Protestant vs. LDS Theology - A Few Questions.

[Jonathon]

Good afternoon!

I hope you all are well. For those of you who have not read the recent thread I began on re-baptism, I was a member of the Church during my high school years, but a variety of circumstances ultimately led to my resignation. I am nearly 28 years old, and am in the process of re-investigating the Church. I understand that according to LDS thought, a testimony of the Book of Mormon, and therefore the veracity of the Church, is given through the Holy Ghost as a burning in the bosom. I have committed to re-read the Book of Mormon, and will apply this in my prayers.

Nevertheless, over the last few years, I have done quite a bit of study on Protestant Systematic Theology and doctrine. I have a few questions that I am eager to hear an LDS explanation on. I know that one can have all the knowledge in the world and not have a testimony of the Spirit. However, I am hopeful that this thread can be used of the Spirit to enlighten my understanding.

I am headed off to dinner, and will pose a few additional doctrinal questions later. However, I would like to ask one that is pressing on me before I head out the door.

From what I remember of LDS Theology, Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are three separate beings with bodies. Those who are born into the earth have been sent here from the pre-existence for a mortal probation. We are, therefore, children of God, regardless of whether we are members of the Church. In order to "pass the test," return to Heavenly Father, and receive exaltation in eternity, we are given free agency to choose or reject the One True Church. For those who did not have the opportunity to hear the message of the restored gospel, the ordinance of baptisms for the dead have been instituted to preach this message to those who are in spirit prison.

This is a summary of what I remember about the framework of the LDS gospel. Have I recapped correctly? If there are any errors, please let me know. I want to fully understand.

My question, therefore, is this:

According to this theology, Heavenly Father, who has a body of flesh and bone, must have also gone through a similar "mortal probation" at some point. Is this correct, or a false understanding? If this is the case, does Heavenly Father have a Heavenly Father? Or, is there only one Heavenly Father?

There is a scripture in John 4:24 that says:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Through my studies of Protestant Theology, I have come to understand God as one Spirit, with three personalities manifested as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, the essence of God is beyond human comprehension. Nevertheless, it was because of God's love for us that He gave Jesus Christ to save the world.

How is this scripture and this view of God as Spirit reconciled in LDS thought and doctrine?

Thank you so much in advance for your responses. Please know that these questions are sincere, and with no ulterior motive. I really want to understand.

All the best,

Jonathon

[Elgama]

lol this second time I have answered this tonight.

This is purely my own take on the scripture concerned, I haven't even prayed about it before.

1) it does not say that God does not have a body of flesh and bones and LDS theology does state He also has a spirit

2) For me taken in conjunction with verses 20-23 it is talking about how we worship God and the change that will shortly occur and I believe it is about us worshipping Him spirit to spirit which is really what our prayers are connecting our spirit with Father.

3) Find it very interesting from just a brief check verses 20-23 in the Greek use the term Pater (Father) then shift to Theos (God) in verse 24 - wonder if thats because it is referring to the Godhead and not just the Father, which naturally includes the Holy Ghost, but this is just a brief though based on a quick look may know more tommorrow

4) As Latter Day Saints we believe truth has been restored, nowhere (as far as I am aware) does the Bible state God is just Spirit. So it is far from contradictory just the Bible is talking about the Spirit part of God.

-Charley

[Traveler]

Jonathon – a couple of things. I do not know of anywhere in scripture that the differentiation of G-d the Father, G-d the Son and God the Holy Ghost are differentiated as persons or personalities. The Hebrew word to describe “one” G-d is ehad and when the singular meaning is invoked specifically means a single entity that cannot ever be subdivided. Ehad also has a plural meaning that implies unity as when a Man and a Woman become “one” in the marriage covenant.

There is no LDS doctrine concerning a mortal probation of the Father. Jesus once said that he has done nothing but what he has seen the Father do. Speculating on what the English version of this meant is risky in my view.

I believe anything is possible with G-d’s help – including understanding his nature. I have a thread most likely buried, because no one knew how to respond, called the Nature of G-d and the reason of salvation. You might find that interesting if you can find it. It is under LDS Gospel Discussion – maybe a page or two off the front. You may find the opinion interesting.

The Traveler

[Guest tomk]

Good afternoon!

I hope you all are well. For those of you who have not read the recent thread I began on re-baptism, I was a member of the Church during my high school years, but a variety of circumstances ultimately led to my resignation. I am nearly 28 years old, and am in the process of re-investigating the Church. I understand that according to LDS thought, a testimony of the Book of Mormon, and therefore the veracity of the Church, is given through the Holy Ghost as a burning in the bosom. I have committed to re-read the Book of Mormon, and will apply this in my prayers.

Nevertheless, over the last few years, I have done quite a bit of study on Protestant Systematic Theology and doctrine. I have a few questions that I am eager to hear an LDS explanation on. I know that one can have all the knowledge in the world and not have a testimony of the Spirit. However, I am hopeful that this thread can be used of the Spirit to enlighten my understanding.

I am headed off to dinner, and will pose a few additional doctrinal questions later. However, I would like to ask one that is pressing on me before I head out the door.

