to read aloud the following statement by Elder James E. Talmage of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles:

“That Child to be born of Mary … 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” (Jesus the Christ, 3rd ed. [1916], 81). (emphasis added)

Further from Talmage, "Elder Talmage also taught that through Jesus’s mortal mother, Mary, He inherited the ability to ‘lay down His life voluntarily.’ But from His Heavenly Father, Jesus inherited the ability to endure suffering during His atoning sacrifice ‘such as no other being who has lived on earth might even conceive as possible’ (Jesus the Christ, 613). Since this suffering would be ‘more than man can suffer, except it be unto death’ (Mosiah 3:7), only a Being with power over death could endure it” (New Testament Student Manual [Church Educational System manual, 2014], 141)." (emphasis added) Obviously more than just his obedience and virtue. Without the power granted to him from the traits inherited by being God the Father's son. Without this inherited ability, even if he was virtuous he could not have endured the suffering he endured.

Yep, make no mistake, it isn't a heresy, but yours is definitely a personal opinion on the matter, and a wrong opinion -- make no mistake.  Darn lds.org teaching heresies again: https://www.lds.org/manual/new-testament-seminary-teacher-manual/introduction-to-the-gospel-according-to-st-luke/lesson-43-luke-1?lang=eng

Mormon News Room: "We believe Jesus is the Son of God the Father and as such inherited powers of godhood and divinity from His Father, including immortality, the capacity to live forever. While He walked the dusty road of Palestine as a man, He possessed the powers of a God and ministered as one having authority, including power over the elements and even power over life and death." (emphasis added) http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/what-mormons-believe-about-jesus-christ

Even more evidence that this thought of Christ inheritance from God the Father, "Matthew 1:18–23. Jesus Christ is the divine son of Heavenly Father and Mary. From Mary He inherited mortality, which allowed Him to die. From His Heavenly Father He inherited immortality and the power to resurrect." (emphasis added)

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.  Because he is God.

2.  Because he is God.

3.  Because he is God.

4.  Because he is God.

Title Page to the Book of Mormon:   "And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations"

Testimony of the Three Witnesses:  "And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen."

Any other questions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

@Vort

“Ah, yes, the old "Jesus as demigod" trope. Jesus was like Achilles, or Hercules, or Mister Spock -- half mortal human, half something superior. The half-something-superior part gives him superhuman abilities in some way, allowing him to transcend his humanity.

This is a very popular Mormon heresy. But make no mistake, it is very much a heresy. Jesus was a man, just like we are men. He was subject to like passions, to like temptations, and IMO to like weaknesses of the flesh. Jesus' Secret Sauce wasn't his parentage. It was that he was the greatest of all, God made flesh. Jesus won through because of his own virtue, not because of the magical armor of protection, Special Sword + a billion, and genetic inheritance he received at birth.”

I think Jesus was half a god. Remember him performing miracles? How could he calm seas, smite fig trees or raise the dead without being partially divine? Did Jesus have the ability to get down off the cross, if he wished to? Surely, this speaks to divinity?

Is divinity required to perform miracles? Even raise the dead? Does that mean Joseph Smith performed miracles because he was half-god? Or perhaps directly descended from Jesus? What then of Elijah raising the widow's dead son? Is he also half-god?

12 hours ago, Anddenex said:

I suppose then James E. Talmage was a heretic then:

Invite a student to read aloud the following statement by Elder James E. Talmage of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles:

“That Child to be born of Mary … 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” (Jesus the Christ, 3rd ed. [1916], 81). (emphasis added)

Further from Talmage, "Elder Talmage also taught that through Jesus’s mortal mother, Mary, He inherited the ability to ‘lay down His life voluntarily.’ But from His Heavenly Father, Jesus inherited the ability to endure suffering during His atoning sacrifice ‘such as no other being who has lived on earth might even conceive as possible’ (Jesus the Christ, 613). Since this suffering would be ‘more than man can suffer, except it be unto death’ (Mosiah 3:7), only a Being with power over death could endure it” (New Testament Student Manual [Church Educational System manual, 2014], 141)." (emphasis added) Obviously more than just his obedience and virtue. Without the power granted to him from the traits inherited by being God the Father's son. Without this inherited ability, even if he was virtuous he could not have endured the suffering he endured.

