Some questions for Mormons

[Elgama]

I found this article and I think it may answer your question:

" Although God is one being, he is not one person and although he is three persons, he is one being. Our English word "person" is derived from the Latin word persona and this was in fact the word used by Trinitarian Latin theologians to describe the three hypostases of the one Triune God. The word persona was not a word that is equivalent to our modern English word "person." It was a word originally used for a role that an actor portrayed in a play. It was also the word for "mask," because actors wore different masks for each character they portrayed... The idea here is that one being reveals himself in three different ways.

The word "being" can be used as a synonym for "substance" since the word "substance" is intended to mean the essence of being. However, they could also mean God is "one identity" although he is three distinct identities. This definition is usually brought into play when it is understood that God is normally portrayed in Scripture with the personal pronouns, "He," "Him," "I," and "Me." so, God is three persons, yet God is one Being, God is three identities, yet God is one identity.

To describe the essence of divinity or deity (and also humanity as pertaining to Jesus' human nature). The word comes from the Latin word substantia which has its own Latin roots similar to the Greek roots of the Greek word "hypostasis," since both are etymologically derived in their own respective languages from words meaning "under" and "standing." The English theological term "substance" is intended to translate the Greek word ousia. It essentially means stuff that makes something what it is, essence of being. In this sense, it is similar to the philosophical use of the term hypostasis. But in Trinitarian terms, the word "substance" is not the same as hypostasis. Each person of the Triune God is a distinct and different hypostasis but they are all the same substance or essence. The Greek word ousia connotates a sense of being. Thus, God is one being because God is one ousia substance consisting of three hypostasis."

OK I am failing to distinguish this from what we believe except you call it the trinity? Each Christian denomination seems to have its own model of the trinity, but this is even closer to the LDS godhead than normal - personally I think DrT has a point we are all using an awful lot of words to describe something that can be summed up in one - God

-Charley

[xanmad33]

But Mormon doctrine does not recognize them as being the same ultimate being correct?

They recognize God the father having sexual relations with Mrs. God (if you will) and having Jesus correct?

So according to Mormons they are not one and the same correct?

[xanmad33]

This is our take on it:

LDS.org - Liahona Article - The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent

An excerpt from that talk:

n the year a.d. 325 the Roman emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea to address—among other things—the growing issue of God’s alleged “trinity in unity.” What emerged from the heated contentions of churchmen, philosophers, and ecclesiastical dignitaries came to be known (after another 125 years and three more major councils)4 as the Nicene Creed, with later reformulations such as the Athanasian Creed. These various evolutions and iterations of creeds—and others to come over the centuries—declared the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be abstract, absolute, transcendent, immanent, consubstantial, coeternal, and unknowable, without body, parts, or passions and dwelling outside space and time. In such creeds all three members are separate persons, but they are a single being, the oft-noted “mystery of the trinity.” They are three distinct persons, yet not three Gods but one. All three persons are incomprehensible, yet it is one God who is incomprehensible.

We agree with our critics on at least that point—that such a formulation for divinity is truly incomprehensible. With such a confusing definition of God being imposed upon the church, little wonder that a fourth-century monk cried out, “Woe is me! They have taken my God away from me, … and I know not whom to adore or to address.”5 How are we to trust, love, worship, to say nothing of strive to be like, One who is incomprehensible and unknowable? What of Jesus’s prayer to His Father in Heaven that “this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent”?6

...

...

It is not our purpose to demean any person’s belief nor the doctrine of any religion. We extend to all the same respect for their doctrine that we are asking for ours. (That, too, is an article of our faith.) But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first Christian Saints, many of whom were eyewitnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?7

Also in this talk, notice the proofs cited in the New Testament that Christ is speaking to His Father.

Good luck.

Do you believe "God the father" had physical sex in heaven to concieve Jesus? Therefore Jesus had a beginning?

Also do you believe that Jesus has eternally existed AS God?

[Elgama]

Do you believe "God the father" had physical sex in heaven to concieve Jesus? Therefore Jesus had a beginning?