From what I remember of LDS Theology, Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are three separate beings with bodies. Those who are born into the earth have been sent here from the pre-existence for a mortal probation. We are, therefore, children of God, regardless of whether we are members of the Church. In order to "pass the test," return to Heavenly Father, and receive exaltation in eternity, we are given free agency to choose or reject the One True Church. For those who did not have the opportunity to hear the message of the restored gospel, the ordinance of baptisms for the dead have been instituted to preach this message to those who are in spirit prison.

This is a summary of what I remember about the framework of the LDS gospel. Have I recapped correctly? If there are any errors, please let me know. I want to fully understand.

My question, therefore, is this:

According to this theology, Heavenly Father, who has a body of flesh and bone, must have also gone through a similar "mortal probation" at some point. Is this correct, or a false understanding? If this is the case, does Heavenly Father have a Heavenly Father? Or, is there only one Heavenly Father?

There is a scripture in John 4:24 that says:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Through my studies of Protestant Theology, I have come to understand God as one Spirit, with three personalities manifested as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, the essence of God is beyond human comprehension. Nevertheless, it was because of God's love for us that He gave Jesus Christ to save the world.

How is this scripture and this view of God as Spirit reconciled in LDS thought and doctrine?

Thank you so much in advance for your responses. Please know that these questions are sincere, and with no ulterior motive. I really want to understand.

All the best,

Jonathon

Please carefully read this talk:

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

The Gospel, including the physicality of the Father and Son as seperate individuals, is best understood by taking the entire body of Scripture together, not just one verse.

[Snow]

There is a scripture in John 4:24 that says:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Through my studies of Protestant Theology, I have come to understand God as one Spirit, with three personalities manifested as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, the essence of God is beyond human comprehension. Nevertheless, it was because of God's love for us that He gave Jesus Christ to save the world.

How is this scripture and this view of God as Spirit reconciled in LDS thought and doctrine?

Thank you so much in advance for your responses. Please know that these questions are sincere, and with no ulterior motive. I really want to understand.

All the best,

Jonathon

Can you be specific about what you want reconciled as it is not immediately clear to me from you questions.

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

From what I remember of LDS Theology, Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are three separate beings with bodies. Those who are born into the earth have been sent here from the pre-existence for a mortal probation. We are, therefore, children of God, regardless of whether we are members of the Church. In order to "pass the test," return to Heavenly Father, and receive exaltation in eternity, we are given free agency to choose or reject the One True Church. For those who did not have the opportunity to hear the message of the restored gospel, the ordinance of baptisms for the dead have been instituted to preach this message to those who are in spirit prison.

Mostly accurate. Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ are seperate entitites with bodies of flesh and bone. The Holy Spirit does NOT have a body, however. As the D&C says "Were it not so, he could not dwell in us." Also, and this is probably just nit picking, baptisms for the dead do not "preach this message to those who are in spirit prison." Worthy and righteous people who have died and gone to Spirit Paradise preach the Gospel to those in Spirit Prison. Baptisms for the dead and other temple ordinances are performed in proxy for those in Spirit Prison who then have the opportunity to accept or refuse the ordinance. The ordinances themselves are done because they are necessary and required for exaltation.

According to this theology, Heavenly Father, who has a body of flesh and bone, must have also gone through a similar "mortal probation" at some point. Is this correct, or a false understanding? If this is the case, does Heavenly Father have a Heavenly Father? Or, is there only one Heavenly Father?

There is a scripture in John 4:24 that says:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Through my studies of Protestant Theology, I have come to understand God as one Spirit, with three personalities manifested as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, the essence of God is beyond human comprehension. Nevertheless, it was because of God's love for us that He gave Jesus Christ to save the world.

How is this scripture and this view of God as Spirit reconciled in LDS thought and doctrine?

It IS LDS doctrine that Heavenly Father also had his own "mortal probation". Joseph Smith said "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." This statement, I believe, is reiterated in the new Priesthood manual on Joseph Smith's teachings, which reaffirms it's doctrinal basis.

Secondly, I'm not sure how much you remember about the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible, but that verse is one of the ones that differs significantly after Joseph Smith's translation. The JST verse reads as follows, italics indicate the differences:

For unto such hath God promised his Spirit. And they who worship him, must worship in spirit and in truth.

The protestant doctrine of God as you've described is the doctrine of the Trinity, as it was "decided" during the (first) Council of Nicea. LDS doctrine explicitly contradicts the doctrine of the Trinity, as well as most of everything else in the Nicene Crede. I suppose for clarity I should go line by line with the Crede and specify the differences.

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.

Rather accurate. We'll agree with this statement (but qualify it later).

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;

I'm not even sure the guys who wrote the Crede know what this means. Their use of the word "substance", later termed "consubstantial" to describe the Trinity, is a HUGE reference to Platonic philosophy, and Plato, for all his philosophising, was not a Christian. We (LDS) believe in The Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only begotton of the Father in the flesh, with a body of flesh and bone seperate from the Father.

by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth];

By whom (Christ) all things were made etc... We agree with this one.

who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man;

Agreed, for the most part. The "was made man" part might be a little ambiguous, since he was the literal son of God the Father which made him a little bit more than your average homo sapiens.

he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven;

Again, we'll agree but clarify. He suffered in Gethsamene and died on the cross, rose the third day and taught for a good little while, then ascended into Heaven (and then went elsewhere to teach his "other sheep" - John 10:16).

from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

Eh, yeah. I'm not sure what they mean by "the quick and the dead", though it was used as the title of an old western movie. My assumption is that they mean "the living and the dead".