Yep, make no mistake, it isn't a heresy, but yours is definitely a personal opinion on the matter, and a wrong opinion -- make no mistake.  Darn lds.org teaching heresies again: https://www.lds.org/manual/new-testament-seminary-teacher-manual/introduction-to-the-gospel-according-to-st-luke/lesson-43-luke-1?lang=eng

Mormon News Room: "We believe Jesus is the Son of God the Father and as such inherited powers of godhood and divinity from His Father, including immortality, the capacity to live forever. While He walked the dusty road of Palestine as a man, He possessed the powers of a God and ministered as one having authority, including power over the elements and even power over life and death." (emphasis added) http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/what-mormons-believe-about-jesus-christ

Even more evidence that this thought of Christ inheritance from God the Father, "Matthew 1:18–23. Jesus Christ is the divine son of Heavenly Father and Mary. From Mary He inherited mortality, which allowed Him to die. From His Heavenly Father He inherited immortality and the power to resurrect." (emphasis added)

These quotes seem to focus on Jesus inheriting immortality from God - or at least, the ability to choose when He would die. Do you think He inherited more than this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

Is divinity required to perform miracles? Even raise the dead? Does that mean Joseph Smith performed miracles because he was half-god? Or perhaps directly descended from Jesus? What then of Elijah raising the widow's dead son? Is he also half-god?

People tend to equate the power of God as if its magic from a good (or bad) fantasy novel.

Harry Potter, after all, had his name down for Hogwarts from the beginning because of his parentage, right?

Edited by The Folk Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

Is divinity required to perform miracles? Even raise the dead? Does that mean Joseph Smith performed miracles because he was half-god? Or perhaps directly descended from Jesus? What then of Elijah raising the widow's dead son? Is he also half-god?

Miracles are performed through the power of God (Priesthood).  Anybody who has a righteous desire can perform miracles as God wills it.

There's no such thing as "half-god".  That's them Greek or Roman gods that is, of course, not God.

 

4 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

These quotes seem to focus on Jesus inheriting immortality from God - or at least, the ability to choose when He would die. Do you think He inherited more than this?

Jesus is God.  He inherited everything that is God not because he just happens to be lucky enough to be God's son.  He became God out of his own perfect obedience in the same manner that we will become God if we do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mordorbund said:

These quotes seem to focus on Jesus inheriting immortality from God - or at least, the ability to choose when He would die. Do you think He inherited more than this?

Let's review the highlighted portions of the quotes:

1) The Child Jesus was to inherit the physical, mental, and spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers that characterized His parents

2) Jesus inherited the ability to endure suffering during His atoning sacrifice ‘such as no other being who has lived on earth might even conceive as possible

3) inherited powers of godhood and divinity from His Father

4) From His Heavenly Father He inherited immortality and the power to resurrect.

The first quote emphasizes "physical, mental, spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers from his parents. God the Father was Christ's earthly Father. What physical, mental, spiritual traits, and powers did Christ inherit from his Father?

We know he inherited at least three things: 1) Powers of Godhood and divinity. 2) He was the only "human" who could say no to death. He was immortal. No one could take his life. He had to freely give it. 3) He had the "power" to resurrect himself. No other human who ever lived or died could resurrect (the combining of body and spirit in glory never to be separated again) anyone, let alone himself/herself. Only Christ could resurrect himself, inherited power because God the Father was his earthly Father. 4) He could endure suffering that no other human could endure due to his parentage.

I assume the powers of Godhood and divinity would umbrella "immortality" and "resurrection." So "immortality" could not have been the only thing he inherited. None of us are able to perform any miracle by ourselves. All the miracles we perform are through Christ and his priesthood, which he has bestowed upon all who are his followers. All miracles we perform are in his name (divine). I would assume these are also inherited powers of Godhood and divinity that none of us have in and of ourselves. It is only through and by Christ we can accomplish what we accomplish. When the Savior performed miracles they were performed by him saying "be healed." When I, or any other son or daughter of God (spiritually) performs a miracle it is in his name whose priesthood we hold.

I would say the quotes focused on more than just "immortality" from God. Are these the only things he inherited? I don't know. I haven't done any in-depth study to say anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

The first quote emphasizes "physical, mental, spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers from his parents.

Huh.  There's a thought I never considered before.  Think I need the original quote now:

Quote

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

Physical, sure, I inherited physical traits from my mortal parents.  Mental - sure, we generally consider that part of the DNA inheritance.  But spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers from mortal parents?  There's an idea I have never considered.  From spiritual parents, duh, but mortal?  I think I'll let the back of my brain ponder this for a while.  Perhaps this quote is meant to cover things "inherited" through upbringing as well as DNA, after all, we believe Christ was taught by the Father in his childhood.  Still, I think I'll let the back of my brain mull this over some. :)

Edited by zil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/4/2017 at 3:45 PM, Anddenex said:

Let's review the highlighted portions of the quotes:

1) The Child Jesus was to inherit the physical, mental, and spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers that characterized His parents

2) Jesus inherited the ability to endure suffering during His atoning sacrifice ‘such as no other being who has lived on earth might even conceive as possible

3) inherited powers of godhood and divinity from His Father

4) From His Heavenly Father He inherited immortality and the power to resurrect.