Also do you believe that Jesus has eternally existed AS God?

I have no idea is the answer to all of them. I don't even understand my own existence and how exactly Jesus was conceived will be a mystery I suspect unless I need to know

-Charley

[Misshalfway]

No we do not believe that. We believe that God is our Heavenly Father and that he created spirit children. He hasn't as yet let us in on how he does it. We are literal offspring of God. We existed in God's presence before coming to earth. We came to earth to get a body. We will die and return to Him. Jesus was the first born of the Spirit children of God. He is the son of God. He came to fulfill his mission. Prayed to the father multiple times. Forbade mary from touching him until he had ascended to his Father. He has a body of flesh and bone which is now perfect because of the resurrection. He is the same as the Father in every way. Joseph Smith saw these two personages. One introduced the other as his son. The father and the son. Two separate beings.

This is what we believe. The Holy Ghost is a personage of Spirit. He does not have a body because he his job is to teach men the truth of all things. Together they are ONE. One in purpose, mind, and action. Absolutely united in mission and intension and nature. That is the God head.

Gods time is not our time. How do you define beginning in the eternities?

[xanmad33]

I have no idea is the answer to all of them. I don't even understand my own existence and how exactly Jesus was conceived will be a mystery I suspect unless I need to know

-Charley

But doesnt the Mormon church have specific doctrine that teaches this?

Is this not one of the purposes for Josephs Smiths "new revelation"? To know about God? and all the details therein?

I may be confused here, so I will be back after I do some more research, thanks

[Elgama]

But doesnt the Mormon church have specific doctrine that teaches this?

Is this not one of the purposes for Josephs Smiths "new revelation"? To know about God? and all the details therein?

I may be confused here, so I will be back after I do some more research, thanks

all you will find is discussion and speculation, you will not find any of it in a modern conference speech or the Standard Works. We know as much as you Latter Day Saints just have more freedom because of their individual relationship with God to think deeper and ask more questions, because we know if it is completely wrong to think either the Holy Ghost will pull us up or the Prophet will be instructed to speak

-Charley

[Elgama]

and no I doubt many Latter Day Saints expect to know all the details therein but we do speculate - as Joseph Smith (paraphrasing) if man could look into heaven for 5minutes he would know more about God than a lifetime studying the Book of Mormon would teach - this is why we ask questions we can pray about and discuss because until we see heaven and maybe even then we can't hope tolearn it all

-Charley

[xanmad33]

Did Jesus have a beginning? Or has he eternally existed?

[Misshalfway]

Yes. Jesus is an eternal being. In the mormon philosphy....we all are. We will exist for eternity after we leave this life... hopefully with God. We are spirits enjoying a physical experience. But we believe that to progress and become like our father, we must gain a body. The resurrection helps all of us overcome death... and sin of course.

Beyond that.....is speculation. There are lots of our members write these books and try to answer all the quesitons of the eternities. They are not our canonized doctrines. They are cool to read about. But they are not taught at church in our manuals. They are opinion.... and that is all. So when you do your research, it is important to read from the right documents

[a-train]

Do you believe "God the father" had physical sex in heaven to concieve Jesus? Therefore Jesus had a beginning?

Also do you believe that Jesus has eternally existed AS God?

The fact that our Saviour was born of the Virgin Mary does not bring about any notion that His existance began in Palestine with His miraculous conception. Just the same, when He took up a spiritual body, this did NOT constitute His beginning.

You should be very careful that you do not enter into blasphemy here. This would be very unbecoming of any professed Christian.

We have no indication either in the affirmative or the negative about sexual activity in heaven or by God and we know nothing of the manner whereby our LORD took on His spirit body. Jesus has eternally existed AS God. His taking on of a spirit body was NOT the beginning of His existance, but another chapter in His Eternal existance.

You seem so reluctant to talk about something that is plainly IN the Bible: that God has a body of flesh and bones. Is it even slightly demonstrable from the Bible that our LORD Jesus has no such body? Is a denial of such not a denial of the Gospel itself? After all these centuries is this what the testimony of Christians has come to? The apostles died in their testimony of the PHYSICAL LITERAL visit of God on this earth, His birth, His life, His death, and His resurrection; and today the so-called Christians will not even admit that Jesus has a body?