And in the Holy Ghost.

Yes.

Overall you might notice some similarity between this and our first Article of Faith. I suspect Joseph Smith thought of precisely that when he wrote the Articles of Faith.

We believe in God the Eternal Father, and in His son Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

Any more questions?

[a-train]

How is this scripture and this view of God as Spirit reconciled in LDS thought and doctrine?

God is a Spirit, but He also has a body of flesh and bone. If you consider the implication of Trinitarianism, you'll see that even those espousing that doctrine must confess that God has a body as the New Testament is full of the notion. Certainly also the Modalists should confess the same. There can be no doubt that Jesus has a body of flesh and bone.

The only difference between Trinitarianism, Modalism, and Mormonism is the respective understandings of the Unity of the Godhead.

-a-train

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

God is a Spirit, but He also has a body of flesh and bone. If you consider the implication of Trinitarianism, you'll see that even those espousing that doctrine must confess that God has a body as the New Testament is full of the notion. Certainly also the Modalists should confess the same. There can be no doubt that Jesus has a body of flesh and bone.

The only difference between Trinitarianism, Modalism, and Mormonism is the respective understandings of the Unity of the Godhead.

-a-train

Oooh there's a LOT more differences than that, you're over-simplifying, which is dangerous to say the least. While logically, you're correct that they SHOULD accept that God has a body, the doctrine of the Trinity as it is taught is one that denies all attempts to logically understand it.

Trinitarianism specifically denies that the Trinity/Godhead has a body - but accepts that it CAN manifest itself in a body. How that works is one of the "Mysteries of God" that trinitarians seem to believe in so readily. That's one of the huge differences between the doctrine of the Trinity and the LDS church. With the Trinity, God is mysterious and unknowable. In the LDS church we believe that God is knowable, personal, and answers all your questions (in due time, according to your faith) - Alma 12:10.

"10 And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full." emphasis added.

There are also a lot of other differences, many of which are of incredibly major doctrinal import to one faith or the other. While there are also similarities, the differences are many and important.

[Jonathon]

Thank you all for your thoughtful responses.

Traveler - I appreciate the recommendation of your thread. I'll check it out.

tomk - I read the article you sent me by Jeffrey R. Holland. It was a breath of fresh air to read such clear, unambiguous, statements on the nature of the LDS doctrine of the Godhead.

He wrote something that aroused my curiousity:

I testify that He had power over death because He was divine but that He willingly subjected Himself to death for our sake because for a period of time He was also mortal. I declare that in His willing submission to death He took upon Himself the sins of the world, paying an infinite price for every sorrow and sickness, every heartache and unhappiness from Adam to the end of the world. In doing so He conquered both the grave physically and hell spiritually and set the human family free.

Is there an article by a General Authority that you recommend with greater exposition on the Atonement? As I have been studying the Catholic/Protestant view of the Atonement, I came to believe the following:

Man is inherently sinful. Though the Old Testament speaks of righteousness vs. wickedness, I came to believe that it is only God who makes a person righteous. No effort of their own can satisfy a pure, holy, God because every human effort is tainted with sin. Because of this, Jesus Christ was sent to the world to be the propitiation (substitution) for the due penalty of our sin. That due penalty being death and eternal separation from God. As such, Jesus Christ became the only pure and completely righteous being to ever live, and we are thus justified by our faith in His righteousness alone. Because any efforts of our own self-righteousness are tainted by sin, we are, therefore, unable to ever become righteous enough, thus the need for the Savior's sacrifice on the cross. We make efforts toward living holy lives, but we realize that our merits of righteousness will never be accepted by God because they were already accepted by God at His Atonement.

Thank you for allowing me to voice how I have come to understand the necessity of the Atonement over the last few years. I wrote that so that you, more scholarly LDS, can find statements that are perhaps completely contradictory or aligned with LDS doctrine. Anyone who is willing, please feel free to respond with your thoughts on what my views of the Atonement have been. (Or point me in the direction of a good article written by a GA!)

Puf_the_majic_dragon - Thank you so much for your lengthy, clear, and thoughtful response. Thank you for correcting me on my misunderstanding of baptism for the dead and its correlation to sharing the message of the Restored gospel to those in Spirit Prison. I appreciate your affirmation of the doctrine set forth by Joseph Smith of the Father's own mortal probation. This, then, leads to my earlier question:

Does Heavenly Father have a Heavenly Father? Are there Church documents that talk in more detail about Heavenly Father's mortal probation?

Thank you for breaking down the Nicene Creed and contrasting it with LDS views.

I am sure you have heard many Protestant/Evangelical and even Catholics question you on John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I have believed that Jesus Christ is the Word, and thus has been with the Father in eternity since time immemorial. However, LDS doctrine clearly teaches that He was born literally of the Father. Can you expound on this?

Oh, and majic_dragon, maybe they got "quick and the dead" from Moroni 10:34. :)

a-train - Thanks for the clarification on Trinitarianism, Modalism, and Mormonism's understanding of the Unity of the Godhead. I have believed each one of these "isms" at some point in my past, however, when I was a member of the Church in my high school years, I certainly hadn't studied these out. I wonder if I am coming "full circle..."

Hope you all are having a swell night.