The first quote emphasizes "physical, mental, spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers from his parents. God the Father was Christ's earthly Father. What physical, mental, spiritual traits, and powers did Christ inherit from his Father?

We know he inherited at least three things: 1) Powers of Godhood and divinity. 2) He was the only "human" who could say no to death. He was immortal. No one could take his life. He had to freely give it. 3) He had the "power" to resurrect himself. No other human who ever lived or died could resurrect (the combining of body and spirit in glory never to be separated again) anyone, let alone himself/herself. Only Christ could resurrect himself, inherited power because God the Father was his earthly Father. 4) He could endure suffering that no other human could endure due to his parentage.

I assume the powers of Godhood and divinity would umbrella "immortality" and "resurrection." So "immortality" could not have been the only thing he inherited. None of us are able to perform any miracle by ourselves. All the miracles we perform are through Christ and his priesthood, which he has bestowed upon all who are his followers. All miracles we perform are in his name (divine). I would assume these are also inherited powers of Godhood and divinity that none of us have in and of ourselves. It is only through and by Christ we can accomplish what we accomplish. When the Savior performed miracles they were performed by him saying "be healed." When I, or any other son or daughter of God (spiritually) performs a miracle it is in his name whose priesthood we hold.

I would say the quotes focused on more than just "immortality" from God. Are these the only things he inherited? I don't know. I haven't done any in-depth study to say anything else.

Are the Powers of Godhood inherited? In Christ is the fulness of the Godhead. I would argue that that fulness was given to him in the beginning, before the foundation of the world was. When He came to earth, he either a) maintained these powers because he retained his godhood throughout, or b) was granted them by His Father as He grew from grace to grace similar to how He granted them to His prophets as they grew from grace to grace.

Christ had the power to lay down His life and to take it up again. The scriptures are clear on this. What they are not clear on is how He received this power (except that it was from His Father). I'm willing to allow that it was inherited, but I would also note that Paul ties it theologically with His sustained guiltlessness. There's no reason why both can't apply in His case.

With specific regard to the Resurrection, the New Testament in some places says Jesus raised Himself from the dead and others say the Father raised Him from the dead. So I think there's doctrinal wiggle room here that self-resurrective powers are not found in a dominant gene.

Was godly endurance inherited or was it one of the "graces" He grew into and was granted by His Father because of His specific mission? Talmage notes that it's a superhuman ability to bleed from every pore and not pass out. But if His physical strength to endure only comes because of His birth Father, isn't it a bit inconsiderate that He chastises His apostles for not staying awake? 

Where does this put us with the doctrine that Christ is our Exemplar? If Christ withstood Satan's temptations because He inherited physical and spiritual traits from God, then why am I told to follow Him? Shouldn't I follow post-exilic Adam instead? Imagine a Rockefeller telling you that if you do exactly what he did you'll double your wealth too. All you have to do is follow him. nevermind that he inherited his first 100 million, you can also be a billionaire! It strikes me that either the doctrine of Christ's physical inheritance needs to be revised or else the doctrine of Christ as exemplar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mordorbund said:

Are the Powers of Godhood inherited? In Christ is the fulness of the Godhead. I would argue that that fulness was given to him in the beginning, before the foundation of the world was. When He came to earth, he either a) maintained these powers because he retained his godhood throughout, or b) was granted them by His Father as He grew from grace to grace similar to how He granted them to His prophets as they grew from grace to grace.

Christ had the power to lay down His life and to take it up again. The scriptures are clear on this. What they are not clear on is how He received this power (except that it was from His Father). I'm willing to allow that it was inherited, but I would also note that Paul ties it theologically with His sustained guiltlessness. There's no reason why both can't apply in His case.

With specific regard to the Resurrection, the New Testament in some places says Jesus raised Himself from the dead and others say the Father raised Him from the dead. So I think there's doctrinal wiggle room here that self-resurrective powers are not found in a dominant gene.

Was godly endurance inherited or was it one of the "graces" He grew into and was granted by His Father because of His specific mission? Talmage notes that it's a superhuman ability to bleed from every pore and not pass out. But if His physical strength to endure only comes because of His birth Father, isn't it a bit inconsiderate that He chastises His apostles for not staying awake? 