Well spoke John of them: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.'

The antis can go in circles for centuries badmouthing and twisting words and constantly redefining everything, but when it comes to admiting something as simple and true as the bodily resurrection and immortality of the Lamb of God their lips cannot confess.

-a-train

[a-train]

Did Jesus have a beginning? Or has he eternally existed?

Our LORD is without beginning and His existance is endless. He is the Great I Am.

-a-train

[rthrbmtbkg]

WELL, may I first say that I am seriously impressed. You are one articulate, well read woman. I also get the impression that you're not trying to criticize anyone; you’re just trying to sort out all the stuff you’ve heard. In an effort to hopefully simplify, let me say this:

Mormons believe in Jesus Christ. We believe he is the son of God, and we believe in the Holy Ghost. We believe that the Bible is scripture about the old world in Europe and Africa and Asia, and that the Book of Mormon is scripture about groups that came to the Americas around the same time. We believe Christ lived, died, and was resurrected. We believe that his sacrifice made it possible for everyone to be resurrected. We believe that when Christ left the earth, we were told he’d be back. After he left, his Church was taken from the earth for a time, a period we call the dark ages.

In the 1820’s, there were lots of different views, just like today. One young man wanted to know how he could best be forgiven his sins, so he went to ask God which Church to join. Mormons believe God and Jesus Christ appeared to him, in person, and told him that it was time their authority was restored to the earth. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the organization created by God in the final days before Christ comes again. It is a complete Church, meaning it has God’s authority, a prophet that he speaks through, and modern day teachings that help us better understand past and present scripture.

At that, let me stop. The ONLY way to understand all the questions you have is to get those basics out of the way. Notice I didn’t say anything about the nature of God and Jesus, or how the Book of Mormon came to be, or any other details that might be discussed. The bottom line is Christ, God, Bible, Book of Mormon, restored Church with Priesthood authority, and modern day revelation. If you can believe that, the rest of it ends up really not meaning much. There are still answers, but when you believe those basics, they become just details versus the overall picture.

How do you believe the foundation I talked about? Only through prayer to God can someone truly know if it’s true. Only through the peace the Spirit can bring can you feel for yourself if it’s right. No one on here, where you are, or any person anywhere can explain the details enough to you to MAKE you believe.

I hope you know that I think it’s really cool that you’re so interested. Like I said before, you’re pretty intelligent, and I think it’s great you’ve got so many questions. I hope I’ve been some kind of help in your search.

Scott

[a-train]

But Mormon doctrine does not recognize them as being the same ultimate being correct?

Correct, it does not, nor does the Bible. Statements from the scriptures that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are One lack indication that the meaning is physical or substantial. If indeed, as you have intimated, God has no physical existance whatsoever, then the sense in which the Godhead is One could not be physical, now could it?

Further, if the Father has NO corporeal existance, but the Son does, then they must be physically seperate by mere definition. And if the physical body of the Son is in any way shared by the Father, then the Father also has a physical nature.

One cannot profess Christianity nor a belief in the Bible and also deny that Jesus, the Eternal God came IN THE FLESH. And because He came in flesh, He is either physically seperate from the Father or the Father exists physically also.

The bottom line: It is not the testimony of Joseph Smith that He saw the Son bodily standing at the right hand of the Father that is irreconcilable with the testimonies of the Apostles, but it is the denial of the physical bodily resurrection and immortality of our LORD that is contrary to the testimonies that were sealed by the blood of our LORD's disciples.

-a-train

[Guest tomk]

Did Jesus have a beginning? Or has he eternally existed?

Like all of us, He has existed eternally.

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.

[xanmad33]

The fact that our Saviour was born of the Virgin Mary does not bring about any notion that His existance began in Palestine with His miraculous conception. Just the same, when He took up a spiritual body, this did NOT constitute His beginning.

You should be very careful that you do not enter into blasphemy here. This would be very unbecoming of any professed Christian.