Jon

[Dale]

One idea i had is based on Luke 24:39. I reasoned if Jesus was a ghost, but was God he was also calling himself spirit with the Father. I speculated he was lumping the persons in the Godhead together by calling them together spirit. If the Son was a person of spirit shape i reasoned that had to be what he was doing. Or he may have confused the person of the Father with the Holy Spirit and called them spirit.

[bert10]

Hi Jonathan....I am sorry this post will not reach you in time. I have put down the parts in quotation marks and then I have answered below each point that I have put down.

""Nevertheless, over the last few years, I have done quite a bit of study on Protestant Systematic Theology and doctrine. I have a few questions that I am eager to hear an LDS explanation on. I know that one can have all the knowledge in the world and not have a testimony of the Spirit. However, I am hopeful that this thread can be used of the Spirit to enlighten my understanding.""

I realize that there is not yet a question in the above post but you did touch on one of the most important part of the teachings of Jesus and of the Apostles. If you have been with the Christians you will notice that is not what they teach...nor can they since they [in general] deny the Spirit of prophecy and so can only teach ABOUT God and to put one's faith in the Bible which is interpreted according to the religion one is in. - Instead of in God. I will end here with one verse. It will also help address your question below: The testimony of Jesus can only come by the Spirit of prophecy:

Revelation 19:10 - And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

----------------------------------------------------

"I am headed off to dinner, and will pose a few additional doctrinal questions later. However, I would like to ask one that is pressing on me before I head out the door."

""From what I remember of LDS Theology, Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are three separate beings with bodies. Those who are born into the earth have been sent here from the pre-existence for a mortal probation. We are, therefore, children of God, regardless of whether we are members of the Church. In order to "pass the test," return to Heavenly Father, and receive exaltation in eternity, we are given free agency to choose or reject the One True Church. For those who did not have the opportunity to hear the message of the restored gospel, the ordinance of baptisms for the dead have been instituted to preach this message to those who are in spirit prison.""

<> Correction, we have been given free will to learn to choose the GOOD from the NOT-GOOD [remember the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ?] and to learn by trial and error to purify ourselves by learning to hear God in our hearts. If a man does not hear God in his heart....belonging to the LDS church shall not save him. We are all impure until we have can have this contact with God. And nothing impure can live with the Father.

---------------------------------------------------------

""This is a summary of what I remember about the framework of the LDS gospel. Have I recapped correctly? If there are any errors, please let me know. I want to fully understand.

My question, therefore, is this:

According to this theology, Heavenly Father, who has a body of flesh and bone, must have also gone through a similar "mortal probation" at some point. Is this correct, or a false understanding? If this is the case, does Heavenly Father have a Heavenly Father? Or, is there only one Heavenly Father?""

The LDS on this board can answer your questions on Church doctrines. The question remains....how can you believe if first you do not have contact with God? How can you know what we tell you is true without this contact?

That is why the Commandment of God to the LDS is to not teach anything but Repentance to Gentiles. The gospel of repentance is crucial for learning how to hear God in ones heart.

---------------------------------------------------------------

""There is a scripture in John 4:24 that says:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.""

Which is so true. That is why I preach that God is not in the bible which Christians put their trust in. God abides in the hearts of people who are truly seeking him. And no man is truly seeking Him if he has not done away with his pride and retain his hardened hearts. This is the primary reason why men do not hear God in their hearts today.

Hebrews 3:15 - While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation. ......As in the day of the provocation of the Lord. see OT what happened and why Israel inherited over 600 commandments statutes and rituals after this.

------------------------------------------------------

""Through my studies of Protestant Theology, I have come to understand God as one Spirit, with three personalities manifested as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, the essence of God is beyond human comprehension. Nevertheless, it was because of God's love for us that He gave Jesus Christ to save the world.

How is this scripture and this view of God as Spirit reconciled in LDS thought and doctrine?""

The LDS have not problem in seeing the Godhead as 3 Beings. Since we also have confirmation in the bible. For example Stephen did actually see the Son literally at the right of the Father. Even in the OT...we have confirmation of this. I have inserted in parentheses what the verse means.

Psalms 110:1 - A Psalm of David. The LORD [LORD = GOD the Father who is also called the ONE TRUE GOD]u said unto my Lord,[Lord = God is also Jesus who is the Son of GOD] Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

What has not been explain fully is the Concept of "ONESS" Who but they who have the Father and the Son abiding in their hearts can even come close to explain what it is?

So we are right back at the beginning...without a personal real contact with GOD how can one believe anything we say?

I have answered your question by the Spirit of truth.

I hope this helps.

Peace be unto you

bert10

[a-train]

Oooh there's a LOT more differences than that, you're over-simplifying, which is dangerous to say the least.

Mormons, Trinitarians, Modalists, we all believe in one God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is the Unity, the History, and the Corporeal nature of God that is in question. The history and physicality of the Godhead are mainly subject to the Unity therein within Trinitarianism and Modalism.

It is the respective concepts of the Unity within Trinitarianism and Modalism that prevents any notion of two seperate physical bodies for the Father and the Son. This rejection comes not from scripture directly, but through creedal or logical definitions of the Unity of the Godhead.

The Christian world has long sought to reconcile the seeming plurality of the Godhead with monotheism. It all comes down to the Unity of the Godhead, all the rest hinges on that.