Where does this put us with the doctrine that Christ is our Exemplar? If Christ withstood Satan's temptations because He inherited physical and spiritual traits from God, then why am I told to follow Him? Shouldn't I follow post-exilic Adam instead? Imagine a Rockefeller telling you that if you do exactly what he did you'll double your wealth too. All you have to do is follow him. nevermind that he inherited his first 100 million, you can also be a billionaire! It strikes me that either the doctrine of Christ's physical inheritance needs to be revised or else the doctrine of Christ as exemplar. 

Would you consider your last statement a false dichotomy? A question that presents only two options while ignoring other alternatives? You provide, "It strikes me that either the doctrine of Christ's physical inheritance needs to be revised or else the doctrine of Christ as exemplar," which only allows for "inheritance" or Christ no longer our "exemplar." I would propose there are alternatives being missed. I will come back to this.

The first question, "Are the Powers of Godhood inherited"? According to the Church newsroom the powers of Godhood are indeed inherited, "inherited powers of godhood and divinity from His Father." James E. Talmage from a book the Church sends every missionary with (or at least did) specifies, "But from His Heavenly Father, Jesus inherited," giving a second witness (from an authoritative sources) to the notion of the "Powers of Godhood" are indeed inherited. Ours now becomes the responsibility to seek to understand this truth.

In the first paragraph, two options are once again provided that appear to create another false dichotomy? Or, possibly you had others on your mind but felt to focus on these two. We know, besides Christ, that others reached a similar level (e.g. Holy Ghost). When the Holy Ghost receives a mortal body will he also have the fulness of the Godhead? Or in order for the fulness of the Godhead to manifest in the flesh does God the Father need to be the mortal Father (inheritance and also maintaining Christ as our exemplar)? We have to admit that Christ was already different -- to some degree -- because of his parentage in contrast to ours.

I would propose that there isn't any wiggle room regarding resurrection. His birth, his immortality, his endurance, and his resurrection are all witnesses to his divinity which our lives (all other humans) have no witness to. The Church's manuals give witness that his "immortality" and "resurrection" were inherited from his Father (source:https://www.lds.org/manual/new-testament-teacher-resource-manual/the-gospel-according-to-saint-matthew/matthew-1-2?lang=eng). His ability to endure is not inconsiderate to me in any way, just as it wasn't inconsiderate to ask his apostles to "stay awake" for one hour. Am I inconsiderate when I ask my children to "stay awake" during one hour of sacrament? I would propose I am not. As a basketball player I would often hear my coach request greater endurance from those whose endurance was less than mine. Would this be inconsiderate of a coach to request stronger endurance upon those whose genetics were less than other players? There is nothing inconsiderate from a request, or disappointment, to extend ourselves.

"Where does this put us with the doctrine that Christ is our Exemplar?" I don't see any incongruence with Christ being our exemplar and what has been expressed. If Christ being the only begotten son of the Father doesn't inhibit him from being our exemplar, then I don't see how any other inherited power inhibits him from being our exemplar also. If the concept of him being an exemplar is maimed by inheritance, then it was maimed the moment he was born as God's only begotten son, which already separated us from him as we have two mortal parents. Then the question remains, "then why am I told to follow Him?" The answer still remains the same, "because he is the way back to the Father." We do follow "post-exilic Adam" in the same sense we follow President Monson. Nothing changes. I have not shared this before, and I hesitate to do so, but from my experience with you I would be curious to hear your thoughts regarding this verse in Alma 13, "Or in fine, in the first place they were on the same standing with their brethren; thus this holy calling being prepared from the foundation of the world for such as would not harden their hearts, being in and through the atonement of the Only Begotten Son, who was prepared."

I would maintain that Christ's inheritance, as being God's only begotten son, and his obedience and virtue (which obedience and virtue were maintained via moral agency), is definitely what allowed him to accomplish his mission. If any of these were not maintained he would not have been our Savior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2017 at 12:50 AM, Snigmorder said:

1. Why was Jesus able to satisfy the Law?

1a. What does it mean that the curse of Adam had no bearing on Jesus?

1b. I've heard it said that Jesus has power because his Father was God. This sounds wrong because it suggests that power is genetic. Therefore, I could have power as well if my Father is also God.   

I'll offer up some thoughts on this first question and see how that goes.

The first question is what did the law demand?  We would have to know first what was required prior to begin able to grasp how the law was satisfied.  We understand that it had to be innocent blood meaning someone who had not become subject to the curse of the Garden by having broken the law of the garden.  However, how does that fact of being innocent blood bear on the satisfying of the law.