We have no indication either in the affirmative or the negative about sexual activity in heaven or by God and we know nothing of the manner whereby our LORD took on His spirit body. Jesus has eternally existed AS God. His taking on of a spirit body was NOT the beginning of His existance, but another chapter in His Eternal existance.

You seem so reluctant to talk about something that is plainly IN the Bible: that God has a body of flesh and bones. Is it even slightly demonstrable from the Bible that our LORD Jesus has no such body? Is a denial of such not a denial of the Gospel itself? After all these centuries is this what the testimony of Christians has come to? The apostles died in their testimony of the PHYSICAL LITERAL visit of God on this earth, His birth, His life, His death, and His resurrection; and today the so-called Christians will not even admit that Jesus has a body?

Well spoke John of them: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.'

The antis can go in circles for centuries badmouthing and twisting words and constantly redefining everything, but when it comes to admiting something as simple and true as the bodily resurrection and immortality of the Lamb of God their lips cannot confess.

-a-train

a-train, with all due respect I have been extremely willing to talk with you about my beliefs, have I not?

The page I provided a link to answers every single one of the questions asked of me.

And you warn me of blasphemy? I am repeating what your own church has said.

I will get all evidence of this for you, since you make such an accusation.

. "God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory" (I Timothy 3:16; see verse 15 for further confirmation that God is the subject of verse 16). God was manifest (made visible) in flesh; God was justified (shown to be right) in the Spirit; God was seen of angels; God was believed on in the world; and God was received up into glory. How and when did all of this happen? In Jesus Christ.

2. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… And the Word was made flesh…" (John 1:1, 14). Literally, the Word (God) was tabernacled or tented in flesh. When did God tabernacle or robe Himself in flesh? In Jesus Christ. Both verses of Scripture prove that Jesus is God - that He is God manifest (revealed, made known, made evident, displayed, shown) in flesh.

When have I ever denied that? Jesus is God manefest in the flesh.

1. Isaiah 9:6 is one of the most powerful proofs that Jesus is God: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father The Prince of Peace." The terms child and son refer to the Incarnation or manifestation of "The mighty God" and "The everlasting Father."

2. Isaiah prophesied that the Messiah would be called Immanuel, that is, God with us (Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:22-23).

3. Isaiah described the Messiah as both a branch out of Jesse (the father of David) and as the root of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1, 10; see also Revelation 22:16). According to the flesh He was a descendant (branch) of Jesse and David, but according to His Spirit He was their Creator and source of life (root). Jesus used this concept to confound the Pharisees when He quoted Psalm 110:1 and asked, in essence, "How could David call the Messiah Lord when the Messiah was to be the son (descendant) of David?" (Matthew 22:41-46).

4. Isaiah 35:4-6 shows that Jesus is God: "Behold, your God… he will come and save you." This passage goes on to say that when God comes the eyes of the blind would be opened, the ears of the deaf would be unstopped, the lame would leap, and the tongue of the dumb would speak. Jesus applied this passage of Scripture to Himself (Luke 7:22) and, of course, His ministry did produce all of these things.

5. Isaiah 40:3 declares that one would cry in the wilderness, "Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God." John the Baptist fulfilled this prophecy when he prepared the way for Jesus (Matthew 3:3); so Jesus is the LORD (Jehovah) and our God.

The questions I have posed regarding Jesus being born (therefore having a beginning) are directly from LDS leaders and doctrine, as are the questions regarding God the Father literally procreating spirit children in Heaven.

If a leader preaches from the pulpit of your church, is that not considered sound doctrine? Just so I'm clear.

[THIRDpersonviewer]

If a leader preaches from the pulpit of your church, is that not considered sound doctrine? Just so I'm clear.

Only if He does so by the Spirit.

[xanmad33]

Correct, it does not, nor does the Bible. Statements from the scriptures that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are One lack indication that the meaning is physical or substantial. If indeed, as you have intimated, God has no physical existance whatsoever, then the sense in which the Godhead is One could not be physical, now could it?

-a-train

actually it does, many times and in many ways.