-a-train

[Maya]

Hi Jonathon. As you may know my bacground is Lutheran. I was thinking of studying religion, becoming a preast. I hope I can enlighten some ofyour questions, if not today then an other day.

About Good was once a man: You already ahve got good answers. I just want to refere to JS words "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become" BUT I still reming that the DOCTORIN is in our scriptures, not in anything someone says, UNLESS it is written in DC or something and voted for! But to me personally it sounds possible. It is not for me such an important question... my brain refuses to think longer than God our fother and hes eternal beeing... so the quetion about Hevenly father having a Hevenly Father...I would say it is possible, but if ther is none I wont get depressed!

About God beeing a spirit. That was a doctorin I never could understand the Lutheran way. Neither understood I trinity. Why would Jesus talk to himself... like on teh crossor in the Getsemane.... Why would he talk about Father as a third person and tell about Him to the apostles... I understod easy the unity... thinking alike, beein one in toughts and deeds.

I often wondered what the word was that was in the beginning. I wassure it wasnot God but his word. When I was tols it ment the son, I felt something fall on its right place...I knewwhat the word was and it made sense. The son was the one making the preparations for eath. He was working for His Father!

When I was tought that small children were without sinn it was like a big stone fell off my brist... it had been hard to think that even the newborn would already be sinnful. I had often been wondering how could it be possible that the small babyes could be evel and that they go to hell if they are not babtised before they die. I imagined in my mind the poor mothers and fathers that get a child that dies soo after birth and that donot get babtised in time, how terrible it must have been as the preasts said the baby went to the hell!!!

In thosedays they often left babyes in the forests to die, if the parents did not want the baby or if it was malformed or something. I suppose it was easier to leave such a baby in the forest as the baby was considered evel.

God is loveing not crule! And from this if the babyes are pure we come to the fact that they need no babtisement as they have no sin ... yet. Jesus often blessed the smal children. Ok the families were babtised... but the bible dont tell us the ages of those that were babtised apparently the smallest were just given a blessing. In the Book of Mormon it states very clarely about small children: Momoni 8:9-on .

WHY would Jesus say to us we should become like a small child so we can enter Gods Kingdom, if the child is bad and has to be tought to be good??!! These things are against one an other UNLESS smallchildren are good and need no babtisement. Babtisement is for sins...

Atonement: go to : LDS.org - Search Gospel Library Write atonement on the line you get loads good speaches... I am sure someone can recomend something to you.

Se ya :)

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

As I have been studying the Catholic/Protestant view of the Atonement, I came to believe the following:

Man is inherently sinful. Though the Old Testament speaks of righteousness vs. wickedness, I came to believe that it is only God who makes a person righteous. No effort of their own can satisfy a pure, holy, God because every human effort is tainted with sin. Because of this, Jesus Christ was sent to the world to be the propitiation (substitution) for the due penalty of our sin. That due penalty being death and eternal separation from God. As such, Jesus Christ became the only pure and completely righteous being to ever live, and we are thus justified by our faith in His righteousness alone. Because any efforts of our own self-righteousness are tainted by sin, we are, therefore, unable to ever become righteous enough, thus the need for the Savior's sacrifice on the cross. We make efforts toward living holy lives, but we realize that our merits of righteousness will never be accepted by God because they were already accepted by God at His Atonement.

I'll give this one full marks for effort :) What you're referring to here is often called "Original Sin", which is the idea that all of mankind is inherently evil because of Adam's fall. As LDS we do not believe this is the case - "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam's transgression." Thus we believe that man is inherently sinLESS. This is why children who have not reached the age of accountability do not need to be baptised and are automatically accepted into the Kingdom of Heaven. However, since there is temptation in the world, and since we have the gift of Agency (free will), every human being will eventually at some time during their life choose to commit a sin of some sort. The Law of Justice demands punishment for such, which would by itself prevent any of us from going to Heaven. However through the Atonement, the Law of Mercy allows Christ's suffering to be the punishment for our sins, satisfying Justice and clearing the way for our return to our Father in Heaven. I don't know of any good expositions on this from general authorities, but the last half of the book of Mosiah and the first dozen or so chapters of Alma in the Book of Mormon are amazing in this regard.

Puf_the_majic_dragon - Thank you so much for your lengthy, clear, and thoughtful response. Thank you for correcting me on my misunderstanding of baptism for the dead and its correlation to sharing the message of the Restored gospel to those in Spirit Prison. I appreciate your affirmation of the doctrine set forth by Joseph Smith of the Father's own mortal probation. This, then, leads to my earlier question:

Well I'm glad to answer any questions I can :) just remember that as much as I might pretend to know everything, I'm still human, so the best places to look for answers are in the scriptures.

Does Heavenly Father have a Heavenly Father? Are there Church documents that talk in more detail about Heavenly Father's mortal probation?

I am aware of none. Joseph Smith's statement was not meant to be used as I used it here, he spoke it in explaining the concept of eternal progression - that is the doctrine that we can continue to better ourselves and have an increase (of glory) in the next life. Whether or not HF had his own mortal probation, and what that may or may not have consisted of, is NOT pertinent to OUR eternal salvation, and therefore will probably never be directly addressed by either scripture or general authority. However, I will postulate that through study, ponderance, prayer, and strong faith we can gain further understanding of this or other so-called mysteries through personal revelation. My Institute teacher (who is by no means a prophet) has said that a "mystery" (of God, of the Gospel) is a doctrine or principle that can only be learned through personal revelation.