From practically the very first, the Old Testament presents opportunity to to grasp what becomes key elements in understanding the atonement and the processes that activate its various elements.  The first conflict is that well known story of Cain and Able and the sacrifice of innocent blood that is Able’s.  I have long noted that Able and the elements of his life seem beyond coincidence to be clearly symbolic of the Savior. Of course the same can be said for Cain as a type of Satan. Able is a shepherd (Christ symbol) who cares for sheep (Christ’s flock).  Cain covets Ables’s sheep and would make them his. Able is the chosen son and in fact would be the Saviors direct lineage if not for Cain’s efforts to destroy that blood line.  While there are other symbolic potentials, for the moment the one I hope to expand on and emphasize as supremely significant, though often overlooked, is the concept of the claims of innocent blood for reparations for the breech of law that has robbed them of life. When the Lord approaches Cain after the slaying of Able the interaction is described in the following verses:

Genesis 4:9-13

9 And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?

10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground.

11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand;

12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.

13 And Cain said unto the Lord, My punishment is greater than I can bear.

One can easily be caught up in the heinous nature of what is deemed the first innocent life ever taken.  However, in keeping with the concept that all things point to Christ, it is entirely appropriate to examine this event to determine if indeed this event may teach us something of Christ’s mission and atonement. Clearly there are parallels as has been mentioned but pertinent to the atonement is the aspect of innocent blood having a voice and seeking and receiving some form of reparation for the innocent blood spilled and received by the earth.

The transition to verse 11 from verse 10 makes it apparent that the Lord has heard the cries of Abel’s blood and responds particular to that pleading with a just response to the claims for justice.  It is noteworthy that the response to this murderer is not an immediate loss of his life but instead he is allowed to live with penalties.  This might seem different with the nature of the response in the Garden where a death penalty was deemed appropriate.  Perhaps the difference of the kingdom in which the law is breached is a consideration as the Garden represents a terrestrial state, while after the fall, the earth enters a telestial state. However, for me it simply seems he is remanded to the judgments and penalties of the higher law of the Garden, while being permitted the time frames of the current estate and that in time he will receive a just reward after his probationary period at the times of final judgment.I recently read this quote from Orson Pratt that speaks in a similar fashion:

Had there been no other sin but that of Adam's, the redeemed earth would have become the eternal abode of all the posterity of Adam, without one exception. But both man and the earth have been still further corrupted by other sins. The posterity of Adam have transgressed the code of laws given since the fall, and subjected themselves to its penalty. This penalty does not interfere with the first penalty. Man will be redeemed from the first before the second will be fully inflicted. When his redemption from the first death is completed, then comes the judgment, when his own sins will be inquired into, and not Adam's. (Pratt, Orson - The Earth—Its Fall, Redemption, and Final Destiny—The Eternal Abode of the Righteous.Discourse by Professor Orson Pratt.Reported By: G. D. Watt.)

Further scriptural consideration into the claims of innocent blood continue to expand on the significance of the intentional shedding of innocent blood.

Alma 14:11

11 But Alma said unto him: The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory; and he doth suffer that they may do this thing, or that the people may do this thing unto them, according to the hardness of their hearts, that the judgments which he shall exercise upon them in his wrath may be just; and the blood of the innocent shall stand as a witness against them, yea, and cry mightily against them at the last day.

Alma provides profound insight when his observations are applied to Christ’s atonement.  One observation is that God allows certain unsavory situations to be fulfilled that he can render a just judgment.  If the people don’t do the crime they can’t be required to do the time so to speak. What’s more is that this must be.  Alma’s response does not really focus on stopping the crimes being committed but instead focuses on allowing the proper conditions to develop that these wicked people can be subject to a just judgment.

Part of what enables that justice is the fact that the condition of these who die being determined to be those that are innocent and undeserving of death will enable them to be witnesses against the wickedness of those who slay them. The term “cry mightily” could be determined to be the act of claiming their right to a just verdict against these who have robbed them of life and shed their innocent blood.  The term “blood of the innocent” seems an emphatic qualifier that reinforces by inference the expectation that justice is merited and appropriate and required and that it will be addressed in the appropriate time, in this case “at the last day”.

If we apply these expectations to the case of Christ shedding his innocent blood, the most innocent of all the innocents, we realize there is no greater cause to evoke the demands of justice than that Christ merits a powerful claim for his innocent blood being spilled in the cause of the atonement.  His status as a non-fallen being, who remains infinite in life potential and creative potential, demands an infinite recompense to be made whole from the crimes perpetrated against him.

Once understood, we can see in the scriptures, and without wresting they can be understood to sustain this principle.  No change in the scriptural expectations, simply greater clarity in what is meant.