There is only one God, who is the Creator and Father of mankind (Malachi 2:10).

If Jesus was also the creator, wouldn't this verse alone be a lie?

I have clearly outlined to you my beliefs about God, and that Jesus was God manifest in the flesh, please go read what I posted before you tell me what I believe.

[xanmad33]

Only if He does so by the Spirit.

How do you know when he "does so by the spirit" vs. something else? And further how do you know whether what you are hearing is "sound doctrine" or not?

[rthrbmtbkg]

Well, I would say if you feel the Spirit from what is said, then it's by the Spirit. If someone doesn't feel it, they may just be out of tune. Either way, once you hear or read what they've said, there's not much question.

[rthrbmtbkg]

actually it does, many times and in many ways.

There is only one God, who is the Creator and Father of mankind (Malachi 2:10).

If Jesus was also the creator, wouldn't this verse alone be a lie?

I have clearly outlined to you my beliefs about God, and that Jesus was God manifest in the flesh, please go read what I posted before you tell me what I believe.

Can I ask a ?...do you know the history behind how the Bible came to be?

[xanmad33]

lol, yes, and that conversation has already happened

Everyone here agrees that the Bible is just as reliable as the BOM, Journals and discourses, doctrine and covenants, & pearl of great price...

Are all those sound doctrines?

Does your bishop preach sound doctrine on Sundays?

What about your apostles?

And just to clear up my personal confusion, Your prophet does not preach sound doctrine unless he is "in the spirit"?

[rthrbmtbkg]

lol, yes, and that conversation has already happened

Everyone here agrees that the Bible is just as reliable as the BOM, Journals and discourses, doctrine and covenants, & pearl of great price...

Are all those sound doctrines?

Does your bishop preach sound doctrine on Sundays?

What about your apostles?

And just to clear up my personal confusion, Your prophet does not preach sound doctrine unless he is "in the spirit"?

Sorry...didn't have time to read the whole book of thread. hehehe Yes, the president preaches sound doctrine, along with the apostles. I've never heard anything over the pulpit of a general conference that wasn't sound doctrine. Here's an example:

O Remember, Remember

[THIRDpersonviewer]

How do you know when he "does so by the spirit" vs. something else? And further how do you know whether what you are hearing is "sound doctrine" or not?

The Spirit CANNOT lie. So, if the speaker is under the influence of the Holy Spirit, he will not lie. He will speak the truth. He will speak sound doctrine.

How do you know when he does so by the Spirit? I gave it to I think. Galatians 5:22-23 If the listener is in tune with the Spirit(under the influence), and the speaker is speaking by the Spirit, then both the hearer and giver will understand each other, not completely, but the core message will get across.

So how do you know if what you are feeling is the Spirit?

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

If you feel these things, most notably peace, as you read the scriptures or listen to a speaker speaking with the Holy Ghost, then YOU WILL KNOW that the words are true. It is not always immediate. But depending on your faith, depending on your desire to hear truth, the quicker the Spirit will come to testify.

[Elgama]

lol, yes, and that conversation has already happened

Everyone here agrees that the Bible is just as reliable as the BOM, Journals and discourses, doctrine and covenants, & pearl of great price...

Are all those sound doctrines?

Does your president preach sound doctrine on Sundays?

What about your apostles?

And just to clear up my personal confusion, Your prophet does not preach sound doctrine unless he is "in the spirit"?

Journal of Discourses is not Canon if a prophet says something you can be sure its OK to think about it, a prophet will not be allowed to lead us astray but not everything they say is doctrine either - however we are taught line upon line, precept upon precept and we are expected to keep growing - what was OK for someone to think in 1847 may not be OK in 2008 because the prophet has spoken.

The Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price are doctrine if you can find anything in them then I will take it as doctrine - and if it comes during General Conference then personally I take it as current doctrine and understanding. But we all have the Holy Ghost - and we simply take anything we have doubts with to the Lord and ask Him for help to gain a testimony or for a confirmation.

If you want to know what Latter Day Saints believe and understand, what stage our church is at look at General Conference.

-Charley