Thank you for breaking down the Nicene Creed and contrasting it with LDS views.

I am sure you have heard many Protestant/Evangelical and even Catholics question you on John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I have believed that Jesus Christ is the Word, and thus has been with the Father in eternity since time immemorial. However, LDS doctrine clearly teaches that He was born literally of the Father. Can you expound on this?

This verse (and the whole first chapter of John, actually) also has a Joseph Smith Translation that makes a HUGE difference:

1 In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.

I'll also make mention that this verse, in any translation, specifies that there was a BEGINNING. Interpretation of this, I think, will be agreed upon by all - that it speaks of the beginning of this world and its creation as described in Genesis.

As far as uses of "the Word" in scripture, I've heard some interesting things in this regard, none of which I can say are true doctrine, but which I personally believe to be true. Words have a very special power, not just in communication, but in making literal changes. In Genesis (and the creation stories of many other religions) the creation took place after God SAID "let there be...". God didn't wave his hand, he didn't snap his fingers, he spoke aloud a command that ordered and defined matter into an entire universe. I suggest also that you can replace "Word" with "Power", as in Priesthood Power - which we LDS understand to mean the authority to act in God's name, but I mean also the Power of God itself - both apply. It's also interesting to note, on this subject, how we are encouraged to pray VOCALLY in our personal prayers, and that priesthood ordinances and blessings are always spoken ALOUD. Saying the words aloud seems to make a great deal of difference.

I want to emphasize the last paragraph as my own ponderings and not as doctrine. Paul did some of this in his epistles and it's been mistaken for doctrine by theologians for centuries.

Oh, and majic_dragon, maybe they got "quick and the dead" from Moroni 10:34. :)

May be :)

I think it derives from the usage of the term "quickened" as applied to resurrected beings - that is "made alive". I'm just speculating here, I haven't the motivation to look it up.

Mormons, Trinitarians, Modalists, we all believe in one God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is the Unity, the History, and the Corporeal nature of God that is in question. The history and physicality of the Godhead are mainly subject to the Unity therein within Trinitarianism and Modalism.

It is the respective concepts of the Unity within Trinitarianism and Modalism that prevents any notion of two seperate physical bodies for the Father and the Son. This rejection comes not from scripture directly, but through creedal or logical definitions of the Unity of the Godhead.

The Christian world has long sought to reconcile the seeming plurality of the Godhead with monotheism. It all comes down to the Unity of the Godhead, all the rest hinges on that.

-a-train

It's also true that Mormons believe in the same God as Restorationist Christians, Protestants, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Jews, and even Muslims - that is the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob (etc). You could say that the only real difference between Christans and Jews/Muslims is belief in the divinity and Messiahship of Christ. But this understates and blurs all of the important differences that can and do draw the line between eternal salvation and eternal damnation.

Don't get me wrong, finding common ground is great. It can just get dangerously close to compromising standards or doctrines. The important distinctions need to be clearly drawn to avoid confusion, especially in matters pertaining to eternal salvation. I hope I don't seem intolerant or anything, usualy I'm the one vying for finding commonalities between different ideologies. Don't even get me started on all of the sayings of Jesus in the NT that are direct quotes of Buddha.....

[a-train]

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I have believed that Jesus Christ is the Word, and thus has been with the Father in eternity since time immemorial. However, LDS doctrine clearly teaches that He was born literally of the Father. Can you expound on this?

This verse (and the whole first chapter of John, actually) also has a Joseph Smith Translation that makes a HUGE difference:

1 In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.

I'll also make mention that this verse, in any translation, specifies that there was a BEGINNING. Interpretation of this, I think, will be agreed upon by all - that it speaks of the beginning of this world and its creation as described in Genesis.

However, Jesus IS coeternal with the Father and He is God. Jesus was not created ex nihilo by the Father. Jesus is our Creator and the God of gods, King of kings, and LORD of lords.

The spiritual birth the Saviour in the pre-mortal realm to the Father of spirits did NOT mark His beginning. He is an Eternal Being. It is a common misconception of LDS teaching that we believe Jesus was created ex nihilo by the Father.

-a-train

[a-train]

It's also true that Mormons believe in the same God as Restorationist Christians, Protestants, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Jews, and even Muslims - that is the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob (etc). You could say that the only real difference between Christans and Jews/Muslims is belief in the divinity and Messiahship of Christ. But this understates and blurs all of the important differences that can and do draw the line between eternal salvation and eternal damnation.

Don't get me wrong, finding common ground is great. It can just get dangerously close to compromising standards or doctrines. The important distinctions need to be clearly drawn to avoid confusion, especially in matters pertaining to eternal salvation. I hope I don't seem intolerant or anything, usualy I'm the one vying for finding commonalities between different ideologies. Don't even get me started on all of the sayings of Jesus in the NT that are direct quotes of Buddha.....

So what attribute of Trinitarianism and/or Modalism does Mormonism disagree with that is not Unity?

-a-train

[Guest User-Removed]

Jonathon...With all due respect...studying Protestant Theology when seeking answers to LDS Doctrine...is like studying Farsi..when you really want to learn Mandarin.

Line upon line....Precept upon precept...The answers you're looking for come from the Restoration...not the philosophies of man...mingled with scripture.