Moroni 10:33

33 And again, if ye by the grace of God are perfect in Christ, and deny not his power, then are ye sanctified in Christ by the grace of God, through the shedding of the blood of Christ, which is in the covenant of the Father unto the remission of your sins, that ye become holy, without spot.

This adds an interesting perspective that I hope to always bear in mind.  The plan of salvation represents a covenant with the Father.  Though we were exiled from the Garden, it was a planned exile that always provided the means for a way back through the shedding of Christ’s blood.

Alma 21:9

9 Now Aaron began to open the scriptures unto them concerning the coming of Christ, and also concerning the resurrection of the dead, and that there could be no redemption for mankind save it were through the death and sufferings of Christ, and the atonement of his blood.

This verse highlights at least three components of the atonement.  Christ’s death was required and there was to be suffering and the shedding of his blood.  Each one of these elements fulfilled specific requirements.  At this time the sufferings equate to the law of justification, ie. Because he suffered so greatly he was justified in seeking a great recompense from his Father.  His death was required that his Father could intercede and as a citizen of His Fathers Kingdom who did not deserve to die, the Father could resurrect and then grant Christ’s the keys of resurrection. The shedding of his innocent blood initiates a claim on justice for his recompense.  There are, I’m sure, additional impacts from these things that I will continue to seek to discover. 

We find solid acknowledgement of how the innocent blood plays into his claims before God in our behalf in the following verse.

Doctrine and Covenants 38:4

4 I am the same which have taken the Zion of Enoch into mine own bosom; and verily, I say, even as many as have believed in my name, for I am Christ, and in mine own name, by the virtue of the blood which I have spilt, have I pleaded before the Father for them.

 

Another benefit that is derived from the innocent blood of Christ being spilled is in the case of those who know not God.  Their ignorance precludes their being judged the same as those with knowledge. Mosiah speaks to this:

Mosiah 3:11

11 For behold, and also his blood atoneth for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them, or who have ignorantly sinned.

There is much further explanation from this point here especially about how mercy and justice interact to provide the opportunity for us to return and live with our Father but not require him to cease to be God for having compromised the demands of the law.  However, this has been a long post already and I will leave off for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2017 at 8:19 PM, Anddenex said:

I would propose that there isn't any wiggle room regarding resurrection. His birth, his immortality, his endurance, and his resurrection are all witnesses to his divinity which our lives (all other humans) have no witness to. The Church's manuals give witness that his "immortality" and "resurrection" were inherited from his Father (source:https://www.lds.org/manual/new-testament-teacher-resource-manual/the-gospel-according-to-saint-matthew/matthew-1-2?lang=eng). His ability to endure is not inconsiderate to me in any way, just as it wasn't inconsiderate to ask his apostles to "stay awake" for one hour. Am I inconsiderate when I ask my children to "stay awake" during one hour of sacrament? I would propose I am not. As a basketball player I would often hear my coach request greater endurance from those whose endurance was less than mine. Would this be inconsiderate of a coach to request stronger endurance upon those whose genetics were less than other players? There is nothing inconsiderate from a request, or disappointment, to extend ourselves.

Some while back I gave consideration to this issue - specifically relative to the resurrection due to a quote from Brigham Young which was also echoed by President John Taylor.  The Brigham Young quote is this:

The question I wish to ask is simply this; and I put it to all the Elders of Israel, and to all the men and women of intelligence in Israel which pertains to the Kingdom of God on Earth; and if the whole world were before me I would ask them the same question. Can any man, or set of men officiate in dispensing the laws, and administering the ordinances of the Kingdom of God, or of the kingdoms and governments of the world legally, without first obeying those laws, and submitting to those ordinances themselves. Do you understand me? If a foreigner wishes to become a citizen of the United States he must first become subject to this government; must you not first acknowledge and obey the laws of this government? Certainly you must.

Then, to apply this to the Kingdom of God on Earth, and ask yourselves if any man has the power, the influence[,] the right, the authority, to go forth and preach this gospel, and baptise for the remission of sins unless he himself has, in the first place, been baptised, ordained and legally called to that office? What would the Elders of Israel and every other sensible man say to this? They would all decide at once with me, that no man can lawfully officiate in any office in the Kingdom of God, [p.92]or in the governments of men, he has not been called to, and the authority of which has not been bestowed upon him. I am not going to talk a thousand things to you, but I wish to tell you a few, and desire you to understand them, and connect them together. (Young, Brigham A Sermon Delivered on 8 October 1854 The Teachings of President Brigham Young, Vol. 3, 1852-1854 [Salt Lake City: Collier's Publishing Co., 1987], 343-68)

Herein is a principle, I believe that governs priesthood ordinances.  As we recognize that in the first resurrection the keys for such will be handed down to worthy priesthood holders who then will resurrect others of their families.  However these priesthood holders will have been resurrected first before they can exercise the keys of resurrection in behalf of their families.

Another quote by Brigham Young adds another dimension as to how God the Father might have facilitated Christ’s resurrection.  Concerning Christ’s statement that he had power to lay down his life and power to take it again, he stated the following:

I do not doubt the power of Christ; but did he prove that in his resurrection? No. But it is proved that an angel came and rolled away the stone from the door of the sepulcher, and did resurrect the body of the Son of God.

What angel was this? It is not for me to say. I do not know him. If I ever did know him it is so long since I have entirely forgotten who it was. That Jesus had power to lay down his life, and power to take it up again I do not dispute.  Neither do I dispute, but what an angel came, that was sent by the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, to roll away the stone from the sepulcher, and resurrect the Son of God. Suffice it to say that he was some character who had himself been resurrected. Is there any further proof with regard to this sacred order of the Kingdom of God on the Earth?

O yes, you can find it in all the scriptures. For instance when the Savior appeared to Paul of Tarsus, on the road, in answer to the question, “Lord what will thou have me do,” he was told to go into the City of Damascus, and it should be told him there what to do. In the mean[time] one Ananias was sent to him, who baptized and ordained him. Jesus would not do this, because he had servants on earth whose special duty it was to administer these ordinances.

Again, the angel that appeared to Cornelius would not operated in the ordinances of the Gospel, but told him to send men to Joppa, to the house of one Simon the Tanner, and call for one Peter, etc., whose duty it was to do it, he being called and ordained to that power. Many more instances of this kind might be quoted but the above will suffice to illustrate the principle. (“I Propose to Speak Upon a Subject that does not Immediately Concern Yours or My Welfare” A Sermon Delivered on 8 October 1854 The Teachings of President Brigham Young, Vol. 3, 1852-1854 [Salt Lake City: Collier's Publishing Co., 1987], 343-68))

Thus as Elder Young suppositions God the Father managed the Resurrection of Jesus Christ by sending one who held the keys of resurrection, having been resurrected himself in the form of the angel who rolled away the stone. There might seem some subtle incongruities in the quote above considering that prior to Christ none had resurrected, “he being the first fruits of them that slept” and the common teaching that no one from outside of the population of those that have been occupants of this earth ever administers to anything in this earth.  Thus generally, Brigham’s quote might reference someone somewhat outside of this sphere of existence that had resurrected elsewhere. (perhaps he is eluding to participation by God the Father, something we will explore in a bit.)

Neither is President Young the only reference to this concept, Wilford Woodruff recorded in his journal:

But what is the time of our suffering in this life in comparison with Eternity After we have spent millions of Ages in Eternity & we look back upon our time here & it will ownly look like the twinkling of an eye in comparison. And so it will be in the waiting for the resurrection of our bodies. It will be for A moment as it were before we shall stand in our immortal bodies. But no person can have power to raise the dead except he holds the Keys of the Resurrection & no man can hold the keys of the resurrection or be ordained unto that power until he has died & been raised from the dead himself. No more than A man has power to Baptize A man legally & lay hands upon him for the Holy Ghost & ordain him to the office of an Elder who has not been baptized or ordained himself.

Michael the Ark Angel (Adam) Holds the Keys of the resurrection And After A man is raised from the dead has an immortal body & recieves An ordination to hold the keys of the resurrection from under the Hands of Michael or those Having authority He then has power to raise the dead & not before.

Jesus was the first fruits of the Resurrection. "He had power to lay down his life & power to take it again" When He had lain in the grave three days An Angel, some person who was Appointed to this work appeared rolled back the stone & Called Jesus forth.

We have power here through the Priesthood to lay hands upon the sick & they recover, to east out devils open the eyes of the blind & unstop the ears of the deef according to the faith of the children of men. It is just as easy to raise the dead for one who is ordained unto this power as it is for us to administer in the ordinances of the House of the Lord here. Some times we lay hands upon the sick & they are healed instantly. Other times with all the faith & medicine they are a long time getting well, & others die.. Wilford Woodruff's Journal23 Feb, 1848, Winter Quarters.: 1833-1898 Typescript, Volumes 1-9, Edited by Scott G. Kenney, Signature Books 1993, 3:323-324.