Additionally...The Trinity is pure man made doctrine. Nowhere in the NT does the word or term Trinity appear.

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

However, Jesus IS coeternal with the Father and He is God. Jesus was not created ex nihilo by the Father. Jesus is our Creator and the God of gods, King of kings, and LORD of lords.

The spiritual birth the Saviour in the pre-mortal realm to the Father of spirits did NOT mark His beginning. He is an Eternal Being. It is a common misconception of LDS teaching that we believe Jesus was created ex nihilo by the Father.

-a-train

I didn't mean to imply that at all, you're absolutely right - although the use of the word "coeternal" I believe stems from those credes and not from scripture or doctrine... But Jesus is an eternal being. The same does not only apply to Jesus alone, but to EVERYONE - we are ALL eternal beings. As the D&C says, we were intelligences before we were created spiritually, and spiritually before we were created physically. As far as where intelligences come from - I have a few ideas I've thought of, but that's another discussion for another time, and it's mostly speculation anyway.

So what attribute of Trinitarianism and/or Modalism does Mormonism disagree with that is not Unity?

I think I mentioned one earlier regarding the "body" of God - that Mormonism believes God the Father has a body of flesh and bones, whereas Trinitarianism believes that God is purely spirit but can manifest in a body (and honestly this sounds almost like Hindu..). You might say that this is part of the "unity" belief, but at that point we're arguing semantics. But honestly I'm not familiar enough with all of the "isms" to go into an in depth discussion on their differences right now (and I'm procrastinating my homework). So can I take a rain check?

[JLFuller]

You can save yourself some time by following these two links: LDS FAIR Apologetics Homepage and Encyclopedia of Mormonism. They provide indepth discussions of what you seem to be interestred in and you don't have to wait for someone to respond to your online query.

[Jonathon]

Good morning.

There are some great responses here, and I look forward to responding when I have more time. Thanks to all (bert, puff, a-train, mailis) for your responses. I will respond in detail to your posts when I have more time. Also, thank you JLFuller for the LDS apologetics links. I will check them out.

I wanted to quickly respond to one comment.

MyDogSkip said:

Jonathon...With all due respect...studying Protestant Theology when seeking answers to LDS Doctrine...is like studying Farsi..when you really want to learn Mandarin.

Line upon line....Precept upon precept...The answers you're looking for come from the Restoration...not the philosophies of man...mingled with scripture.

I recently heard a talk from a General Authority about members using the resources of "new media" to share their faith and testify to the truthfulness of the gospel. Is not participation in a thread like this part of that "new media" of sharing Restoration gospel truths?

Just as a General Authority over conference said that Church members can not and will not compromise doctrine, I can not and will not compromise my God-given curiosity over the nature of spiritual matters. I have tried to make it abundantly clear that my participation in this thread has no ulterior motive. I am genuinely seeking intelligent conversation on spiritual matters that have been the framework of my thought and belief since I was a child. Indeed, had I reconciled some of these things as a 15 year old who joined the LDS Church, and later left at 19, perhaps I would not need to be participating on a forum like this to seek answers and be pointed to more official sources where these answers are found.

Therefore, I will not simply turn off a switch in my mind and not ask the questions that are based upon convictions that I have held for many years that, I am willing to admit, might be misguided. I sincerely appreciate those who have taken these questions seriously, and have given me ample to "chew on" as I am in this process.

So, with all due respect, this is not as simple as "studying Farsi when you really want to learn Mandarin." Delving into Protestant Theology and thought over the last eight years has been out of a sincere desire for truth, and has ultimately led to genuine convictions. I realize this may be difficult for some to grasp, particularly since I was once a member of the Church, albeit a very brief time in my adolescence. It is not a matter of "studying Farsi," but living, walking, breathing, and talking Farsi for most of my life. In order to learn Mandarin, I must understand how the grammar and structure of the Farsi language relate to Mandarin, a language I barely scratched the surface of many years ago.

Jon

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

You can save yourself some time by following these two links: LDS FAIR Apologetics Homepage and Encyclopedia of Mormonism. They provide indepth discussions of what you seem to be interestred in and you don't have to wait for someone to respond to your online query.

Although some might consider me one, I personally wouldn't trust the teachings of doctrine to LDS apologists.

As far as that encyclopedia goes, I've taken a moment to glance over it and it looks thorough and well prepared. However its writers are not general authorities nor were they called to assemble the work through the power of God - thus it is the work of men and IMO is on the same level as any of the responses here in terms of authoritativeness. A search on LDS.org would probably be the best bet for authoritative answers to any questions. I am going to have to bookmark this encyclopedia, however.... (I'd much rather see it in perhaps a wiki-like format than as a PDF document..)

[ztodd]

Although some might consider me one, I personally wouldn't trust the teachings of doctrine to LDS apologists.

Why not? We trust the teaching of LDS doctrine to 19 year old missionaries who received only 3 weeks of training... most apologists have equal authority and slightly more experience.

As far as that encyclopedia goes, I've taken a moment to glance over it and it looks thorough and well prepared. However its writers are not general authorities nor were they called to assemble the work through the power of God - thus it is the work of men and IMO is on the same level as any of the responses here in terms of authoritativeness. A search on LDS.org would probably be the best bet for authoritative answers to any questions.

Good point- but is LDS.org the only place people will look? After getting bored with LDS.org, or feeling like you can't find what you're looking for there, where is the next place people should go?