In its way, this could be a bit of a conundrum as well; however, there still is something being established by the verses above that is intriguing. To be fair I would also like to add a thought from a recent conference where Elder Holland spoke and it might be construed somewhat differently:

 

Beginning in the spiritual anguish of the Garden of Gethsemane, moving to the Crucifixion on a cross at Calvary, and concluding on a beautiful Sunday morning inside a donated tomb, a sinless, pure, and holy man, the very Son of God Himself, did what no other deceased person had ever done nor ever could do. Under His own power, He rose from death, never to have His body separated from His spirit again. Of His own volition, He shed the burial linen with which He had been bound, carefully putting the burial napkin that had been placed over His face “in a place by itself,”10 the scripture says. (Holland, Jeffery R., Where Justice, Love, and Mercy Meet, Conference Talk April 2015,)

 

This is a subject that might further a sense of doctrinal discord if one is not careful but I think the nature of how President Young spoke to this concept addresses both sides.  Elder Young earlier remarked "That Jesus had power to lay down his life, and power to take it up again I do not dispute." I believe Brigham Young is acknowledging that Christ did inherit something from his father in a physical sense which enabled him to resurrect, however based on the earlier quote I believe Brigham also understands something about priesthood order  and that one cannot give what they have not received from another priesthood holder.

Again just to allow for the fact that others approach this subject from what I perceive to be partial venues of thought here are a few more quotes to consider. 

The original source for the Jeffery R. Holland quote above may well be from his book, Christ and the New Covenant which phrases it this way:

The message [of Christianity] is that a man who was dead did, by his own power, infuse life back into his own body, never again to experience the separation of his spirit from that body in time or eternity. In so doing, he magnificently and magnanimously provided, by that same power, a similar experience for every other man, woman, and child who would ever live in this world” (Holland, Jeffery R.,Christ and the New Covenant, 238).

Additional Apostolic witness is provided by Elder Russel M. Nelson:

 

I thank God for his Son, Jesus Christ, for his mission in mortality, and for his ministry as the resurrected Lord. He brought about his own resurrection. (Nelson, Russell M., Life After Life)

 

In addition to these few there are several other quotes by general authorities that speak to this subject and often the implication is that Christ raised himself from the dead.

 

When we speak of Jesus being resurrected, we mean that his premortal spirit, which animated his mortal body from his birth in the manger until he died on the cross, reentered that body; and the two, his spirit body and his physical body, inseparably welded together, arose from the tomb an immortal soul.

Our belief is, and we so testify, that Jesus not only conquered death for himself and brought forth his own glorious resurrected body, but that in so doing he also brought about a universal resurrection. (April 1982, The Resurrection of Jesus, Romney, Marion G.)

Further comment is provided by Joseph Fielding Smith and appears to communicate a very similar concept:

Christ Had Power over Death. This being true, what then did Paul mean by saying to Timothy, according to the King James Bible, that the Son of God “only hath immortality”? Simply this: That of all who have dwelt upon this earth, the Son of God stands out alone as the only one who possessed life in himself and power over death inherently. Christ was never subject unto death, even on the cross, but death was ever subject unto him. “As the Father hath life in himself,” the Savior said, “so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.” Again, he said: “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father” (Smith, Joseph Fielding, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol 1, p 31 (John 5:26; John 10:17 – 18).

Between these two perspectives is perhaps a gulf for some.  Yet for myself I see it a alternate sides of the same coin. For instance to say “so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself” really does not have to conflict with the ideology that is stated in Mosiah:

Mosiah 15:8

8 And thus God (The Father) breaketh the bands of death, having gained the victory over death; giving the Son power to make intercession for the children of men—

It may be that the life which Christ had in himself was the means which enabled the ordinance of resurrection to function in Christ.  However, then the question of how does it work for us who do not have this life within ourselves?  Still questions for me to consider.  What seems clear is that the Father had some part in the process of Christ resurrection and overcoming death and hell and that Christ possessed attributes which facilitated the same. So this remains a profound question in my mind.

This seems the appropriate place to consider upon the principle found in scripture concerning how Christ was taught as recorded in the Book of John:

John 5:19-23, 26-27

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

27And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

There is a sense, reinforced by these verses that there is a divinely appointed manner in which priesthood order can be expected to occurr. For me it takes absolutely nothing away from Christ to recognize the possibility that indeed his Father had keys that could only be granted after He had assisted in the ordinance of resurrecting his Son and then could give keys for Christ to do the same in resurrecting those for whom he died. It is a pattern that is consistent throughout priesthood implementation as is pointed out by President Young. That Christ states he does nothing of himself but what he sees the Father do, seems so apprapo for one resurrected and then given keys…it just fits an order that harmonizes with the spirit in me and how I would expect the doctrine of the priesthood to manifest.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@brlenox   If I could make a slight suggestion.  Many people won't take the time to read a very long post.  Even if filled with good information.  You might try to break it down a little.  Just a suggestion.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now