Perhaps the answer is that if you can't find what you're looking for in official church doctrine, then you should stop looking, try not to worry about it, and focus your attention on the official doctrine (however boring that may be). :)

[Vanhin]

I didn't mean to imply that at all, you're absolutely right - although the use of the word "coeternal" I believe stems from those credes and not from scripture or doctrine... But Jesus is an eternal being. The same does not only apply to Jesus alone, but to EVERYONE - we are ALL eternal beings. As the D&C says, we were intelligences before we were created spiritually, and spiritually before we were created physically. As far as where intelligences come from - I have a few ideas I've thought of, but that's another discussion for another time, and it's mostly speculation anyway.

Hey Puf,

So far I have enjoyed reading your posts. I have one point to make concerning intelligences.

You wording (highlighted in bold, and included in context) can easily lead one to believe that there is an entity more basic that our spirit, which represents us as pre-spiritual beings, and that the Doctrine and Covenants supports this idea.

Now, there is a fine line here, and it may simply be a matter of understanding on my part or perhaps clarification on yours. So, feel free to expound on your thought, if the OP will allow it.

According to the Guide to the Scriptures, from the Internet Edition of LDS Scriptures, the word intelligence(s) has multiple meanings, but it lists the three that are related to your point. I quote from the GS:

"Intelligence has several meanings, three of which are:1 It is the light of truth which gives life and light to all things in the universe. It has always existed.2 The word intelligences may also refer to spirit children of God.3 The scriptures also may speak of intelligence as referring to the spirit element that existed before we were begotten as spirit children." (GS, Intelligence)

So according to that brief summary and the supporting scriptures that follow, three of the meanings for intelligence in our scriptures are:

1. The light of truth, (or the light of Christ)

2. A spirit child of Heavenly Father

3. Spirit matter (which our spirit bodies and all things spiritual is made up of)

If you were simply referring to intelligence as spirit element, then I am in agreement with your understanding. If you meant a being, or entity, that is not spirit element or a spirit son or daughter of God but is called intelligence(s), then I disagree with you. :) This mainly because I do not find support for such a thing in scripture, or the official doctrine of the Church.

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Sincerely,

Vanhin

[rameumptom]

Good afternoon!

My question, therefore, is this:

According to this theology, Heavenly Father, who has a body of flesh and bone, must have also gone through a similar "mortal probation" at some point. Is this correct, or a false understanding? If this is the case, does Heavenly Father have a Heavenly Father? Or, is there only one Heavenly Father?

There is a scripture in John 4:24 that says:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Through my studies of Protestant Theology, I have come to understand God as one Spirit, with three personalities manifested as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, the essence of God is beyond human comprehension. Nevertheless, it was because of God's love for us that He gave Jesus Christ to save the world.

How is this scripture and this view of God as Spirit reconciled in LDS thought and doctrine?

Thank you so much in advance for your responses. Please know that these questions are sincere, and with no ulterior motive. I really want to understand.

All the best,

Jonathon

While Joseph Smith did teach about the Father also having a Father, there is so little information on it, that we are not entirely certain what the exact teaching is on it. Some LDS do not believe that the Father was mortal, while most of us that study this stuff leave it until more revelation is given on it. The issue is, if it is okay for Jesus, as God, to come down to earth and be mortal, why should it be difficult to believe the Father did the same?

We also believe that God is Spirit. As John Adams once wrote Thomas Jefferson, what exactly does that mean? Is it the Trinity view that classical Christianity believes in, or something else? The apostle John also states that "God is Love." Does that suddenly mean he is not a Spirit? Or does it mean that God has more than one attribute that is being described in these passages?

Ancient Jewish and Christian belief shows that God was understood to be anthropomorphic, or man-like. God and Jehovah were two separate beings, Jehovah being the angel of God's presence; and understood by early Christians to be Jesus. The OT scholar and Methodist minister, Margaret Barker, explains this well in her book "The Great Angel."

Many early Christians understood the Father and Son to be separate beings. For example, Origen explained that Christ was a subordinate God to the Father. And being separately physical beings helps explain Biblical passages that otherwise would make little sense: Stephen seeing Jesus on the right hand of God; Jesus praying to the Father and stating "not my will but thine, be done" suggesting two separate wills; etc.

The key to this is Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. IF Joseph Smith really did see the Father and Son in the First Vision, and if the Book of Mormon truly is the word of God; then questions such as the Trinity are automatically answered.

[a-train]

So what attribute of Trinitarianism and/or Modalism does Mormonism disagree with that is not Unity?

I think I mentioned one earlier regarding the "body" of God - that Mormonism believes God the Father has a body of flesh and bones, whereas Trinitarianism believes that God is purely spirit but can manifest in a body (and honestly this sounds almost like Hindu..). You might say that this is part of the "unity" belief, but at that point we're arguing semantics. But honestly I'm not familiar enough with all of the "isms" to go into an in depth discussion on their differences right now (and I'm procrastinating my homework). So can I take a rain check?

Not necessary. This is my point. Why do Trinitarians reject the notion that the Father has a body? It is because of their definition of the Oneness of God, the Unity of the Godhead. I'm not saying this just for kicks, ask a Trinitarian. To them, two bodies for One God is not monotheistic enough, it is too plural.

-a-train